Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom

From: Derek Lyons (derekl1963_at_nospamyahoo.com)
Date: 06/18/04 

Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 18:00:33 GMT

hpywife927@yahoo.com (LaDonna Wyss) wrote:
>Yes, I know where level A-7 is, and yes, these paragraphs got "lost."
>lol The answer is: I cannot tell you why who did not see what. Yes,
>those individuals were standing where you (and the drawings) say they
>were at the time the fire broke out in the CM at 6:31, but remember,
>this fire actually started 22 minutes before that at 6:09.

How can we remember something that is an unproven assumption of yours,
not a fact established by evidence.

>What I DO know is this: The path the fire took was largely invisible
>(concealed.) It moves from inside the thruster, through the wiring up
>to the ablative shield, around the shield, then up into the RCS access
>ports underneath Gus where it breached the crew compartment.

No, you *don't* know that. You have *hypothesized* it. There is a
world of difference between a fact established by evidence, and a
hypothesis that fails to agree with existing evidence.

>What Roger saw inside the cabin would have been an extremely
>small puff of smoke; had it been completely detectable the crew
>would have left. It was only enough for him to have had a suspicion
>something was wrong. The same would have held true for anyone
>staring at the CSM.

Nonsense. A fire big enough to penetrate the *sealed* CM (which was
at higher than atmospheric pressure) would have produced far more than
an 'extremely small' puff of smoke.

>But let's think about human nature for a second: You're five hours into
>a test. It's January in Florida, so it's dark. Yes, there are lights, but
>what are you more likely to be doing? Staring at your consoles,
>looking at papers, talking to someone, etc.; or, staring with 100%
>attention at the CSM for anything out of the ordinary?

Across the 22 minutes you claim the fire spread, it's a virtual
certainty that *someone* would have looked at the CSM. It's also a
virtual certainty that *someone* would have looked at the SM
telemetry. (Or are you trying to have us believe that the fire burned
that long and strong without breaching a noticeable SM system.)

>The former is the most likely scenario. No one had any reason to be
>standing on the gantry staring at thrusters, wiring, access ports, or
>anything else. The test was nearing a conclusion; the very next step
>was an emergency egress drill.

It's only the most likely scenario to you because it agrees with your
foregone conclusion.

D. 

-- 
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom
    ... > Adjustable Level A-7 is at the Service Module RCS quad level on the vehicle. ... this fire actually started 22 minutes before that at 6:09. ... would have held true for anyone staring at the CSM. ...
    (sci.space.history)
  • Re: NBC: My pet subject
    ... the woman they highlight appears to be three or four floors below where the fuselage hit, standing in an area of wing damage. ... Only that the fire had died down well before the building collapsed. ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
  • Re: NBC: My pet subject
    ... she's not more than 20 feet from the main hole and it's obvious that the area she's standing in has burned. ... People can see where the fuselage of the plane would have struck, and it does appear to be three or four floors above the floor she is on. ... But of course you'll scoff at that, and keep insisting that the fire was no big deal. ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
  • Re: He Shot An Arrow In To His Wife
    ... >>> A few months ago I said something rude to a woman who was ... She was just standing there, ... "Excuse me" has been known to work better than staring - just ...
    (alt.true-crime)