5/ I'm not saying that people who haven't taken at least one EM physics course shouldn't be allowed to vote ... wait, no, that's exactly what I'm saying
-
-
16/ The lunar lander "worked" the first time in Apollo-11 because that was not the first time, it was the sixth time. LEMs had been flown on Apollo 5, 6 , 8, 9, and 10.https://twitter.com/Cary_Bleasdale/status/1487171316436418560 …
Show this thread -
17/ Also, there were MULTIPLE problems w the LEMs. Windows broke in testing, things shorted out. During Neal Armstrong's descent in Apollo 11 the LEM's AGC overloaded, crashed, and rebooted dozens of times bc of data from the descent radar.
Show this thread -
18/ It's not an argument that Apollo was real. The argument for Apollo being real is that you can buy a laser, point it at the Apollo-11 landing site, and get bounces off of the cats-eye-reflector they left behind. It's an argument for >>>https://twitter.com/Cary_Bleasdale/status/1487172840948637697 …
Show this thread -
19/ ...how we managed to do it in "just" 10 years. The answer is that it wasn't 10 years. It was 10,000 + people working in parallel for 10 years.
Show this thread -
20/ > It wasn't actually flown though. Please stop saying dumb and false things. LEMs were flown into orbit (or beyond) on all of those flights, and humans piloted LEMs in space on Apollo 9 and 10 LEM was flow in Earth orbit on 9 and lunar orbit on 10https://twitter.com/Cary_Bleasdale/status/1487173497554194433 …
Show this thread -
22/ not a complete list, but from one bookshelf here in the officepic.twitter.com/vmx8QvT0gZ
Show this thread -
23/ [ re the bookshelf photos above ]
https://twitter.com/ROGUEWEALTH/status/1487176613284528131 …Show this thread -
24/ On that note, I was chatting in a private forum with
@robkroese earlier today about his work on Mammon book 2 and he asked a question about the kinetic energy / damage from an object falling from orbit ...so I uploaded a spreadsheet I'd made for Aristillus vol 2 years agoShow this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"Thousands of companies working in parallel under the guiding hand of Uncle Sam' is something we've had before and since, with...extremely mixed results. I don't see that a an argument for the lunar landing.
-
When they have a clear, identifiable, singular goal, they can do it and it works. A troopship in a day. A hundred and fifty planes a day, every day, for six years. A small LEM, on the moon, and back again. Then we get into the Shuttle program and the horror of Mission Creep.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.