Re: Spacecraft Sound Levels
- From: "Brad Guth" <ieisbradguth@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 18 Sep 2005 13:37:22 -0700
Ken Webster,
Don't look Ken, sci.space.tech and sci.space.science brown-nose suck
and blow like another black hole at the same time, as even you've been
excluded as well as Bob Martin and certainly anyone other that doesn't
fit their incest flatulence mold of the day.
At least "Orval Fairbairn" offers his fair share of damage-control on
behalf of his pagan God (MI6/NSA~NASA);
"Moon Landing Hoax: Nexus of NASA Loyal Worker With Religion & Moon
Landing Lies & Seniority"
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.models.rockets/browse_frm/thread/945d91648901476b/ef1181d1ce1f3382?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=1&hl=en#ef1181d1ce1f3382
>I happen to have worked on the guidance/performance of the Apollo Mission
>I also have a personal friend and flying buddy who trained astronauts on
>the lunar lander simulator, which was an actual, flying test article.
Apparently simulators of which none of the astronauts actually managed
any real flight-time via rocket thrust within are all that matters.
Tell us Orval Fairbairn; where's the film footage of even others as
having been dropped out of the sky and purely fly-by-rocket living to
tell us village idiots about it?
How about even a look-see upon any robotic/tethered aerial drop of
anything that's purely fly-by-rocket?
At least pro-NASA "Cardman" has recently been contributing approprate
sorts of topic feedback.
Cardman,
Here's another new and improved version as to your:
>People will believe what they see, and what makes sense, if other
>people do not inform them how things really work.
Finally, you've offered something that makes perfect sense. So, why not
ask of these supposedly all-knowing lords and wizards of usenet to
start off with their explaining as to how fly-by-rocket landers
(AI/robotic as well as manned) actually functioned throughout the
various R&D steps that had to have taken place.
In addition to "Spacecraft Sound Levels"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/browse_frm/thread/1a0bacb9e674adc4/0436eb09ef5d2011?lnk=st&q=brad+guth&rnum=12&hl=en#0436eb09ef5d2011
We'll need a few specifics, such as actual R&D film footage as to the
applied physics and technology of physical stabilizing, de-orbit and
down-range fuel consumption/kg of mass, physical and radiation
shielding, internal cabin and/or internal moonsuit noise levels, as
well as internal energy demands and so forth as based upon whatever's
external to the NASA/Apollo bible because, it obviously should match
exactly unless something has been skewed a little off track.
Then having someone of their all-knowing wizardly status quo start
explaining upon the Kodak laws of photon physics, as such might
represent yet another perfectly good step for mankind that's going in
the right direction.
OOPS; my PC just went into the toilet because, it looks as though my
contributions have been exceeding your usenet bandwidth, as in too much
drain upon their mainstream status quo mainframes. Either that or I'm
being formally sequestered into their intellectual black hole of
topic/author banishment.
~
Life upon Venus, a township w/Bridge & ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
War is war, thus "in war there are no rules" - In fact, war has been
the very reason of having to deal with the likes of others that haven't
been playing by whatever rules, such as GW Bush.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: How will history view ...
- Next by Date: Re: Do Republicians support NASA more than Democrats in the US?
- Previous by thread: Re: Spacecraft Sound Levels
- Next by thread: Re: "Back" to the Moon (was: back to the moon)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
