Jump to content

Shower thoughts


p1t1o
 Share

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

You breathe it back out without using it.

Most of it. Some of it does get dissolved into your blood stream. (Because the membranes in your lungs are permeable to all gasses, not just oxygen.) So you do have nitrogen gas exchange in the lungs and an equilibrium level of dissolved nitrogen in your bloodstream. And, yes, it is completely harmless and negligible during your normal operating physiology. But if something changes that equilibrium and you get too much of it, then things can get silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

he pilot was hired to follow the flight plan, including the emergency options which included the abort modes.
The pilot neither was hired to be the first on the Moon, nor owned the craft himself.

That's an egoistic heroism.

The pilot was there to pilot the craft; astronauts were pilots and resented being treated as “spam in a can” by scientists. The navicomp had them heading towards a boulder field and he piloted the LM away from it. While they may not have had much fuel left in the descent stage, there was plenty of time to finally abort if necessary using the ascent stage. 

He was simply doing his job, and he did it well. That’s why he was selected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

The pilot was there to pilot the craft; astronauts were pilots and resented being treated as “spam in a can” by scientists. The navicomp had them heading towards a boulder field and he piloted the LM away from it. While they may not have had much fuel left in the descent stage, there was plenty of time to finally abort if necessary using the ascent stage. 

The navicomp is just a piloting tool like any autopilot. The pilot has a flight plan, and follows the objectives.

If the flight plan says "land on the airstrip A", and the autopilot missed it, then the pilot still must follow the flight plan.
If  he can't reach the airstrip A, he should not land on the trees and rocks next to it when it's possible to follow the flightplan and pass to the backup airdrome (the orbit in this case).

If an aircraft was landed on trees just because it could, the pilot would be very probably disqualified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Apollo-11 aborted = Apollo-10bis, Apollo-12 first landed.

Apollo-11 crashed = many PR and organisation problems.

The pilot was hired to follow the flight plan, including the emergency options which included the abort modes.
The pilot neither was hired to be the first on the Moon, nor owned the craft himself.

That's an egoistic heroism.

Neil Armstong was not an egoist hero. He was committed to the mission.

On another note, in an alternate timeline where the Soviet Union loses WW2 to the Allies (like Operation Unthinkable happening and succeeding but i'm not talking about that), one of the more cursed consequenses could have been the R-7, the soviet rocket we all know and love, being an US rocket, if NASA had snatched Korolev instead of von Braun. It would probably not have been called R-7, but i think it would have a role not too dissimilar to Atlas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

Neil Armstong was not an egoist hero. He was committed to the mission.

Was it on his flightplan "Land it anywhere on stones"?

Or was his objective to land the craft at the designated area or at any other place which provide the craft and the crew safety?

7 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

an alternate timeline where the Soviet Union loses WW2 to the Allies (like Operation Unthinkable happening and succeeding but i'm not talking about that),

The Operation Unthinkable was being planned exactly in case SU wins WW2.

In case it lost, there would be Operation like Atlantic Dunkirk and then B-36 nuke bombing of the Europe.

10 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

could have been the R-7, the soviet rocket we all know and love, being an US rocket

Never. R-7 is a forced attempt to build an ICBM from what you have right now.
US had enough time and economics to build a more trivial rocket, like Atlas.

11 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

if NASA had snatched Korolev instead of von Braun

All his life Korolyov was mostly an administrator. His snatching would give NASA a pain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Never. R-7 is a forced attempt to build an ICBM from what you have right now.
US had enough time and economics to build a more trivial rocket, like Atlas.

36 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

Kinda disrespectful to say that about the most succesful rocket ever, it's still used to this day.

21 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Was it on his flightplan "Land it anywhere on stones"?

What actually happened was that the place full of rocks was where they were supposed to land when they didn't know it was full of rocks it was only found out about when they were like 100 meters above the place. Armstrong switched off the computer and landed in a safe place, and as we know, the LM had enough fuel to land. Even if it didn't Armstrong would simply have flipped the abort switch, there was no real risk of crashing for Armstrong and Aldrin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

Kinda disrespectful to say that about the most succesful rocket ever, it's still used to this day.

The best respect is that it's used to this day.

Though, as a combat missile it was almost harmless, and there were just five open ground launchpads with it.

R-9 was a better attempt, and R-16 was what is really an ICBM.

32 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

What actually happened was that the place full of rocks was where they were supposed to land

So, was the place chosen wrong, or did the autopilot miss?

But in any case, if the runway is obstructed, the pilot must abort landing and follow the plan B, unless he is falling and doesn't have a choice.
It's aviation, just without air. Not private dog sleds and biplanes of Scott and Amundsen.
Another Apollo-10 landing simulation mission would be much less painful for NASA (the ship owner) than a catastrophe. Remember, how many years were the Challenger and Columbia investigated.

NASA would just land on the Moon several months later.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kerbiloid said:

So, was the place chosen wrong, or did the autopilot miss?

But in any case, if the runway is obstructed, the pilot must abort landing and follow the plan B, unless he is falling and doesn't have a choice.
It's aviation, just without air. Not private dog sleds and biplanes of Scott and Amundsen.
Another Apollo-10 landing simulation mission would be much less painful for NASA (the ship owner) than a catastrophe. Remember, how many years were the Challenger and Columbia investigated.

NASA would just land on the Moon a several months later.

Edited just now by kerbiloid

You just completely ignored everything i said after that.

Just now, kerbiloid said:

The best respect is that it's used to this day.

Though, as a combat missile it was almost harmless, and there were just five open ground launchpads with it.

R-9 was a better attempt, and R-16 was what is really an ICBM.

32 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

I mean as actual space rocket

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Maria Sirona said:

You just completely ignored everything i said after that.

I didn't.

You described the action sequence of how exactly the pilot was violating the rules. That's a technical question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Maria Sirona said:

NO I DIDN'T I DESCRIBED HOW THE DAMN COMPUTER DID AND ARMSTRONG SAVED THE MISSION

The computer is just a tool helping the (air)craft commander do his work.

Any decision is the commander's responsibility. He wasn't blind, and the autopilot wasn't forcing him to land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

The computer is just a tool helping the (air)craft commander do his work.

Any decision is the commander's responsibility. He wasn't blind, and the autopilot wasn't forcing him to land.

We're talking about spacecraft not aircraft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Maria Sirona said:

We're talking about spacecraft not aircraft

Absolutely no difference.

It's not a romantic private travel. It's a piloting job.

A spacecraft pilot is a pilot specially trained to pilot a craft.

They are hired from the aircraft pilots btw, and keep piloting the aircrafts. 

It's exactly like a horse or dog training. It's trained once for exact set of actions and reflexes.

The pilot doesn't have a time to think. He's trained to react in non-standard situations following the things he was trained to.

The pilot follows the flight plan (unless he is a farmer on his private Cessna.)

If the situation doesn't match the flight plan, he should follow instructions. The primary goal of everything in the aviation is the flight safety. It's a religion.

If he didn't follow the instructions he gets suspended from flying until the investigation gets finished.

Edited by kerbiloid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Vanamonde said:

In the shower this morning my thought was that I wished people would stop getting mad at each other and talk about quirky things they thought about in the shower. 

Yes, If you are going to have a heated exchange it is best not to shower together. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Absolutely no difference.

It's not a romantic private travel. It's a piloting job.

A spacecraft pilot is a pilot specially trained to pilot a craft.

They are hired from the aircraft pilots btw, and keep piloting the aircrafts. 

It's exactly like a horse or dog training. It's trained once for exact set of actions and reflexes.

The pilot doesn't have a time to think. He's trained to react in non-standard situations following the things he was trained to.

The pilot follows the flight plan (unless he is a farmer on his private Cessna.)

If the situation doesn't match the flight plan, he should follow instructions. The primary goal of everything in the aviation is the flight safety. It's a religion.

If he didn't follow the instructions he gets suspended

There was basically no harm to the chance of succesful abort with the ascent stage so why not search for a place which is safe to land in. We're after all talking about the man who ejected from his LLTV at the exact right moment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Geonovast said:

If I ever build a house, it's going to have a drive-through, so I can have pizza brought right to my desk without me getting up.

I can just imagine that this will end up the other way with people driving up to your desk and placing orders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/21/2022 at 7:44 AM, Maria Sirona said:

No offense, but that's just kinda lazy

In fairness if you built a house you earned some pizza. 


Whatever else they do I simply cannot abide this younger generation rehabbing the Star Wars prequels. I find it nearly impossible to believe they weren’t written start to finish by Tommy Wiseau.

Edited by Pthigrivi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pthigrivi said:

Whatever else they do I simply cannot abide this younger generation rehabbing the Star Wars prequels. I find it nearly impossible to believe they weren’t written start to finish by Tommy Wiseau.

Oh...that's unkind. :D

I'm not the younger generation, but I don't mind the prequels. Maybe because I never saw the original trilogy as being more than what they are: summer blockbusters that became a cultural phenomena. But, high art, they are not. ;)

Except for Episode I. Episode I is worse than unwatchable, it's unnecessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TheSaint said:

Episode I is worse than unwatchable, it's unnecessary.

The Jar-Jar haters are trying to blur the fact that Ep.I is the honestest part of SW which discovers the two-faced Jedi nature without pro-Jedi propaganda.

Qui-Gon Jinn, a sneaky cheater, full of lies, buying Anakin but leaving his mom in slavery, and so on.

Honestly, the insectoid Anakin's owner looks less disgusting than the Jedi cultists in Ep I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...