I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge

  • 14391 Replies
  • 3074213 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45077
  • +87/-104
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9330 on: June 19, 2018, 08:55:05 PM »
Quote
The manned trips to the moon have already been described in the relevant mission reports.
ROTFL! Do you believe them?
Like I've said a number of times, you will never accept any evidence that proves you wrong, so why should anyone bother with your so called "challenges"?
? I just organize Challenges. Nobody has provided any evidence to the contrary.
There are mission reports that describe the hardware and fuel used.  There are many hours of videos and thousands of photographs taken by the astronauts in space.  There lunar samples analyzed by numerous independent labs.  There are several retroreflectors left behind by astronauts that are still being used for highly precise lunar ranging measurements.  How much more evidence do you need?
Hm, all mission reports, photos, videos, etc. are falsifications. I show it at http://heiwaco.com/moontravel1.htm .  Even a twerp should realize it 2018.
I don't need any more evidence.
Right, because there is no evidence that can change your mind.  So why even bother with your "challenges"?

But topic is completely different - describe a trip to the Moon and back using today's technology and associated fuel consumption.
1969 a lot was (not) done manually by the asstronuts.
2018 all should be automatic (by computers and robots). Any humans aboard have nothing to do but watch through the window and visit the toilet. To win my Challenge, you also have to explain the latter.
And of course the whole purpose of the trip.
Are you sure that you even know the rules of your own challenge?  It seems that the rules change every time that you explain it.  That is a classic definition of "moving the goal posts".
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9331 on: June 20, 2018, 12:09:02 AM »
Quote
The manned trips to the moon have already been described in the relevant mission reports.
ROTFL! Do you believe them?
Like I've said a number of times, you will never accept any evidence that proves you wrong, so why should anyone bother with your so called "challenges"?
? I just organize Challenges. Nobody has provided any evidence to the contrary.
There are mission reports that describe the hardware and fuel used.  There are many hours of videos and thousands of photographs taken by the astronauts in space.  There lunar samples analyzed by numerous independent labs.  There are several retroreflectors left behind by astronauts that are still being used for highly precise lunar ranging measurements.  How much more evidence do you need?
Hm, all mission reports, photos, videos, etc. are falsifications. I show it at http://heiwaco.com/moontravel1.htm .  Even a twerp should realize it 2018.
I don't need any more evidence.
Right, because there is no evidence that can change your mind.  So why even bother with your "challenges"?

But topic is completely different - describe a trip to the Moon and back using today's technology and associated fuel consumption.
1969 a lot was (not) done manually by the asstronuts.
2018 all should be automatic (by computers and robots). Any humans aboard have nothing to do but watch through the window and visit the toilet. To win my Challenge, you also have to explain the latter.
And of course the whole purpose of the trip.
Are you sure that you even know the rules of your own challenge?  It seems that the rules change every time that you explain it.  That is a classic definition of "moving the goal posts".

No, I don't change the rules by highlighting some parts of them. http://heiwaco.com/chall2.htm .
And why should I change the rules?

An application to collect my €1M should include

1. Description of spacecraft/mass (kg) without fuel.

2. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/altitude (m) of spacecraft with fuel in a suitable parking orbit of Earth (ready to go) and how it got there!

To travel in space you need fuel. And that fuel comes from Earth. The first little part Challenge is to establish how you get the fuel with you!

3. Location/time/date/direction leaving Earth parking orbit and force (N) applied/duration (s) of force applied and fuel used (kg) for the initial trans-location X- injection.

Maybe a slow Hohmann transfer is used but any trajectory to proceed to location X is permitted. Location X is where the influence of Moon/Mars gravity equals Earth gravity in space. Ensure that the escape velocity from Earth is correct so you can arrive at location X.

4. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of spacecraft/fuel after leaving orbit Earth and after cutting off the force heading for location X in space, and on to landing on Moon/ Mars + calculations of location X.

Or simply - how much fuel (kg) is required to leave orbit Earth going to Moon/Mars?

5. Location/time/date/velocity (m/s)/direction at arrival location X.

6. Mass (kg) at arrival location X.

7. Location/time/date/direction leaving trajectory to X/Moon/Mars and force(s) (N) applied/duration (s) of force(s) applied to enter orbit/land on Moon/Mars, fuel (kg) used for and time of landing.

This is critical. You have initially been orbiting Earth but now you intend to orbit Moon/Mars before landing. Do you have the fuel for it? Part of the spacecraft/fuel may of course be left in orbit Moon/Mars and you just take a small landing spacecraft to land/piss on the Moon/Mars. It is your choice.

If you manage to do 3-7 correctly you have left one orbit around Earth for another orbit around Moon or Mars and then left the latter orbit to land. An orbit is the path followed by one heavenly body, e.g. a planet, a moon or an artificial spacecraft around another planet, moon or Sun without any power used. If the orbit is circular, the local orbital tangential velocity (m/s), the change of direction (°/s) and the gravity (inwards) and centrifugal (outwards) forces (N) are constant and in balance. If the orbit is elliptical, which is the normal case, the orbital, tangential speed, change of direction and gravity/centrifugal forces are variable and greater, when the distance between the bodies is smaller, but they are always in balance. The position/tangential speed/change of direction of a body in orbit can be determined. It appears that space travel is simply to move from one orbit to another orbit and to/from the heavenly bodies being orbited ... and your task is to show how you do it! And it is simple - at the right time/location in EPO you fire your rocket/apply your force so that your spacecraft arrives at the Moon or Mars without further forces applied.

8. Mass (kg) of spacecraft/fuel on solid Moon/Mars.

9. Force (N) applied/duration (s) of force applied, fuel used (kg) for departure and time/date of departure Moon/Mars.

Explain also in detail how you can land anywhere and then just blast off from where you were to get back in space!

10. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of spacecraft/fuel after departure Moon/Mars heading for location X in space and on to Earth + calculations. Fuel used (kg).

11. Location/time/date/velocity (m/s)/direction at location X.

12. Trajectories - locations/times in space at regular intervals to/from Moon/Mars to confirm that you are heading in the right directions.

13. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction, time/date of spacecraft just prior re-entry Earth.

14. Trajectory/velocity of re-entry, incl. times, start location (position/altitude), directions in 3D, altitudes, velocities in 3D every minute from start to end (parachutes deployed). Note: Arriving from the Moon means that you drop free fall onto Earth for a couple of days and arrival speed at top of atmosphere for re-entry will be >11 000 m/s. Arriving from planet Mars means that you drop free fall onto Earth for a couple of weeks and arrival speed at top of atmosphere for re-entry will be >21 000 m/s. The re-entry brake system must be 3.65 times stronger returning from Mars than from the Moon.

Alternatively you will crash or you will miss Earth completely. Re-entry at >21 000 m/s velocity is not easy.

15. Landing (details).

Manoeuvres to leave/enter orbits and to land/depart, forces applied and their directions and durations must be explained in detail incl. locations/times, etc. Costs need not be considered. Just calculate the trajectories, the forces (N) applied and the fuel (kg) used. Ensure that you can carry the fuel with you from the beginning and that you do not get too heavy. Ensure also that you can really do a re-entry and establish the re-entry trajectory beforehand.

16. Miscellaneous Make a short description of the accommodation, sanitary and safety facilities, restaurants, lectures and entertainment aboard your spacecraft to keep the officers, crew and passengers happy during the trip, etc. Maybe external space walks cheer up the passengers?

I assume using 2018 technology everything will done by computers with any persons aboard just watching and waiting. I of course doubt it can be done and that one problem is the fuel.

But ... doesn't a manned trip to Moon/Mars sound boring? Only a twerp could find it funny and exciting.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2018, 12:15:39 AM by Heiwa »

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
  • +0/-0
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9332 on: June 20, 2018, 12:21:18 AM »
Ever heard of a metaphor? I use it. Twerps don't even know what it is.

Excuse me! I certainly do know what a metaphor is!


met·a·phor
ˈmedəˌfôr,ˈmedəˌfər/Submit
noun
a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
“I had fallen through a trapdoor of depression,” said Mark, who was fond of theatrical metaphors"
synonyms:   figure of speech, image, trope, analogy, comparison, symbol, word painting/picture
"the profusion of metaphors in her everyday speech has gotten pretty tiresome"
a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
"the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an industry that was teetering"
Yes, but it doesn't mean you are not a twerp.
What?!!! Iam THE twerp! And you falsely claimed that I didn't know what a metaphor was. Will you acknowledge that you were wrong?!!!
No, you are just a twerp.
Why do you keep saying the patently obvious?!!! Will you acknowledge that you were wrong when you said I didn't know what a metaphor was?!!!
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9333 on: June 20, 2018, 12:33:10 AM »
Quote
The manned trips to the moon have already been described in the relevant mission reports.
ROTFL! Do you believe them?
Like I've said a number of times, you will never accept any evidence that proves you wrong, so why should anyone bother with your so called "challenges"?
? I just organize Challenges. Nobody has provided any evidence to the contrary.
There are mission reports that describe the hardware and fuel used.  There are many hours of videos and thousands of photographs taken by the astronauts in space.  There lunar samples analyzed by numerous independent labs.  There are several retroreflectors left behind by astronauts that are still being used for highly precise lunar ranging measurements.  How much more evidence do you need?
Hm, all mission reports, photos, videos, etc. are falsifications. I show it at http://heiwaco.com/moontravel1.htm .  Even a twerp should realize it 2018.
I don't need any more evidence.
Right, because there is no evidence that can change your mind.  So why even bother with your "challenges"?

But topic is completely different - describe a trip to the Moon and back using today's technology and associated fuel consumption.
1969 a lot was (not) done manually by the asstronuts.
2018 all should be automatic (by computers and robots). Any humans aboard have nothing to do but watch through the window and visit the toilet. To win my Challenge, you also have to explain the latter.
And of course the whole purpose of the trip.
Are you sure that you even know the rules of your own challenge?  It seems that the rules change every time that you explain it.  That is a classic definition of "moving the goal posts".

No, I don't change the rules by highlighting some parts of them. http://heiwaco.com/chall2.htm .
And why should I change the rules?

An application to collect my €1M should include

1. Description of spacecraft/mass (kg) without fuel.

2. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/altitude (m) of spacecraft with fuel in a suitable parking orbit of Earth (ready to go) and how it got there!

To travel in space you need fuel. And that fuel comes from Earth. The first little part Challenge is to establish how you get the fuel with you!

3. Location/time/date/direction leaving Earth parking orbit and force (N) applied/duration (s) of force applied and fuel used (kg) for the initial trans-location X- injection.

Maybe a slow Hohmann transfer is used but any trajectory to proceed to location X is permitted. Location X is where the influence of Moon/Mars gravity equals Earth gravity in space. Ensure that the escape velocity from Earth is correct so you can arrive at location X.

4. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of spacecraft/fuel after leaving orbit Earth and after cutting off the force heading for location X in space, and on to landing on Moon/ Mars + calculations of location X.

Or simply - how much fuel (kg) is required to leave orbit Earth going to Moon/Mars?

5. Location/time/date/velocity (m/s)/direction at arrival location X.

6. Mass (kg) at arrival location X.

7. Location/time/date/direction leaving trajectory to X/Moon/Mars and force(s) (N) applied/duration (s) of force(s) applied to enter orbit/land on Moon/Mars, fuel (kg) used for and time of landing.

This is critical. You have initially been orbiting Earth but now you intend to orbit Moon/Mars before landing. Do you have the fuel for it? Part of the spacecraft/fuel may of course be left in orbit Moon/Mars and you just take a small landing spacecraft to land/piss on the Moon/Mars. It is your choice.

If you manage to do 3-7 correctly you have left one orbit around Earth for another orbit around Moon or Mars and then left the latter orbit to land. An orbit is the path followed by one heavenly body, e.g. a planet, a moon or an artificial spacecraft around another planet, moon or Sun without any power used. If the orbit is circular, the local orbital tangential velocity (m/s), the change of direction (°/s) and the gravity (inwards) and centrifugal (outwards) forces (N) are constant and in balance. If the orbit is elliptical, which is the normal case, the orbital, tangential speed, change of direction and gravity/centrifugal forces are variable and greater, when the distance between the bodies is smaller, but they are always in balance. The position/tangential speed/change of direction of a body in orbit can be determined. It appears that space travel is simply to move from one orbit to another orbit and to/from the heavenly bodies being orbited ... and your task is to show how you do it! And it is simple - at the right time/location in EPO you fire your rocket/apply your force so that your spacecraft arrives at the Moon or Mars without further forces applied.

8. Mass (kg) of spacecraft/fuel on solid Moon/Mars.

9. Force (N) applied/duration (s) of force applied, fuel used (kg) for departure and time/date of departure Moon/Mars.

Explain also in detail how you can land anywhere and then just blast off from where you were to get back in space!

10. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of spacecraft/fuel after departure Moon/Mars heading for location X in space and on to Earth + calculations. Fuel used (kg).

11. Location/time/date/velocity (m/s)/direction at location X.

12. Trajectories - locations/times in space at regular intervals to/from Moon/Mars to confirm that you are heading in the right directions.

13. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction, time/date of spacecraft just prior re-entry Earth.

14. Trajectory/velocity of re-entry, incl. times, start location (position/altitude), directions in 3D, altitudes, velocities in 3D every minute from start to end (parachutes deployed). Note: Arriving from the Moon means that you drop free fall onto Earth for a couple of days and arrival speed at top of atmosphere for re-entry will be >11 000 m/s. Arriving from planet Mars means that you drop free fall onto Earth for a couple of weeks and arrival speed at top of atmosphere for re-entry will be >21 000 m/s. The re-entry brake system must be 3.65 times stronger returning from Mars than from the Moon.

Alternatively you will crash or you will miss Earth completely. Re-entry at >21 000 m/s velocity is not easy.

15. Landing (details).

Manoeuvres to leave/enter orbits and to land/depart, forces applied and their directions and durations must be explained in detail incl. locations/times, etc. Costs need not be considered. Just calculate the trajectories, the forces (N) applied and the fuel (kg) used. Ensure that you can carry the fuel with you from the beginning and that you do not get too heavy. Ensure also that you can really do a re-entry and establish the re-entry trajectory beforehand.

16. Miscellaneous Make a short description of the accommodation, sanitary and safety facilities, restaurants, lectures and entertainment aboard your spacecraft to keep the officers, crew and passengers happy during the trip, etc. Maybe external space walks cheer up the passengers?

I assume using 2018 technology everything will done by computers with any persons aboard just watching and waiting. I of course doubt it can be done and that one problem is the fuel.

But ... doesn't a manned trip to Moon/Mars sound boring? Only a twerp could find it funny and exciting.

Only a twerp would go through all that trouble only to realise the obvious futility and impossibility of it all. I refuse to be a twerp and waste my time on the notion. I will take you lead on this Heiwa. You certainly sound like you know what you're talking about. Only a twerp would not listen to your wisdom

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9334 on: June 20, 2018, 01:51:04 AM »
Only a twerp would go through all that trouble only to realise the obvious futility and impossibility of it all. I refuse to be a twerp and waste my time on the notion. I will take you lead on this Heiwa. You certainly sound like you know what you're talking about. Only a twerp would not listen to your wisdom
Vive les twerps. Twerps of the world unite against the ignorance of Heiwa and his shifty followers.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9335 on: June 20, 2018, 03:19:47 AM »
Only a twerp would go through all that trouble only to realise the obvious futility and impossibility of it all. I refuse to be a twerp and waste my time on the notion. I will take you lead on this Heiwa. You certainly sound like you know what you're talking about. Only a twerp would not listen to your wisdom
Vive les twerps. Twerps of the world unite against the ignorance of Heiwa and his shifty followers.

You sound like a twerp rab

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45077
  • +87/-104
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9336 on: June 20, 2018, 07:51:43 AM »
Are you sure that you even know the rules of your own challenge?  It seems that the rules change every time that you explain it.  That is a classic definition of "moving the goal posts".

No, I don't change the rules by highlighting some parts of them. http://heiwaco.com/chall2.htm .
And why should I change the rules?

An application to collect my €1M should include

1. Description of spacecraft/mass (kg) without fuel.

2. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/altitude (m) of spacecraft with fuel in a suitable parking orbit of Earth (ready to go) and how it got there!

To travel in space you need fuel. And that fuel comes from Earth. The first little part Challenge is to establish how you get the fuel with you!

3. Location/time/date/direction leaving Earth parking orbit and force (N) applied/duration (s) of force applied and fuel used (kg) for the initial trans-location X- injection.

Maybe a slow Hohmann transfer is used but any trajectory to proceed to location X is permitted. Location X is where the influence of Moon/Mars gravity equals Earth gravity in space. Ensure that the escape velocity from Earth is correct so you can arrive at location X.

4. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of spacecraft/fuel after leaving orbit Earth and after cutting off the force heading for location X in space, and on to landing on Moon/ Mars + calculations of location X.

Or simply - how much fuel (kg) is required to leave orbit Earth going to Moon/Mars?

5. Location/time/date/velocity (m/s)/direction at arrival location X.

6. Mass (kg) at arrival location X.

7. Location/time/date/direction leaving trajectory to X/Moon/Mars and force(s) (N) applied/duration (s) of force(s) applied to enter orbit/land on Moon/Mars, fuel (kg) used for and time of landing.

This is critical. You have initially been orbiting Earth but now you intend to orbit Moon/Mars before landing. Do you have the fuel for it? Part of the spacecraft/fuel may of course be left in orbit Moon/Mars and you just take a small landing spacecraft to land/piss on the Moon/Mars. It is your choice.

If you manage to do 3-7 correctly you have left one orbit around Earth for another orbit around Moon or Mars and then left the latter orbit to land. An orbit is the path followed by one heavenly body, e.g. a planet, a moon or an artificial spacecraft around another planet, moon or Sun without any power used. If the orbit is circular, the local orbital tangential velocity (m/s), the change of direction (°/s) and the gravity (inwards) and centrifugal (outwards) forces (N) are constant and in balance. If the orbit is elliptical, which is the normal case, the orbital, tangential speed, change of direction and gravity/centrifugal forces are variable and greater, when the distance between the bodies is smaller, but they are always in balance. The position/tangential speed/change of direction of a body in orbit can be determined. It appears that space travel is simply to move from one orbit to another orbit and to/from the heavenly bodies being orbited ... and your task is to show how you do it! And it is simple - at the right time/location in EPO you fire your rocket/apply your force so that your spacecraft arrives at the Moon or Mars without further forces applied.

8. Mass (kg) of spacecraft/fuel on solid Moon/Mars.

9. Force (N) applied/duration (s) of force applied, fuel used (kg) for departure and time/date of departure Moon/Mars.

Explain also in detail how you can land anywhere and then just blast off from where you were to get back in space!

10. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction of spacecraft/fuel after departure Moon/Mars heading for location X in space and on to Earth + calculations. Fuel used (kg).

11. Location/time/date/velocity (m/s)/direction at location X.

12. Trajectories - locations/times in space at regular intervals to/from Moon/Mars to confirm that you are heading in the right directions.

13. Mass (kg)/speed (m/s)/direction, time/date of spacecraft just prior re-entry Earth.

14. Trajectory/velocity of re-entry, incl. times, start location (position/altitude), directions in 3D, altitudes, velocities in 3D every minute from start to end (parachutes deployed). Note: Arriving from the Moon means that you drop free fall onto Earth for a couple of days and arrival speed at top of atmosphere for re-entry will be >11 000 m/s. Arriving from planet Mars means that you drop free fall onto Earth for a couple of weeks and arrival speed at top of atmosphere for re-entry will be >21 000 m/s. The re-entry brake system must be 3.65 times stronger returning from Mars than from the Moon.

Alternatively you will crash or you will miss Earth completely. Re-entry at >21 000 m/s velocity is not easy.

15. Landing (details).

Manoeuvres to leave/enter orbits and to land/depart, forces applied and their directions and durations must be explained in detail incl. locations/times, etc. Costs need not be considered. Just calculate the trajectories, the forces (N) applied and the fuel (kg) used. Ensure that you can carry the fuel with you from the beginning and that you do not get too heavy. Ensure also that you can really do a re-entry and establish the re-entry trajectory beforehand.

16. Miscellaneous Make a short description of the accommodation, sanitary and safety facilities, restaurants, lectures and entertainment aboard your spacecraft to keep the officers, crew and passengers happy during the trip, etc. Maybe external space walks cheer up the passengers?
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?

I assume using 2018 technology everything will done by computers with any persons aboard just watching and waiting. I of course doubt it can be done and that one problem is the fuel.
First of all, much of the technology required for a manned mission to Mars is still in the process of being invented and won't be ready for a number of years yet, so don't count on 2018 technology being able to do the job to your satisfaction.  Secondly, yes, fuel is always an issue.  That's why a lot of research is going into creating the fuel for the return trip from existing Martian resources.

But ... doesn't a manned trip to Moon/Mars sound boring? Only a twerp could find it funny and exciting.
Being a spoiled land lubber, no one would expect you to understand the spirit of the explorer.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9337 on: June 20, 2018, 08:04:57 AM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45077
  • +87/-104
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9338 on: June 20, 2018, 09:34:27 AM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?
Why would I agree with someone who has absolutely no experience in any of the numerous fields required to pull off a manned space mission?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9339 on: June 20, 2018, 10:48:53 AM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?
Why would I agree with someone who has absolutely no experience in any of the numerous fields required to pull off a manned space mission?
I have plenty experience in manned sea going missions on Earth. Such trips are planned beforehand including calculations of fuel required. Many years ago I became interested in manned space missions and found that the more I read about NASA manned space missions starting in the 1960's, it seemed NASA was trolling people to see just how much they could get away with. There are major anomalies and lots of red flags everywhere. I concluded all was fantasy. No American was ever in space.
So I started my Challenge about it many years ago. And nobody can explain how to do a manned trip in space.

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
  • +0/-0
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9340 on: June 20, 2018, 11:48:38 AM »
Ever heard of a metaphor? I use it. Twerps don't even know what it is.

Excuse me! I certainly do know what a metaphor is!


met·a·phor
ˈmedəˌfôr,ˈmedəˌfər/Submit
noun
a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
“I had fallen through a trapdoor of depression,” said Mark, who was fond of theatrical metaphors"
synonyms:   figure of speech, image, trope, analogy, comparison, symbol, word painting/picture
"the profusion of metaphors in her everyday speech has gotten pretty tiresome"
a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
"the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an industry that was teetering"
Yes, but it doesn't mean you are not a twerp.
What?!!! Iam THE twerp! And you falsely claimed that I didn't know what a metaphor was. Will you acknowledge that you were wrong?!!!
No, you are just a twerp.
Why do you keep saying the patently obvious?!!! Will you acknowledge that you were wrong when you said I didn't know what a metaphor was?!!!
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9341 on: June 20, 2018, 12:18:07 PM »

To win my prize money you have to think and then conclude ... that it is not possible. It means that you finally realize that you have been fooled.


After much contemplation I have concluded that winning is not possible. I realize I have been fooled.

Pay Me.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45077
  • +87/-104
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9342 on: June 20, 2018, 01:27:52 PM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?
Why would I agree with someone who has absolutely no experience in any of the numerous fields required to pull off a manned space mission?
I have plenty experience in manned sea going missions on Earth. Such trips are planned beforehand including calculations of fuel required. Many years ago I became interested in manned space missions and found that the more I read about NASA manned space missions starting in the 1960's, it seemed NASA was trolling people to see just how much they could get away with. There are major anomalies and lots of red flags everywhere. I concluded all was fantasy. No American was ever in space.
So I started my Challenge about it many years ago. And nobody can explain how to do a manned trip in space.
Your cognitive dissonance is showing.  You want to believe that manned space missions should be quite similar to manned sea missions, but your brain can't handle how different they really are, so you just reject the notion of manned space missions being possible at all. 

Your Dunning-Kruger syndrome is showing too, in that you just can't accept that aerospace engineers and rocket scientists know more about rockets and space travel than you do.  It's really quite sad.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9343 on: June 20, 2018, 02:22:59 PM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?

This


Only twerps believe asstronuts have pissed on the moon or are swimming like fish in an aquarium on the International Fake Station

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

?

Badxtoss

  • 3268
  • +0/-0
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9344 on: June 20, 2018, 04:10:08 PM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?
But we've already proven your challenges are fake. Why do you keep lying?  Why do you keep talking about these fake challenges?  You can't prove you have the money so they are fake.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9345 on: June 20, 2018, 04:13:02 PM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?
But we've already proven your challenges are fake. Why do you keep lying?  Why do you keep talking about these fake challenges?  You can't prove you have the money so they are fake.

It is doubtful Heiwa has devoted his entire life to lying. Only twerps do that. It is more likely you are regurgitating the lies from twerps from your life of being indoctrinated to believing that asstronuts have pissed on the moon and nuclear bombs are real

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9346 on: June 20, 2018, 05:07:26 PM »
The challenge is not to complain about the challenges.
The challenge is to solve the challenges.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9347 on: June 20, 2018, 06:55:41 PM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?
Why would I agree with someone who has absolutely no experience in any of the numerous fields required to pull off a manned space mission?
I have plenty experience in manned sea going missions on Earth. Such trips are planned beforehand including calculations of fuel required. Many years ago I became interested in manned space missions and found that the more I read about NASA manned space missions starting in the 1960's, it seemed NASA was trolling people to see just how much they could get away with. There are major anomalies and lots of red flags everywhere. I concluded all was fantasy. No American was ever in space.
So I started my Challenge about it many years ago. And nobody can explain how to do a manned trip in space.
Your cognitive dissonance is showing.  You want to believe that manned space missions should be quite similar to manned sea missions, but your brain can't handle how different they really are, so you just reject the notion of manned space missions being possible at all. 

Your Dunning-Kruger syndrome is showing too, in that you just can't accept that aerospace engineers and rocket scientists know more about rockets and space travel than you do.  It's really quite sad.

Topic is my space travel Challenge and not my health. I am happy to confirm I am in good mental health. Only twerps suggest that manned space travel anywhere does not require careful planning including calculations of fuel required and cannot even explain the purpose of humans in space.
Just take the simple task of changing a round, low altitude orbit around Earth to be extended so you can go to the Moon or Mars.
Twerps suggest that you just fire your rocket engine and - WHOOM - you are catapulted to the vicinity of the Moon or Mars, where you fire your rocket engine again - WHOOOOM - and start orbiting the Moon or Mars. But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required. They are typical twerps believing in fantasies.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45077
  • +87/-104
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9348 on: June 20, 2018, 07:22:43 PM »
Much of that information for the manned moon missions is already in the Apollo mission reports.  If you reject the NASA reports, then why would you accept the same information from anyone else?
No manned missions to the Moon have ever been done, and all reports about it are fake.
And nobody has been able to show how to fly to the Moon in spite of my €1M award.
I thought that a twerp like you would finally agree the 1969 Apollo trip was just a hoax.
Why do you go on to post garbage?
Why would I agree with someone who has absolutely no experience in any of the numerous fields required to pull off a manned space mission?
I have plenty experience in manned sea going missions on Earth. Such trips are planned beforehand including calculations of fuel required. Many years ago I became interested in manned space missions and found that the more I read about NASA manned space missions starting in the 1960's, it seemed NASA was trolling people to see just how much they could get away with. There are major anomalies and lots of red flags everywhere. I concluded all was fantasy. No American was ever in space.
So I started my Challenge about it many years ago. And nobody can explain how to do a manned trip in space.
Your cognitive dissonance is showing.  You want to believe that manned space missions should be quite similar to manned sea missions, but your brain can't handle how different they really are, so you just reject the notion of manned space missions being possible at all. 

Your Dunning-Kruger syndrome is showing too, in that you just can't accept that aerospace engineers and rocket scientists know more about rockets and space travel than you do.  It's really quite sad.

Topic is my space travel Challenge and not my health. I am happy to confirm I am in good mental health.
Mentally ill people are usually the last ones to know that they have any mental illness.

Only twerps suggest that manned space travel anywhere does not require careful planning including calculations of fuel required...
When did I ever suggest otherwise?  ???

... and cannot even explain the purpose of humans in space.
The purpose of humans in space is to explore space and to conduct scientific research.  How hard is that to understand?

Just take the simple task of changing a round, low altitude orbit around Earth to be extended so you can go to the Moon or Mars.

Twerps suggest that you just fire your rocket engine and - WHOOM - you are catapulted to the vicinity of the Moon or Mars, where you fire your rocket engine again - WHOOOOM - and start orbiting the Moon or Mars.
No.  Nobody suggests that it's that easy to change orbits.  This only demonstrates your own ignorance.

But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required.
Again, you demonstrate your own ignorance.  The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is used to calculate the amount of fuel required for a given amount of delta-v and is a relatively simple calculation.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9349 on: June 20, 2018, 10:23:12 PM »


But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required.
Again, you demonstrate your own ignorance.  The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is used to calculate the amount of fuel required for a given amount of delta-v and is a relatively simple calculation.

Yes, it sounds simple! If you want to go to the Moon from EPO you calculate the delta-v (m/s) required and suddenly you know the fuel (kg) required. I wonder why nobody can do it? Maybe because you must also carry the fuel to fly home?
You sound like CIA boss/twerp Gina Haspel who recently told the US President that Korea north has 60 nuclear bombs and missiles that can wipe out USA. Asked about any evidence for it, the answer was, as usual, it is a secret. Remember Saddam Hussein/Iraq and M. Khadaffi/Libya! They also had nuclear bombs according CIA but after both countries were destroyed, none was found. The info had been obtained using torture that Gina loves.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9350 on: June 20, 2018, 10:27:51 PM »
The purpose of humans in space is to explore space and to conduct scientific research.  How hard is that to understand?
It is for me. Much simpler is to use robots for the job. They do not need to go to the toilet.

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • +2/-1
  • Standard Idiot
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9351 on: June 20, 2018, 10:33:11 PM »
Sending people into space changes the mission from science to 'keep the people alive'.
It multiplies the cost for no reward.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9352 on: June 20, 2018, 10:43:58 PM »
The purpose of humans in space is to explore space and to conduct scientific research.  How hard is that to understand?

Robots are not only cheaper but can do a lot more than a human could. Even if you could get a human up there, it's a one way trip. How is it we have so many humans 'coming back' then you will no doubt ask as per your programming. Because as Heiwa said, they are all lying actors and twerps. And twerps believe them

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9353 on: June 21, 2018, 03:00:35 AM »
Just take the simple task of changing a round, low altitude orbit around Earth to be extended so you can go to the Moon or Mars.
Twerps suggest that you just fire your rocket engine and - WHOOM - you are catapulted to the vicinity of the Moon or Mars,
You might try starting with a rocket, fuel and payload of total mass 120,000 kg in a 170 km LEO and using a fuel with SI = 421 s.
The rocket has a thrust of 895 kN, so fire it for 147 s which hopefully gives the rocket a delta-V of 3140 m/'s.
This lunar transfer orbit injection burn uses about 63901 kg of fuel

Quote from: Heiwa
where you fire your rocket engine again - WHOOOOM - and start orbiting the Moon or Mars. But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required.
You've got into a highly elliptical orbit that we'll call a lunar transfer orbit and when the rocket gets to its apogee of 384,000 km,
 :D so now "fire your rocket engine again - WHOOOOM" ;D.
This time a delta-V of only 826.93 m/s is needed to make the orbital velocity about 1010.48 km/s at the moon's radius.
This final lunar radius orbital injection uses about 10179 kg of fuel, placing about 45920 kg into lunar orbit.

That's funny those numbers look very like those of Apollo lunar missions, but the only values taken from Saturn V data are the mass in LEO, the LEO altitude and the specific impulse of the rockets and fuel use.

This isn't quite what is needed for the usual "automatic return" trajectory to the moon but I'll let the experts work that out.

Quote from: Heiwa
They are typical twerps believing in fantasies.
Yes, there are lots of us twerps around. Heiwa, you might check the numbers, you might find some mistakes.

PS Just because you can't understand something does not make that thing impossible, it doesn't mean any such thing.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45077
  • +87/-104
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9354 on: June 21, 2018, 06:58:50 AM »


But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required.
Again, you demonstrate your own ignorance.  The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is used to calculate the amount of fuel required for a given amount of delta-v and is a relatively simple calculation.

Yes, it sounds simple! If you want to go to the Moon from EPO you calculate the delta-v (m/s) required and suddenly you know the fuel (kg) required. I wonder why nobody can do it? Maybe because you must also carry the fuel to fly home?
What are you talking about?  Of course the mission planners calculate how much fuel they need to carry for the return trip.  Why is it so hard for you to understand the concept of carrying that fuel for the return trip as part of your initial payload? 
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9355 on: June 21, 2018, 11:07:49 AM »
Just take the simple task of changing a round, low altitude orbit around Earth to be extended so you can go to the Moon or Mars.
Twerps suggest that you just fire your rocket engine and - WHOOM - you are catapulted to the vicinity of the Moon or Mars,
You might try starting with a rocket, fuel and payload of total mass 120,000 kg in a 170 km LEO and using a fuel with SI = 421 s.
The rocket has a thrust of 895 kN, so fire it for 147 s which hopefully gives the rocket a delta-V of 3140 m/'s.
This lunar transfer orbit injection burn uses about 63901 kg of fuel

Thanks, so half my fuel/mass is burnt just to get out of EPO! But how do I know I will arrive anywhere. And how can I return and collect the €1M Heiwa Challange award?

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • +0/-0
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9356 on: June 21, 2018, 11:11:05 AM »


But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required.
Again, you demonstrate your own ignorance.  The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is used to calculate the amount of fuel required for a given amount of delta-v and is a relatively simple calculation.

Yes, it sounds simple! If you want to go to the Moon from EPO you calculate the delta-v (m/s) required and suddenly you know the fuel (kg) required. I wonder why nobody can do it? Maybe because you must also carry the fuel to fly home?
What are you talking about?  Of course the mission planners calculate how much fuel they need to carry for the return trip.  Why is it so hard for you to understand the concept of carrying that fuel for the return trip as part of your initial payload?
Well, no mission planners will tell me how much fuel they need to carry for the return trip. I think they are twerps just acting as NASA experts. What do you think? Do you think?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45077
  • +87/-104
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9357 on: June 21, 2018, 12:52:03 PM »


But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required.
Again, you demonstrate your own ignorance.  The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is used to calculate the amount of fuel required for a given amount of delta-v and is a relatively simple calculation.

Yes, it sounds simple! If you want to go to the Moon from EPO you calculate the delta-v (m/s) required and suddenly you know the fuel (kg) required. I wonder why nobody can do it? Maybe because you must also carry the fuel to fly home?
What are you talking about?  Of course the mission planners calculate how much fuel they need to carry for the return trip.  Why is it so hard for you to understand the concept of carrying that fuel for the return trip as part of your initial payload?
Well, no mission planners will tell me how much fuel they need to carry for the return trip. I think they are twerps just acting as NASA experts. What do you think? Do you think?
I think that the mission planners don't want to waste their time with you because you are the twerp.

Again, it's simply a matter of using the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation.  The part that's probably confusing you the most is that you have to pretty much plan the mission backwards.  You start out by figuring out how much mass you have at the end of your lunar stay and how much delta-v you need to get you from lunar orbit back to earth.  Once you know how much fuel you need for that burn, then you can add that fuel mass to the payload mass that you need to carry with you to lunar orbit.  When you know how much mass you need to take to lunar orbit and how much delta-v you need to get you there, then you can calculate how much propellant you need to take to EPO.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
  • +3/-2
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9358 on: June 21, 2018, 02:42:05 PM »


But they cannot calculate how much fuel is required.
Again, you demonstrate your own ignorance.  The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation is used to calculate the amount of fuel required for a given amount of delta-v and is a relatively simple calculation.

Yes, it sounds simple! If you want to go to the Moon from EPO you calculate the delta-v (m/s) required and suddenly you know the fuel (kg) required. I wonder why nobody can do it? Maybe because you must also carry the fuel to fly home?
What are you talking about?  Of course the mission planners calculate how much fuel they need to carry for the return trip.  Why is it so hard for you to understand the concept of carrying that fuel for the return trip as part of your initial payload?
Well, no mission planners will tell me how much fuel they need to carry for the return trip. I think they are twerps just acting as NASA experts. What do you think? Do you think?
I think that the mission planners don't want to waste their time with you because you are the twerp.

Again, it's simply a matter of using the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation.  The part that's probably confusing you the most is that you have to pretty much plan the mission backwards.  You start out by figuring out how much mass you have at the end of your lunar stay and how much delta-v you need to get you from lunar orbit back to earth.  Once you know how much fuel you need for that burn, then you can add that fuel mass to the payload mass that you need to carry with you to lunar orbit.  When you know how much mass you need to take to lunar orbit and how much delta-v you need to get you there, then you can calculate how much propellant you need to take to EPO.

There comes a point where the amount of fuel would be diminishing returns because of the weight alone. Just because I have a billion tonnes of rocket fuel under my arse, doesn't mean I can go wherever I want. There is also the issue of slowing down. I mean FFS the rocket that supposedly went to the moon was apparently 239,725kg and fully loaded was 2,766,913kg. More than 10x the weight of fuel than the vehicle itself. If my car is 1500kg and I increase the fuel tank to carry 15,000kg of fuel, I wont be going ANYWHERE

This almost 3 million tonne rocket ship was also supposedly going 11km/s. Think about the amount of energy required to slow something down weighing that much to a stop. It is ludicrous. Mankind simply hasn't invented an efficient or effective means of having humans travel to space and certainly not back again. Only twerps believe we have. THINK about it.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • +0/-0
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #9359 on: June 21, 2018, 03:15:11 PM »
Thanks, so half my fuel/mass is burnt just to get out of EPO!
Yes, and a big fraction of the delta-V to even get into a Low Mars Orbit is simply that needed to get into LEO.
The delta-V to 250 km LEO is about 9 km/s, roughly 3.56 km/s to leave LEO and enter a Mars Transfer Orbit (MTO) and another about 2.1 km/s to enter a LMO.
A grand total of about 15.13 km/s (excuse rounding errors) - so off you go.
Don't forget to send a tweet when you get there - tough about the no way back but don't worry, your leaving will raise the Earth's average IQ a smidgeon.

Quote from: Heiwa
But how do I know I will arrive anywhere?
You know you will get somewhere because the mission planners are not dumb idiots like you and have other experts in astronomy and others fields to advise them.
And the trajectory is monitored, just as the course of a ship is and using some of the same equipment (yes, a sextant!), then mid-course corrections are applied.
Plus ground-based radar etc, of course and a lot of people doing a lot of big sums here on earth on lots of IBM System 360s.

Armstrong charted course to the heavens with sextant, star chart and slide rules

Apollo-11 astronauts used a Plath sextant to navigate 389,645 kilometres from the Earth to the Moon in July 1969. The instrument invented for sailors in the 1700s.
C&GS COLLECTION / NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC A
Quote from: TOM SPEARS
OTTAWA — In July of 1969, Neil Armstrong and two other astronauts were in orbit around Earth, preparing to fire up another engine and accelerate toward the moon.

Ground-based radar showed their orbit was perfect. But they needed a position check.

They pulled out an instrument invented for sailors in the 1700s: a sextant.

To understand the achievement of the first humans to walk on the moon, it’s necessary to understand Armstrong’s time, when astronauts had to calculate and use their ingenuity every step of the way because they didn’t have today’s computers and sensors.

We’ll pick up the story from a NASA transcript 46 minutes after launch, as Apollo-11 flies 103.0 miles above the Earth:

The rest is in: Neil Armstrong and early astronauts charted course with sextant, slide rules

On Apollo 11, I think, the insertion burn was a little longer than planned, so the velocity was 3 m/s too high - a correction was needed, big deal.

No single person tries to plan this sort of thing. You seem to think that one person can plan the whole thing.

Quote from: Heiwa
And how can I return and collect the €1M Heiwa Challange award?
You know what you can do with your "€1M Heiwa Challange award" - it's as fake as you are!

 ;D ;D Bye bye, don't forget tweet when you get to Mars! ;D ;D