Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom
From: Herb Schaltegger (herbschaltegger_at_spamtrap.invalid)
Date: 06/13/04
- Next message: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: The RCS: Voice Transcript"
- Previous message: Andrew Gray: "Re: The RCS: Voice Transcript"
- In reply to: LaDonna Wyss: "Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom"
- Next in thread: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 08:37:03 -0500
In article <4821518f.0406122121.6558c614@posting.google.com>,
hpywife927@yahoo.com (LaDonna Wyss) wrote:
> Herb Schaltegger <herbschaltegger@spamtrap.invalid> wrote in message
> news:<herbschaltegger-0CE5C7.19093312062004@news.newsguy.com>...
> > >
> > > OK, I'm terrified to ask this question, because I'm sure I already
> > > know what the answer is going to be (I hear this ridiculous reply many
> > > times a day), but here we go: If everything (according to you) was
> > > being simulated, and no real equipment was being tested, then what
> > > caused the fire?
> >
> > Go back and re-read. YOU claimed ". . . the instruments were not being
> > simulated." I claimed that they were. That's ALL I claimed.
> >
> > Honestly, if your grasp for detail is so poor that you can't even read
> > your OWN quotes and the replies thereto, why should anyone take anything
> > you say seriously?
> >
> > > And, as long as I'm asking questions, if everything was being
> > > simulated (which would mean NASA was correct in proclaiming it
> > > "non-hazardous", then why did they have a live rocket on the Launch
> > > Escape Tower?
> >
> > "Live" in the sense that it contained solid rocket fuel or "live" in the
> > sense that it was actually ready to pull the CM off the stack and
> > parachute it a few miles away over the ocean? Clarify your terminology
> > (a skill you have yet to demonstrate mastery of) and you may get an
> > answer.
>
> Well, now, I guess I'm going to have to repeat what I posted a week
> ago in order to answer your question (it truly would be helpful if you
> folks would have read it last Sunday): First, what you choose to
> believe when I am finished depends on whether you wish to believe
> Frank Borman or whether you choose to believe the facts. Borman
> claimed the rocket was safetied. That would have meant that yes, it
> was actually ready to pull the CM off the stack but no, the pyros had
> been safetied (by the pulling out of Panel 150; I'm too tired to go
> into THAT tonight, but if you need those details I'll reiterate THAT
> part of my earlier post tomorrow.) The evidence, however, indicates
> the pyros were not safetied until after the fire (note Borman doesn't
> bother to tell Congress WHEN it was safetied--a cute trick every
> six-year-old knows.)
The investigative report says they were safed for the entire duration of
the test. What evidence do you have to claim otherwise? Detailed
citation, please.
> Here is what happened during the fire:
> 1. Repeated gimbal torque motor signals.
> 2. SCS oscillating in roll, pitch, and yaw.
> 3. LEV accelerometers oscillating in pitch and yaw.
> 4. RCS jet driver activation commands in all 16 flight directions.
> 5. 12.4 and 13.6 seconds: Roger switches the entry batteries over to
> the main batteries, which not only ensures the suit compressor will
> continue functioning but also completes the Emergency Detection System
> circuit.
> 6. 17 seconds: They receive a Program Check Fail and an Error Detect
> Fail. These are abort failures. They generate a guidance and
> navigation warning, two Master Caution and Warning, and two DSKY
> lights.
> 7. 18.5 seconds: Gus rotates the T-handle to the translation
> controller 360 degrees clockwise and switches thrust vector control
> on. THIS SWITCHES FROM THE APOLLO GUIDANCE COMPUTER TO MANUAL
> ATTITUDE CONTROL.
Citation to your evidence, please. The investigative report says the
controllers were pinned.
> So the question is: Why is he worried about that in the middle of a
> cockpit fire on the ground UNLESS he is afraid the LEV is about to
> light? And, as I mentioned before (and this was so interesting to Stu
> Roosa that he ordered close-ups of this switch) the BMAG switch had
> ALSO been turned off. The BMAGS do not have to be turned off in order
> to engage manual attitude control; however, in the event of a guidance
> and navigation failure, the BMAGS serve as a back-up so they will
> CONTINUE TO SEND ERROR MESSAGES TO THE AGC. Again, another indication
> Gus was worried the auto abort was either about to be or already had
> been engaged.
> Finally, for those who are about to argue THIS point: Once an abort
> has been triggered, it cannot be stopped simply by switching off the
> EDS. There is a failsafe built in so that in the event of an
> electrical failure an auto abort will continue. The only way to stop
> it is by switching to manual control.
> Time for bed.
> LaDonna
How come it isn't time for you to answer any of the many questions
presented to you before now? Scott Hedrick's still waiting to know who
your "teammates" are. rk and Michael Gardner are still waiting for you
to address their comments concerning the nature of the alleged
electrical faults you keep insinuating. I'm still waiting to hear you
address the LiOH canister testing you allege should have been done.
Daniel is still waiting for you to address his myriad concerns, as well.
Why is it you have so much time to flame, insult and post more
distractions (see above), and so little time to provide basic
information corroborating or substantiating the conclusions you've
previously asserted?
-- Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D. Reformed Aerospace Engineer Columbia Loss FAQ: <http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html>
- Next message: Herb Schaltegger: "Re: The RCS: Voice Transcript"
- Previous message: Andrew Gray: "Re: The RCS: Voice Transcript"
- In reply to: LaDonna Wyss: "Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom"
- Next in thread: Scott Hedrick: "Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
