No Blast crater Apollo? | Page 3 | Government and Political Conspiracies | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
No Blast crater Apollo?
January 18, 2011
9:15 am
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10297
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

you can ask all of the rocketdyne people you want love to hear what they have to say about the saturn v...but Grumman Aerospace Corporation built the Apollo lander... so i would think that it would be outside of your company's staffs technical expertise...as long as we are talking about people mis representing their expertise just thought i should point that out.

This is a totally ridiculas statement, Rocketdyne was most certainly a major part of Grumman project to build the lander. The landing and take off engines, and all the trusters were Rocketdyne, so we were involved every step, as was the North American space divisions in Downey. Thousands of people would have been devoted to the lander alone working with Grumman. There is no part of the entire program, and all the other contractors, Rocketdyne was not a primary function of. You have no idea what you are talking about concerning the involment of Rocketdyne.

January 18, 2011
10:17 am
Avatar
chrisv25
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 175
Member Since:
December 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

greeney you are absolutly right i have no idea what i'm taking about. I have simply referenced wikipedia. You should change the article if it is not correct.

The Lunar Module was built by Grumman Aircraft Engineering and was chiefly designed by the American aerospace engineer, Tom Kelly.[4] Grumman had begun lunar orbit rendezvous studies in late 1950s and again in 1962. In July 1962, eleven firms were invited to submit proposals for the LEM. Nine did so in September, and Grumman was awarded the contract that same month. The contract cost was expected to be around $350 million. There were initially four major subcontractors—Bell Aerosystems (ascent engine), Hamilton Standard (environmental control systems), Marquardt (reaction control system) and Rocketdyne (descent engine).

and then rocketdyne loses the contract

A configuration freeze did not start until April 1963, when the ascent and descent engine designs were decided. In addition to Rocketdyne, a parallel program for the descent engine was ordered from Space Technology Laboratories in July 1963, and by January 1965 the Rocketdyne contract was canceled.

here is the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Lunar_Module

_______________________________________________________
and this is unrelated but funny as hell
Buzz Aldrin ko's a moon hoaxer who is a jerk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... Oo6aHSY8hU

January 18, 2011
12:44 pm
Avatar
chrisv25
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 175
Member Since:
December 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

alright so as for the apollo 11 hoax i done. I think this photo pretty much convinces me we went, landed a man on the moon in 1969.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/m ... llo11.html

the enlarged version of the landing site is very obviously airbrushed if you get it in Photoshop...the unenlarged version is pristine however and i stand corrected, we did land on the moon.

i do however still think that there is something fishy with the NASA photos they released. Airbrushed to make them more impressive after the press debacle that was apollo 1 maybe?

So I'm a big boy..uh umm, grenney you are right, i am wrong.

January 19, 2011
8:45 pm
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10297
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Hi Chris,

Just goes to show you can learn something everyday. I was not aware of something you just wrote about Rocketdyne loosing that contract, but more important in that to me personally, was the fact Space Technology Labs was also involved. My Dad (John the adminstrators Grandfather) was a areonautical engineer for Bell Aircraft in the 40's-50's until 1960. I could write a forum alone on the programs he was involved with. When my Dad left Bell, we moved to California and he was employed at STL. STL was in Redondo Beach right next to LAX airport, they became TRW. He was involved with their rocket programs and I went to his office one day with him, and got to see a working model of a Atlas missile and a silo that was kept in his office. It was one of those PR models big companies make, the missile itself was about 3 feet tall, and it was a "to Scale" model that would go down into the silo and the doors would close. Its probably sitting in some aircraft museum someplace if it survived the period. The kind of thing companies spent a fortune building and display in their lobby. That program was part of the ICBM program, but we did use the Atlas for some of the Mercury launches. The atlas engines became so reliable, we still built them way into my employment at rocketdyne. I think we made ove 500 complete systems, which is 3 engines each. My robotic department supported all the programs, and I probably welded hundreds of some of the major manifolds and pump housing welds myself. they phased them out, but the Air Force has a big amount of them stockpiled ready for use. Boeing at some point bought Hamiton Standard and Bell. These companies buy and sell, its hard to piece togather the ownerships of them. Marquart no longer exists I don;t think. They are only 2 miles from be adjoining the Van Nuys Airport. The look closed up and deserted last time I drove past them. We subcontracted many many things to them even with teh space shuttle program.

When your company is a prime contractor they are required to subcontract at least 20% out. Its the governments way of "spreading the wealth" ad the taxpayers money benifiting all. They sub out to major companies like Marquart, Grumman, Lockheed, but they also sub out to small local shops small parts and other things. Consequently these places are all in close proximity, many near railroad Spurs or airports, and in most all cases, the subcontactors will have the prime contractors involved internally with all of it. Rocketdyne and our Space division would ahve been intertwineed daily with all of them. When you realize the enormity, and complexity of the programs, how many eyes, ears, and hands are on everything, the idea of faking it all is very far fetched to anyone in these programs.

January 22, 2011
3:54 am
Avatar
gudskepteacal
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 620
Member Since:
June 5, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Sorry this is so late chrisv25, but I've had some problems logging on lately. Please disregard my last post as I totally misread and misunderstood you when you were calling this Jay Windley a liar and a fraud; NOT greeney, as I somehow took it. IT WAS MY DUMB MISTAKE! Embarassed One that I will try very hard not to repeat in the future; concerning your posts or any other blackvault member's. Please accept my sincere apology and I truly hope to see you around the board in the future because you seem to have a swell way of finding and posting information. PEACE

"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." - James Madison

January 22, 2011
4:26 am
Avatar
chrisv25
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 175
Member Since:
December 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

no problem. No harm, no foul. I get really defensive about the "attack the credentials of the target" tactic, mostly because of people like Darwin, Galileo, Socrates, ect. That tactic is poorly thought out and a logical fallacy.

anyway with that being said I have no problem with you. PEACE.

January 27, 2011
12:24 am
Avatar
jaydeehess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 465
Member Since:
April 13, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Windley a fraud?

The webmaster, Jay Windley, has been trained as an engineer and has worked in various industries including aerospace. He studied mechanical engineering and computer science at Kansas State University (BSCS), and engineering design and computer science at the University of Utah. At the latter institution he did graduate work using their advanced manufacturing laboratory and for the associated corporate spin-off Engineering Geometry Systems. This group provided design and testing support to major aerospace contractors as well as the U.S. Department of Defense. He currently works as a systems engineer developing high-performance computers and supercomputing applications for customers such as Boeing, Northrup-Grumman, and Airbus.
Windley has been acknowledged as an expert in the technical history of Apollo and has consulted with several authors including Arthur C. Clark, Ed Mitchell, and his comments have appeared in The New York Times Magazine and Metropole. Many of his professional mentors were engineers on the Apollo project and have offered personal insights on many of these questions, and have arranged access to materials and machinery not otherwise easily available.

From the 'Clavius' site, and it should be noted that many aeronautical engineers and astronomers/astro-physicists who comment in many of the same internet forums that Windley does (i.e. BAUT and Phil Plait) often point to the Clavius site when asked questions concerning an Apollo Hoax.

The attempt to deminsh Windley as being an equivalent to Kaysing is particulariy laughable.

as for why no crater
http://www.clavius.org/techcrater.html
Explains a lot of it.
Now why doesn't a helicopter dig a crater in the soil when it lands on a dirt strip?? After all it has a greater mass than the LEM and is operating in 6 times the gravity well!

Math, science, history unraveling the mystery, that all started with a Big Bang.....BANG!!

January 27, 2011
6:05 am
Avatar
jaydeehess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 465
Member Since:
April 13, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Phil Plait's take on the subject
http://www.badastronomy.com/ba.....tml#crater

Math, science, history unraveling the mystery, that all started with a Big Bang.....BANG!!

January 27, 2011
9:49 pm
Avatar
chrisv25
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 175
Member Since:
December 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"jaydeehess" wrote: Windley a fraud?

The webmaster, Jay Windley, has been trained as an engineer and has worked in various industries including aerospace. He studied mechanical engineering and computer science at Kansas State University (BSCS), and engineering design and computer science at the University of Utah. At the latter institution he did graduate work using their advanced manufacturing laboratory and for the associated corporate spin-off Engineering Geometry Systems. This group provided design and testing support to major aerospace contractors as well as the U.S. Department of Defense. He currently works as a systems engineer developing high-performance computers and supercomputing applications for customers such as Boeing, Northrup-Grumman, and Airbus.
Windley has been acknowledged as an expert in the technical history of Apollo and has consulted with several authors including Arthur C. Clark, Ed Mitchell, and his comments have appeared in The New York Times Magazine and Metropole. Many of his professional mentors were engineers on the Apollo project and have offered personal insights on many of these questions, and have arranged access to materials and machinery not otherwise easily available.

From the 'Clavius' site, and it should be noted that many aeronautical engineers and astronomers/astro-physicists who comment in many of the same internet forums that Windley does (i.e. BAUT and Phil Plait) often point to the Clavius site when asked questions concerning an Apollo Hoax.

The attempt to deminsh Windley as being an equivalent to Kaysing is particulariy laughable.

as for why no crater
http://www.clavius.org/techcrater.html
Explains a lot of it.
Now why doesn't a helicopter dig a crater in the soil when it lands on a dirt strip?? After all it has a greater mass than the LEM and is operating in 6 times the gravity well!

he's a computer programmer and claims he is a 'technical historian'... sadly there is no such thing. The guy is untrained...not an engineer and basically a propagandist.

jaydeechess...so why should we believe some random guy who claims he's an 'expert' when you down play anyone else who disagrees with his view point for the same thing? do you have any proof that he's not a fraud?

you should google logical fallacy and then look at his arguments...they are logically invalid.

January 28, 2011
12:34 am
Avatar
jaydeehess
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 465
Member Since:
April 13, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"chrisv25" wrote: [quote="jaydeehess"]Windley a fraud?

The webmaster, Jay Windley, has been trained as an engineer and has worked in various industries including aerospace. He studied mechanical engineering and computer science at Kansas State University (BSCS), and engineering design and computer science at the University of Utah. At the latter institution he did graduate work using their advanced manufacturing laboratory and for the associated corporate spin-off Engineering Geometry Systems. This group provided design and testing support to major aerospace contractors as well as the U.S. Department of Defense. He currently works as a systems engineer developing high-performance computers and supercomputing applications for customers such as Boeing, Northrup-Grumman, and Airbus.
Windley has been acknowledged as an expert in the technical history of Apollo and has consulted with several authors including Arthur C. Clark, Ed Mitchell, and his comments have appeared in The New York Times Magazine and Metropole. Many of his professional mentors were engineers on the Apollo project and have offered personal insights on many of these questions, and have arranged access to materials and machinery not otherwise easily available.

From the 'Clavius' site, and it should be noted that many aeronautical engineers and astronomers/astro-physicists who comment in many of the same internet forums that Windley does (i.e. BAUT and Phil Plait) often point to the Clavius site when asked questions concerning an Apollo Hoax.

The attempt to deminsh Windley as being an equivalent to Kaysing is particulariy laughable.

as for why no crater
http://www.clavius.org/techcrater.html
Explains a lot of it.
Now why doesn't a helicopter dig a crater in the soil when it lands on a dirt strip?? After all it has a greater mass than the LEM and is operating in 6 times the gravity well!

he's a computer programmer and claims he is a 'technical historian'.

He is not claiming a degree in tech history. He is also a photographer and an opera buff. I do not know that he claims any degree in either.. However in one's resume one is quite within one's rights to include one's hobbies.

jaydeechess...

what an odd typo, not sure how one hits both an, 'e' or 'h', and a 'c' at the same time....

so why should we believe some random guy who claims he's an 'expert' when you down play anyone else who disagrees with his view point for the same thing? do you have any proof that he's not a fraud?

Hmmm, my diploma is in electronic technology with some university physics thrown in for good measure. I have worked in the television industry for 20+ years now and would consider myself somewhat of an expert in many aspects of television yet I have no formal degree specifically in a television related program.

One thing I have found about most programmers is that they tend to know a lot about the specific narrow area for which they produce products. For instance a neighbour produces customer specific accounting programs. He knows absolutly nothing however about the programming that we use to automate our station's Master Control. OTOH the guy who produced the automation program knows as much as I do about how a TV signal is put together even though HE HAS NO degree in a television specific course.

I find that a few, yourself included it would seem, appear to believe that because they, as fellow programmers, do not know what the other professes to know, that the other must be lieing.
Now that would be a logical fallacy.
Did you not read my entire post? There are those with the training and expertise to know that Windley is incorrect on many other forums he posts on. I named the BAUT site and its astronomer owner , Phil Plait. You can also try the ApolloHoax forums where you will find a few aerospace engineers.. I believe the moderator, Lunar Orbit, is one. Give him a try. I also quoted Phil Plait's answer as to why no blast crater. I in turn asked those who wonder about the blast crater why a helicopter creates no blast crater when obviously it must create a much greater downward force in order to stay aloft than the LEM ever had to. I see no answer to this. Is that because helicopters are all hoaxes?

you should google logical fallacy and then look at his arguments...they are logically invalid.

Really? I know what a logical fallacy is but I have not detected any in the Clavius site. Pray tell, could you illustrate an example please?

Math, science, history unraveling the mystery, that all started with a Big Bang.....BANG!!

No permission to create posts
Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 288

Currently Online:
34 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

greeney2: 10297

bionic: 9870

Lashmar: 5289

tigger: 4576

rath: 4297

DIss0n80r: 4161

sandra: 3858

frrostedman: 3815

Wing-Zero: 3278

Tairaa: 2842

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 24775

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 8

Forums: 31

Topics: 9068

Posts: 124322

Newest Members:

omep80, exam online, Patrick Shaw, JaSuRiAiLa, James, wow72, leonahunt, Sadysto, saichon, Crystal

Administrators: John Greenewald: 637, blackvault: 1776