uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.

  • 927 Replies
  • 48165 Views
*

rvlvr

  • 1965
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #660 on: February 06, 2018, 11:33:45 AM »
What about the articles SANDOKHAN linked to?

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #661 on: February 06, 2018, 12:09:10 PM »
What about the articles SANDOKHAN linked to?

Rat in facemask detected.

Rat status: terminal butthurt & confusion.

Advice: HOBBIT TREK!

I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rvlvr

  • 1965
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #662 on: February 06, 2018, 12:25:47 PM »
So I guess we are no longer bots, Jerry? You are quite fickle.

How did the articles make you feel? Did you read them? You were earlier saying sandokhan proved something about space flight not being possible, but then he gave links to articles which confirm said flights. FE is a tough sport, isn't it?

Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #663 on: February 06, 2018, 12:32:19 PM »
I was talking about the EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT....they could not correct those in real time from the ground !!!!!!!!!
Did you miss the part where the satellite didn't reach the "EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT"?

The satellite's actual orbit was higher than they had planned.  Why do you insist on
a) not knowing the actual facts,
b) not correcting your misinformation when you are corrected

Seriously, this information is readily accessible, so there's no real excuse to be debating with incorrect information, and I corrected you on the page you repeated this false information.  It's extremely lazy to not keep up with the conversation.

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #664 on: February 06, 2018, 01:02:34 PM »
I was talking about the EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT....they could not correct those in real time from the ground !!!!!!!!!
Did you miss the part where the satellite didn't reach the "EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT"?

The satellite's actual orbit was higher than they had planned.  Why do you insist on
a) not knowing the actual facts,
b) not correcting your misinformation when you are corrected

Seriously, this information is readily accessible, so there's no real excuse to be debating with incorrect information, and I corrected you on the page you repeated this false information.  It's extremely lazy to not keep up with the conversation.
You mean this pile of horse manure ?
If you want a satellite to have a circular orbit at 400 km altitude the velocity ideally should be 7668.55 m/s.
If due to a burn error it ends up at 7640 m/s the satellite goes into an elliptical orbit of perigee 300 km and apogee 400 km.


Explain me how they could manage to stay in between certain parameters while unable to correct anything during flight !!!


?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #665 on: February 06, 2018, 01:05:33 PM »
There's no such thing as a satellite orbit anyway.

I already proved it.

Look:

Okay, so the silly fake ISS is being accelerated by gravity at nearly 20 mph every second it is in orbit.

There are over 31 million seconds in a year.

And the ISS was first put in orbit 20 years ago.

So, multiply 31 million by 20 by 20 and you'll have the number in miles per hour that gravity will have accelerated the silly fake ISS up to by now...

I get it in the tens of billions.

This is not debatable btw, which is why you've gone into mad AI shitpost frenzy mode trying to cover it up.
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #666 on: February 06, 2018, 01:15:56 PM »
And look Space X again tries to reach LEO while going horizontal
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40301
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #667 on: February 06, 2018, 01:21:25 PM »
I was talking about the EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT....they could not correct those in real time from the ground !!!!!!!!!
Did you miss the part where the satellite didn't reach the "EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT"?

The satellite's actual orbit was higher than they had planned.  Why do you insist on
a) not knowing the actual facts,
b) not correcting your misinformation when you are corrected

Seriously, this information is readily accessible, so there's no real excuse to be debating with incorrect information, and I corrected you on the page you repeated this false information.  It's extremely lazy to not keep up with the conversation.
You mean this pile of horse manure ?
If you want a satellite to have a circular orbit at 400 km altitude the velocity ideally should be 7668.55 m/s.
If due to a burn error it ends up at 7640 m/s the satellite goes into an elliptical orbit of perigee 300 km and apogee 400 km.


Explain me how they could manage to stay in between certain parameters while unable to correct anything during flight !!!
Umm...  You do realize that they used existing rockets in the late 1950s, don't you?  They already had a pretty good idea of their operational parameters, so it was pretty much a matter of modifying the flight plan for an orbital trajectory instead of a ballistic one.
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.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #668 on: February 06, 2018, 01:27:32 PM »
You mean this pile of horse manure ?
If you want a satellite to have a circular orbit at 400 km altitude the velocity ideally should be 7668.55 m/s.
If due to a burn error it ends up at 7640 m/s the satellite goes into an elliptical orbit of perigee 300 km and apogee 400 km.

And what exactly is wrong that simple statement?

Quote from: dutchy
Explain me how they could manage to stay in between certain parameters while unable to correct anything during flight !!!
The early rockets didn't get it right!
Quote
Explorer 1
Flight
After a jet stream-related delay on 28 January 1958, at 10:48:16 PM Eastern Time on 31 January the Juno I rocket was launched, putting Explorer 1 into orbit with a perigee of 358 kilometers (222 mi) and an apogee of 2,550 kilometers (1,580 mi) having a period of 114.8 minutes. Goldstone Tracking Station could not report after 90 minutes as planned whether the launch had succeeded because the orbit was larger than expected. At about 1:30 a.m. ET, after confirming that Explorer 1 was indeed in orbit, a news conference was held in the Great Hall at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, DC to announce it to the world.

The original expected lifetime of the satellite before orbital decay was three years. Mercury batteries powered the high-power transmitter for 31 days and the low-power transmitter for 105 days. Explorer 1 stopped transmission of data on May 23, 1958 when its batteries died, but remained in orbit for more than 12 years. It reentered the atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean on March 31, 1970 after more than 58,000 orbits.

Explorer 1
As rocket propellant design improved and with the ability of liquid fuel rocket engines to be throttled, orbital parameter could be controlled more precisely.

But things back in the 1950s and 60s were nowhere near as primitive as you try to make out.

Dutchy, instead of trying your silly attempts at ridicule you could look this information up just as easily as I can.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #669 on: February 06, 2018, 01:36:00 PM »
I was talking about the EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT....they could not correct those in real time from the ground !!!!!!!!!
Did you miss the part where the satellite didn't reach the "EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT"?

The satellite's actual orbit was higher than they had planned.  Why do you insist on
a) not knowing the actual facts,
b) not correcting your misinformation when you are corrected

Seriously, this information is readily accessible, so there's no real excuse to be debating with incorrect information, and I corrected you on the page you repeated this false information.  It's extremely lazy to not keep up with the conversation.
You mean this pile of horse manure ?
If you want a satellite to have a circular orbit at 400 km altitude the velocity ideally should be 7668.55 m/s.
If due to a burn error it ends up at 7640 m/s the satellite goes into an elliptical orbit of perigee 300 km and apogee 400 km.


Explain me how they could manage to stay in between certain parameters while unable to correct anything during flight !!!
Umm...  You do realize that they used existing rockets in the late 1950s, don't you?  They already had a pretty good idea of their operational parameters, so it was pretty much a matter of modifying the flight plan for an orbital trajectory instead of a ballistic one.

No such thing as an orbital trajectory, botty boy.

I've proved it.

Oh and rabbibot, you can't throttle a rocket with a fixed geometry nozzle...

So stop making shit up.
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 6483
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #670 on: February 06, 2018, 01:36:58 PM »
Only a rabbibot can bring the Explorer mission into the debate.

Here is how the Explorer missions were faked.

Explorer I was launched at 10:48 PM EST, January 31, 1958 -- from Pad 26A, at Cape Canaveral.

The Jupiter-C rocket (C standing for "composite") that successfully launched this first US satellite into the Florida skies (below), was actually a converted "Redstone" military ICBM -- a rocket developed as a US Army advancement over their earlier "V-2s," by Wernher von Braun and his imported team of "Operation Paperclip" German Nazi rocket engineers to the United States, in the decade immediately following World War II.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/sputnik/expinfo.html

"Thus, when the spacecraft disappeared over the South Atlantic horizon from Cape Canaveral that evening, after being launched "downrange" (the line extending southeast from Florida -- above), there was essentially no way for von Braun (or anyone else ...) to track it, to KNOW from "telemetry" (radioed information ...) if "his" satellite had been successfully placed in orbit by the Jupiter C ... or not--

But to impatiently just wait ....

Until Explorer I -- moving at ~18,000 miles per hour (5 miles per second ...) -- had almost completely circled the entire world ... and came back around ... within range of special radio receivers set up in the deserts just north of San Diego, California (a place called menacingly "Earthquake Valley" ...).

There, if the receivers picked up Explorer I's faint telemetry signals as it was coming over the Pacific Ocean for the first time -- after the spacecraft had almost circled the entire planet -- word was to be "flashed" (by "long-distance telephone" -- as it was quaintly called in those days ...) to Cape Canaveral (where von Braun's Army launch crew was nervously waiting ...), and, to the Pentagon in Washington DC -- where von Braun himself, Van Allen, and William Pickering (Director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory -- JPL -- the West Coast facility which had constructed the actual satellite) -- were also watching "the clock tick down the seconds" ...."

That key California signal -- for a carefully planned, Explorer I trajectory around the Earth of 220 by 1000 miles -- was expected at about 12:30 AM EST, February 1, 1958.

Slightly over an hour and a half after Explorer's launch from Florida," the moment of truth" in this intensely anticipated "window" came ... and went--

And--

Nothing.

Then -- it was 12:31 ... then, 12:32 ... and more nothing.

Because of the "clockwork" nature of satellite orbits when, by 12:33, there was STILL no signal.


That, they were likely never going to hear that desperately hoped-for signal ... because, somehow ... "something" had gone radically wrong!

By 12:41 AM it was all but certain.

Instead of going into orbit and coming around the Earth on time, Explorer I had -- somehow -- been plunged back into the atmosphere far over the horizon from the Cape -- and, by now, had simply burned up ... literally, somewhere on the far side of the world ....

It was never going to "come around the Earth and over Earthquake Valley ..." -- because it no longer even existed!

Then, at 12:42 AM--

There it was!

Explorer I had just been "late."

But ... why?

Plugging the numbers in the rocket equation revealed the extent to which the entire Explorer mission had to be falsified.


The key parameter is the number representing "ISP" -- a rocket's "specific impulse" (expressed as "seconds").

"Specific impulse is somewhat like a "miles per gallon" reading for your car; the higher the specific impulse (ISP) for a given rocket system (engines plus fuel), the more efficient the total rocket system is ... in terms of "miles per gallon" usage of that fuel ....

And, the higher the final velocity you can achieve with a given amount (mass) of fuel.

And ... higher final velocities result in higher orbits!

So, high ISP numbers are good; lower ISP numbers are ... "less good" ....

In terms of determining if the JPL upper stages could have achieved the performance levels required to place Explorer I into its higher-than-expected orbit, we began by looking at the published parameters of the solid rockets JPL used in constructing those stages for von Braun's final "composite" rocket.

One major clue was in Van Allen's own report:

 

"... the final burnout velocity of the fourth stage was somewhat higher than intended [emphasis added] ....."

 

According to the Smithsonian's "National Air and Space Museum Data Sheet, Department of Astronautics" -- published on an official NASA website--

The fuel and oxidizer used in the JPL-designed "solid" upper stages for the Jupiter-C was "... polysulfide-aluminum and ammonium perchlorate." This was pretty standard stuff, even if its ISP was fairly poor, compared to almost any liquid chemical rocket fuels in use today; the ISP varied from about "220 seconds" in the atmosphere, to about "235 seconds" in a good vacuum (because, contrary to common misperception, rocket engines actually work best in a pure vacuum -- when the thrust exhaust isn't slowed down by the surrounding air!).

The Smithsonian data sheet also neatly listed the "fueled" and "empty weight" of each Jupiter-C stage (below)."

http://www.enterprisemission.com/Jupiter-C-Stats.jpg

Plugging these numbers into the Rocket Equation, and averaging the atmospheric and vacuum ISP efficiencies of the upper stages together (as the Jupiter-C rose out of the atmosphere that night, and the later stage ignitions became more efficient ...), gave us the maximum theoretical "by the book" velocity those three upper stages could have imparted to Explorer I at "orbit injection.

dV = -32.2 X 228 X (662lb/1380lb) = 3520 feet per sec

 

But--

We already knew that this velocity, added to the maximum velocity imparted by the liquid-fueled first stage (at "staging"), was the "nominal satellite injection velocity" -- what was required to place Explorer I into its planned orbit of about "220 by 1000 miles" (red line, below).

Since the actual orbital parameters (according to George Ludwig's figures) were "223 by 1592 ..." -- almost 600 miles higher at apogee than "nominal" (the blue line, below) -- what we really needed was a measure of how much additional velocity that approximately 600-mile increase in apogee represented, to put Explorer I into an orbit that much higher (and more elliptical) than originally targeted ....

There's a well-known "rule of thumb" in rocket science -- that, for "every additional foot per second of injection velocity" at perigee (the low point of the orbit), a spacecraft gains "about a mile of additional altitude at apogee" (the highest orbital point).

Using this approximation, Explorer I had gained something like "an additional ~600 feet per second" ....

This amounted to almost a twenty percent performance increase -- in ALL the upper stage solid ISPs -- over the same solid-fueled rockets' measured performance in previous JPL applications!

The idea that one of the 15 solids in those upper stages might exhibit this degree of major variation, was barely plausible; that ALL of them TOGETHER (required to produce the total delta velocity increase) had done so that night, was simply impossible ... by any known chemistry and physics.

"Normal physics" also says you "can't get something for nothing." Yet, somehow, by this simple calculation, Explorer I DID exactly that--

Acquiring six hundred extra miles of "something" ... from absolutely nothing.

Just how the hell did JPL and von Braun manage to accomplish that!?

No "small variations" -- a few percent, at best -- of the Jupiter-C's individual solid rockets in the vehicle's upper stages -- from "grain size, packing density, mixture variations, etc., etc." -- could possibly account for a ~20% INCREASE in overall delta V at burnout ... resulting in almost 600 additional feet per second ... and 600 additional vertical miles ... of "super performance" for America's first satellite!


It is obvious what happened: the Explorer could not reach beyond the huge radiation contained in the aether/ether layers of the upper atmosphere.

Then, Nasa/JPL had at their disposal two options: either call the San Diego office and tell them to lie about the radio signals, or launch another rocket very fast from the Pacific, just minutes later.

Things went wrong again even for the Explorer III mission.

Launched March 26, 1958, the satellite was planned for a trajectory essentially identical to Explorer I's original intended orbit: 220 by 1000 miles. However, to the chagrin of von Braun and his launch team, the new spacecraft also wound up in a close repeat of Explorer I's peculiarly extended flight path!

Explorer III 's final orbital parameters were -- "125 miles by 1750 miles ... with a period of 115.7 minutes" -- an orbit more elliptical (and even higher) than Explorer I's ... but of almost exactly the same duration!

There was NO WAY this could be dismissed as simply another "over performance" by the Jupiter-C (and yet, of course, according to the "experts," that's all it could be ...)!

With the launch of Explorer IV four months after that -- July 26, 1958 -- "the anomaly" was solid:

Explorer IV's final orbit was "163 miles by 1373 miles ..." compared to the, again, intended "220 by 1000." At first glance, this does NOT look like any kind of confirmation ... until the fact that Explorer IV was carrying twice the payload of scientific instruments, compared to the previous spacecraft, was factored in ....

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #671 on: February 06, 2018, 01:38:16 PM »
And what exactly is wrong that simple statement?
That it doesn't EXPLAIN anything, but adds more nonsence to mask the absence of any valid explanation !
Quote
The early rockets didn't get it right!
Quote
Explorer 1
Flight
After a jet stream-related delay on 28 January 1958, at 10:48:16 PM Eastern Time on 31 January the Juno I rocket was launched, putting Explorer 1 into orbit with a perigee of 358 kilometers (222 mi) and an apogee of 2,550 kilometers (1,580 mi) having a period of 114.8 minutes. Goldstone Tracking Station could not report after 90 minutes as planned whether the launch had succeeded because the orbit was larger than expected. At about 1:30 a.m. ET, after confirming that Explorer 1 was indeed in orbit, a news conference was held in the Great Hall at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, DC to announce it to the world.

The original expected lifetime of the satellite before orbital decay was three years. Mercury batteries powered the high-power transmitter for 31 days and the low-power transmitter for 105 days. Explorer 1 stopped transmission of data on May 23, 1958 when its batteries died, but remained in orbit for more than 12 years. It reentered the atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean on March 31, 1970 after more than 58,000 orbits.

Explorer 1
As rocket propellant design improved and with the ability of liquid fuel rocket engines to be throttled, orbital parameter could be controlled more precisely.

But things back in the 1950s and 60s were nowhere near as primitive as you try to make out.

Dutchy, instead of trying your silly attempts at ridicule you could look this information up just as easily as I can.
Do you really not understand that you simply add some numbers without explaining anything ???

Look at the footage of a rocket launch during the fifties (one that didn't explode for a change !!!)...and then look at the numbers they claim they could handle.....

Care to explain how they did it for a change ???(maintain the exact velocity, angle, altitide and deployment) , instead of adding more irrelevant numbers ??

*

rvlvr

  • 1965
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #672 on: February 06, 2018, 01:52:48 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

And I suggest sandokhan checks the links he posted to better be able to tell us how everything is faked.

You really do not feel at all bad to completely disregard and forget something you yourself posted when you realize it was actually the opposite to what you wanted to tell people? How does your mind work in situations like that, when you know you just dug yourself a hole, but just cannot admit it? You know you lie, because you know what you said is false.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40301
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #673 on: February 06, 2018, 02:22:55 PM »
I was talking about the EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT....they could not correct those in real time from the ground !!!!!!!!!
Did you miss the part where the satellite didn't reach the "EXACT SPEED IN RELATION TO ALTITUDE AND ANGLE NEEDED TO REACH THE PREFERED ORBIT"?

The satellite's actual orbit was higher than they had planned.  Why do you insist on
a) not knowing the actual facts,
b) not correcting your misinformation when you are corrected

Seriously, this information is readily accessible, so there's no real excuse to be debating with incorrect information, and I corrected you on the page you repeated this false information.  It's extremely lazy to not keep up with the conversation.
You mean this pile of horse manure ?
If you want a satellite to have a circular orbit at 400 km altitude the velocity ideally should be 7668.55 m/s.
If due to a burn error it ends up at 7640 m/s the satellite goes into an elliptical orbit of perigee 300 km and apogee 400 km.


Explain me how they could manage to stay in between certain parameters while unable to correct anything during flight !!!
Umm...  You do realize that they used existing rockets in the late 1950s, don't you?  They already had a pretty good idea of their operational parameters, so it was pretty much a matter of modifying the flight plan for an orbital trajectory instead of a ballistic one.

No such thing as an orbital trajectory, botty boy.
Then it's a good thing that I wasn't directing that post at you.
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.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #674 on: February 06, 2018, 02:26:58 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

No one blew up anything.

The money was stolen.

By this conspiracy, that you are programmed to deny exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_to_defraud
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40301
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #675 on: February 06, 2018, 02:33:24 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

No one blew up anything.

The money was stolen.

By this conspiracy, that you are programmed to deny exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_to_defraud
SpaceX has claimed to launch a number of satellites for paying customers.  Why have none of those customers filed lawsuits yet?
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.

*

Shifter

  • 15555
  • Flat Earth Believer
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #676 on: February 06, 2018, 02:35:50 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

No one blew up anything.

The money was stolen.

By this conspiracy, that you are programmed to deny exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_to_defraud
SpaceX has claimed to launch a number of satellites for paying customers.  Why have none of those customers filed lawsuits yet?

Phantom customers. I don't know of anyone personally who has used SpaceX services..... Do you?
RIP rabinoz. Forum legend

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #677 on: February 06, 2018, 02:44:09 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

No one blew up anything.

The money was stolen.

By this conspiracy, that you are programmed to deny exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_to_defraud
SpaceX has claimed to launch a number of satellites for paying customers.  Why have none of those customers filed lawsuits yet?

Another thing you are not programmed to acknowledge exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boondoggle
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #678 on: February 06, 2018, 02:52:38 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

No one blew up anything.

The money was stolen.

By this conspiracy, that you are programmed to deny exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_to_defraud
SpaceX has claimed to launch a number of satellites for paying customers.  Why have none of those customers filed lawsuits yet?

Phantom customers. I don't know of anyone personally who has used SpaceX services..... Do you?

Do you know any Boeing customers personally?
Do you know any Lockheed Martin customers personally?
Do you know any Northrop Grumman  customers personally?

What point were you actually trying to make.....that you know very few people perhaps?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40301
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #679 on: February 06, 2018, 02:59:16 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

No one blew up anything.

The money was stolen.

By this conspiracy, that you are programmed to deny exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_to_defraud
SpaceX has claimed to launch a number of satellites for paying customers.  Why have none of those customers filed lawsuits yet?

Phantom customers. I don't know of anyone personally who has used SpaceX services..... Do you?

Do you know any Boeing customers personally?
Do you know any Lockheed Martin customers personally?
Do you know any Northrop Grumman  customers personally?

What point were you actually trying to make.....that you know very few people perhaps?
Do we really need a sarcasm tag?
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.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #680 on: February 06, 2018, 02:59:47 PM »
So Elon Musk just blew up how much money was it?

No one blew up anything.

The money was stolen.

By this conspiracy, that you are programmed to deny exists:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_to_defraud
SpaceX has claimed to launch a number of satellites for paying customers.  Why have none of those customers filed lawsuits yet?

Phantom customers. I don't know of anyone personally who has used SpaceX services..... Do you?

Do you know any Boeing customers personally?
Do you know any Lockheed Martin customers personally?
Do you know any Northrop Grumman  customers personally?

What point were you actually trying to make.....that you know very few people perhaps?

Lol the REtard lives in a fantasy world.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/07/31/Pentagon-s-Sloppy-Bookkeeping-Means-65-Trillion-Can-t-Pass-Audit
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #681 on: February 06, 2018, 07:06:28 PM »
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explorer I was launched at 10:48 PM EST, January 31, 1958 -- from Pad 26A, at Cape Canaveral.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
According to the Smithsonian's "National Air and Space Museum Data Sheet, Department of Astronautics" -- published on an official NASA website--

The fuel and oxidizer used in the JPL-designed "solid" upper stages for the Jupiter-C was "... polysulfide-aluminum and ammonium perchlorate." This was pretty standard stuff, even if its ISP was fairly poor, compared to almost any liquid chemical rocket fuels in use today; the ISP varied from about "220 seconds" in the atmosphere, to about "235 seconds" in a good vacuum (because, contrary to common misperception, rocket engines actually work best in a pure vacuum -- when the thrust exhaust isn't slowed down by the surrounding air!).

The Smithsonian data sheet also neatly listed the "fueled" and "empty weight" of each Jupiter-C stage (below)."
http://www.enterprisemission.com/Jupiter-C-Stats.jpg

Plugging these numbers into the Rocket Equation, and averaging the atmospheric and vacuum ISP efficiencies of the upper stages together (as the Jupiter-C rose out of the atmosphere that night, and the later stage ignitions became more efficient ...), gave us the maximum theoretical "by the book" velocity those three upper stages could have imparted to Explorer I at "orbit injection.

dV = -32.2 X 228 X (662lb/1380lb) = 3520 feet per sec
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  • Stages 2,3,4 are all essentialy in vacuum.
    I suspect that in reality the Isp is only about 220 s in vacua, so I'll uses Isp = 220 s, though up to 260 s.

  • You seem to be analysing stages 2+3+4 as a single stage of initial mass 1380 lb and final mass 662 lb.
    But it is 3 separate stages, which need to be analysed separately:
      Stage 2 
      Stage 3 
      Stage 4 
      Units
    Init mass
    1380
    360
    80
      pounds
    Final mass
    850
    220
    32
      pounds
    Delta-V
    3430
    3486
    6597
      ft/sec
    Mass data from Jupiter-C/Explorer Statistics
Delta-V for Stage 1 comes out to 13,338 ft/s and the total delta-V for stages 2,3,4 adds up to 13,513 ft/s.
Now, I'm no rocket engineer, so I won't pretend that these figures exactly describe the Explorer I launch.
But I'm sure that they are far more realistic than your 3520 ft/s.

Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #682 on: February 06, 2018, 08:29:28 PM »
There's no such thing as a satellite orbit anyway.

I already proved it.

Look:

Okay, so the silly fake ISS is being accelerated by gravity at nearly 20 mph every second it is in orbit.

There are over 31 million seconds in a year.

And the ISS was first put in orbit 20 years ago.

So, multiply 31 million by 20 by 20 and you'll have the number in miles per hour that gravity will have accelerated the silly fake ISS up to by now...

I get it in the tens of billions.

This is not debatable btw, which is why you've gone into mad AI shitpost frenzy mode trying to cover it up.
The only thing you've proved is that you don't understand physics.  I've been accelerated by gravity for over 40 years.  How fast am I going?

The ISS has been accelerated by at a lower rate for less time than me.  What's the problem?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 40301
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #683 on: February 06, 2018, 08:53:24 PM »
Hey Papa Legba.  Since you're such a fan of Physics Classroom, check this out:
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/mmedia/vectors/sat.cfm
Quote
A satellite is often thought of as being a projectile which is orbiting the Earth. But how can a projectile orbit the Earth? Doesn't a projectile accelerate towards the Earth under the influence of gravity? And as such, wouldn't any projectile ultimately fall towards the Earth and collide with the Earth, thus ceasing its orbit?

These are all good questions and represent stumbling blocks for many students of physics. We will discuss each question here. First, an orbiting satellite is a projectile in the sense that the only force acting upon an orbiting satellite is the force of gravity. Most Earth-orbiting satellites are orbiting at a distance high above the Earth such that their motion is unaffected by forces of air resistance. Indeed, a satellite is a projectile.

Second, a satellite is acted upon by the force of gravity and this force does accelerate it towards the Earth. In the absence of gravity a satellite would move in a straight line path tangent to the Earth. In the absence of any forces whatsoever, an object in motion (such as a satellite) would continue in motion with the same speed and in the same direction. This is the law of inertia. The force of gravity acts upon a high speed satellite to deviate its trajectory from a straight-line inertial path. Indeed, a satellite is accelerating towards the Earth due to the force of gravity.

Finally, a satellite does fall towards the Earth; only it never falls into the Earth. To understand this concept, we have to remind ourselves of the fact that the Earth is round; that is the Earth curves. In fact, scientists know that on average, the Earth curves approximately 5 meters downward for every 8000 meters along its horizon. If you were to look out horizontally along the horizon of the Earth for 8000 meters, you would observe that the Earth curves downwards below this straight-line path a distance of 5 meters. In order for a satellite to successfully orbit the Earth, it must travel a horizontal distance of 8000 meters before falling a vertical distance of 5 meters. A horizontally launched projectile falls a vertical distance of 5 meters in its first second of motion. To avoid hitting the Earth, an orbiting projectile must be launched with a horizontal speed of 8000 m/s. When launched at this speed, the projectile will fall towards the Earth with a trajectory which matches the curvature of the Earth. As such, the projectile will fall around the Earth, always accelerating towards it under the influence of gravity, yet never colliding into it since the Earth is constantly curving at the same rate. Such a projectile is an orbiting satellite.
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.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #684 on: February 06, 2018, 09:29:19 PM »
There's no such thing as a satellite orbit anyway.

I already proved it.

Look:

Okay, so the silly fake ISS is being accelerated by gravity at nearly 20 mph every second it is in orbit.

There are over 31 million seconds in a year.

And the ISS was first put in orbit 20 years ago.

So, multiply 31 million by 20 by 20 and you'll have the number in miles per hour that gravity will have accelerated the silly fake ISS up to by now...

I get it in the tens of billions.

This is not debatable btw, which is why you've gone into mad AI shitpost frenzy mode trying to cover it up.
The only thing you've proved is that you don't understand physics.  I've been accelerated by gravity for over 40 years.  How fast am I going?

The ISS has been accelerated by at a lower rate for less time than me.  What's the problem?

So you've been in free fall for over forty years?

Cool story, bro.

And if the markbot can't see what's wrong with the article it linked to, it's even dumber than I thought...

Clue in the word ACCELERATION though.

I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #685 on: February 06, 2018, 10:18:33 PM »
And look Space X again tries to reach LEO while going horizontal
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

 :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
It is NOT going horizontally, it is still heading up and had you looked at the altitude readout you would have seen that!

Take a look at the "STAGE 2 TELEMETRY" on this video:
At:
1:03, SPEED =   925 km/h, ALTITUDE =   6.2 km,
1:08, SPEED = 1011 km/h, ALTITUDE =   7.4 km,
1:13, SPEED = 1011 km/h, ALTITUDE =   8.7 km,
1:18, SPEED = 1215 km/h, ALTITUDE = 10.2 km and
1:23, SPEED = 1333 km/h, ALTITUDE = 11.8 km.
Even though that rocket is still climbing, it seems to be angled downwards.

When you look at the numbers, you certainly see that it is not going horizontally. I have given you the reason and you just ridicule it!

Ridicule all you like, but the explanation is almost entirely perspective, but you'll like the rest of the explanation less still - so I'll forget that bit!

You must have seen aircraft approaching and see how even they stay at the same altitude seem to climb as they get nearer and vice-versa, as in:

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #686 on: February 06, 2018, 10:48:35 PM »
And look Space X again tries to reach LEO while going horizontal
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

 :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)
It is NOT going horizontally, it is still heading up and had you looked at the altitude readout you would have seen that!

Take a look at the "STAGE 2 TELEMETRY" on this video:
At:
1:03, SPEED =   925 km/h, ALTITUDE =   6.2 km,
1:08, SPEED = 1011 km/h, ALTITUDE =   7.4 km,
1:13, SPEED = 1011 km/h, ALTITUDE =   8.7 km,
1:18, SPEED = 1215 km/h, ALTITUDE = 10.2 km and
1:23, SPEED = 1333 km/h, ALTITUDE = 11.8 km.
Even though that rocket is still climbing, it seems to be angled downwards.

When you look at the numbers, you certainly see that it is not going horizontally. I have given you the reason and you just ridicule it!

Ridicule all you like, but the explanation is almost entirely perspective, but you'll like the rest of the explanation less still - so I'll forget that bit!

You must have seen aircraft approaching and see how even they stay at the same altitude seem to climb as they get nearer and vice-versa, as in:

Oh so the fake data provided by the fakers of the fake rockets themselves says they're not fake?

Sounds legit!

The rabbibot is beyond parody, as ever...
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rvlvr

  • 1965
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #687 on: February 06, 2018, 11:13:58 PM »
There will be more and more of those launches, Jerry.

Space flight will become commonplace, and your flat Earth goes the way of the dodo. You can rant and rave, but that fact remains.

?

Papa Legba

  • Ranters
  • 9566
  • Welcome to the CIA Troll/Shill Society.
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #688 on: February 06, 2018, 11:24:02 PM »
Space flight will become commonplace,

They been saying that since the 1950s...

Ain't you noticed they're lying yet, Paul?

Now get on your crappy cycle and get your ass to work, and don't waste my taxes by trolling me from there, eh?
I got Trolled & Shilled at the CIA Troll/Shill Society and now I feel EPIC!!!

*

rvlvr

  • 1965
Re: uh oh. another nail. sorry guys.
« Reply #689 on: February 06, 2018, 11:34:00 PM »
You know full well my name is not Paul, but you know I know who you are. The asymmetry must be maddening.

And yes, space flight will become more commonplace. Does it hurt?

EDIT: You did get one thing right. I do like to cycle, and I have cycled to work most of the time. My bikes aren't crappy, though.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2018, 11:37:06 PM by rvlvr »