If Armstrong and Aldrin got stuck on the lunar surface...

[wby0nder]

Yes, they basically did but not precisely as depicted in the movie. The book, Lost Moon is so much more complete and accurate then the movie. I made the mistake of reading the book first so the movie, Apollo 13 came off like a cartoon. The fake zero G scenes in 2001 are better then the "real" zero G in Apollo 13! You can see every little turbulence induced bump in A13! Made me crazy!

No.. they really did. Only the fixed point of reference was the sun, not the earth. You can (or you used to be able to) buy a presentation CD on the Apollo 13 incident at the gift shop at JSC that spells out the everything that happened..

 

[John Baker]

Jay, I agree whole heartedly with what you are saying. Most of the things we regard as important or valuable usually do end up in a dumpster or thrift store.

My point was that when you are older, these little tidbits from your past, that you never much thought about, will become important to you, personally. If you tossed them or sold them, you will most assuredly regret having done it.

I've got all kinds of crap hanging on my walls or sitting on shelves that I now am glad I kept. For some reason, they make me feel good when I look at them or hold them, I'm glad I have them.

I don't have much money these days, but I sure do not feel poor, I'm incredibly lucky.

I've only sold a few of my personal possessions over the years, the money is long gone, and so are the those unimportant things that would now be treasures if I still had them.

-John

 

[denverpilot]

Yes, they basically did but not precisely as depicted in the movie. The book, Lost Moon is so much more complete and accurate then the movie. I made the mistake of reading the book first so the movie, Apollo 13 came off like a cartoon. The fake zero G scenes in 2001 are better then the "real" zero G in Apollo 13! You can see every little turbulence induced bump in A13! Made me crazy!

Oh pooh. At least they did it as best they could and didn't use CGI. How many folks who watched only the movie haven't even seen anything like it before and maybe "got it" a little better than they otherwise would have?

(p.s. Lost Moon was very good.)

 

[olasek]

The book, Lost Moon is so much more complete and accurate then the movie.

A bit strange to compare a book with the movie, specially in the area of technical accuracy that is far from simple to depict on the screen. I have been a space buff and really enjoyed the Apollo 13 movie and did not analyze every single screen under a microscope.

 

[denverpilot]

Damn whoever posted this link in another thread...

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11.html

I've been losing a lot of sleep this week reading all that.

 

[rpadula]

Ah... they had some supplies up there!

(hat tip : William Banzai via ZH)

 

[rpadula]

Actually I watched one episode of Pawn Stars and someone walked in with a signed photograph of a Gemini-Titan launch and it was signed by many, many astronauts at the time of Gemini project, I think there was pretty much everybody signed on the photo who was a US astronaut at that time, one of the signature was Neil Armstrong's. The signatures were judged to be authentic and the value of the piece was estimated to be around $3000-$5000.

Speaking of the signatures, did anyone catch this story?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012...-the-apollo-astronauts-did-for-life-insurance

 

[Henning]

Speaking of the signatures, did anyone catch this story?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012...-the-apollo-astronauts-did-for-life-insurance

Creative self insurance, I like it.

 

[olasek]

Speaking of the signatures, did anyone catch this story?

Hmmm... I am thinking.. how much their signatures would be worth if Apollo 11 turned out to be a fiasco with loss of life. In such case they could have a greatly diminished value (just my educated guess), so the whole idea sounds a bit far fetched to me.

 

[Henning]

Hmmm... I am thinking.. how much their signatures would be worth if Apollo 11 turned out to be a fiasco with loss of life. In such case they could have a greatly diminished value (just my educated guess), so the whole idea sounds a bit far fetched to me.

Huh? If they died they would be immortalized and those pieces would have fetched a fortune for the families of national heros. This was well thought out after Apollo 1.

 

[wby0nder]

A bit strange to compare a book with the movie, specially in the area of technical accuracy that is far from simple to depict on the screen. I have been a space buff and really enjoyed the Apollo 13 movie and did not analyze every single screen under a microscope.

Well, the zero G scenes look rushed and you can see everything wobbling in the turbulence. Most people wouldn't notice but as a pilot it wrecked it for me. There was no getting around the fact that they were flying short duration arcs. But I appreciated the effort that went into it. What REALLY wrecked it for me was changing story elements and characters, which I understand kinda has to be done to fit everything into the alloted time. Unfortunately a lot of really important people and events, historic stuff, got telescoped or eliminated. This is messing with history in my view and simply wrong. Generations of people will watch that film and assume they know the story. They don't. Sad.

Don't get me started on The Right Stuff! Ugh!

 

[Bob Noel]

Well, the zero G scenes look rushed and you can see everything wobbling in the turbulence. Most people wouldn't notice but as a pilot it wrecked it for me. There was no getting around the fact that they were flying short duration arcs. But I appreciated the effort that went into it. What REALLY wrecked it for me was changing story elements and characters, which I understand kinda has to be done to fit everything into the alloted time. Unfortunately a lot of really important people and events, historic stuff, got telescoped or eliminated. This is messing with history in my view and simply wrong. Generations of people will watch that film and assume they know the story. They don't. Sad.

Don't get me started on The Right Stuff! Ugh!

Anyone who thinks they will get the full story from an entertainment movie is an idiot.

Did you listen to any of the Apollo 13 movie DVD commentaries? in the commentaries there was acknowledgement/discussion of some of the bits being "embellished" for the purpose of the story/entertainment.

 

[wby0nder]

Anyone who thinks they will get the full story from an entertainment movie is an idiot.

Did you listen to any of the Apollo 13 movie DVD commentaries? in the commentaries there was acknowledgement/discussion of some of the bits being "embellished" for the purpose of the story/entertainment.

That might be interesting. I know that Howard and Hanks are loyal fans of the real story.

 

[Jay Honeck]

Anyone who thinks they will get the full story from an entertainment movie is an idiot.

Did you listen to any of the Apollo 13 movie DVD commentaries? in the commentaries there was acknowledgement/discussion of some of the bits being "embellished" for the purpose of the story/entertainment.

Same is true in the DVD about the making of "Top Gun". They knew they weren't being 100% accurate in their depictions of air combat -- but they also knew that they weren't making a documentary.

 

[write-stuff]

Personally, I thought the zero-G was slam on. The movie was largely pretty accurate. There were inaccuracies such as the one return course-correction burn when there were actually two or three, and showing Guenter Wendt in the O&C Building prior to launch (he would have been at the pad). All and all, a pretty good rendering of the event considering the two-hour constraint.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Just thought of this:



Alt text: "The universe is probably littered with the one-planet graves of cultures which made the sensible economic decision that there's no good reason to go into space – each discovered, studied, and remembered by the ones who made the irrational decision."

 

[write-stuff]

"The universe is probably littered with the one-planet graves of cultures which made the sensible economic decision that there's no good reason to go into space – each discovered, studied, and remembered by the ones who made the irrational decision."

Wow! What an excellent quote. I really liked that and it really says it all.

 

[Anthony]

There is no such thing as a safe adventure. The thrill of exploration is partially attributed to the risks involved. I think as a society we have lost that willingness. Sending machines to do men's work is not exploration.

 

[fgcason]

Alt text: "The universe is probably littered with the one-planet graves of cultures which made the sensible economic decision that there's no good reason to go into space – each discovered, studied, and remembered by the ones who made the irrational decision."

Irrational decision? That assumes money is a galactic and universal standard beyond this one dinky little nothing planet in this one dinky little nothing time period with dinky little people who invented the concept of money to play their little shuffle numbers around mind games with each other to pretend they're more important than all of existence.

This civilization is so wrapped up in the idea of money that no one can see past the concept of money controlling absolutely everything. What if other civilizations scattered across billions of light years throughout the Universe does not use the concept of money to determine what they do? It's not about them ignoring money or got rid of it, it's what if they never came up with the concept of money in the first place then did things like spaceflight because they wanted to do it.

A long time ago, some monkey in africa climbed down out of a tree and went for a walk and he wasn't thinking in terms of high yield fiscal return for the shareholders futures trading and stocks. He was likely just going after a dropped banana or curious about what was in the next tree over. Maybe the rest of all the life forms in the universe think the same way and we are the one off batch of fiscal fruitcakes... Think about it.

 

[PPC1052]

meh.

Money is just a proxy for goods and services. The real question is how much of our collective goods and services we want to allocate toward space exploration as opposed to making our own living conditions better.

 

[jsstevens]

meh.

Money is just a proxy for goods and services. The real question is how much of our collective goods and services we want to allocate toward space exploration as opposed to making our own living conditions better.

a.k.a. resources. Money is a pretty convenient way of exchanging resources.

John

 

[Bob Noel]

meh.

Money is just a proxy for goods and services. The real question is how much of our collective goods and services we want to allocate toward space exploration as opposed to making our own living conditions better.

Space exploration would make our living conditions better.

 

[fgcason]

Money is just a proxy for goods and services.

Hogwash. In this society, money is not a proxy for goods and services. Goods and services is a proxy for money. Everything you do is based on how much money you can obtain. Heck, people can't even buy anything like a car or house or boat or airplane without thinking in terms of resale(money) value when they get rid of it and the people selling the item are thinking in terms of loan interest rates to get more money out of you.

The real question is how much of our collective goods and services we want to allocate toward space exploration as opposed to making our own living conditions better.

What exactly is that piddly amount of money going to actually do that makes living conditions better if they shut the space program down? The answer has to be something specific that NASA is f'ing people out of, not "it'll make something undefined and mysterious better for everyone." I'll tell you what it will do if you actually shut down space exploration, it will disappear back into the bloated political money system to never be seen or heard from again and it will not make anything better for anyone other than lining some greedy snots bank account. Everything will continue just as it is right now except that there will be no more spaceflight.

Nobody can see past their frigging wallets... A high velocity solid rock 1500 feet across that hits the ground would teach the beancounters a good lesson no matter how much money they have in the bank.

 

[PPC1052]

Ug. I shudder to weigh in on this, as what I typed was not controversial.

Hogwash. In this society, money is not a proxy for goods and services. Goods and services is a proxy for money. Everything you do is based on how much money you can obtain.

Every transaction is a two way voluntary agreement. I am willing to buy your service for X dollars, you are willing to perform the service for X dollars. We both win. I converted dollars to services, you converted services to dollars. What's the issue?

What exactly is that piddly amount of money going to actually do that makes living conditions better if they shut the space program down?

Every dollar the government spends is a dollar that was taken from the people. If I weren't taxed to fund NASA, I could spend the money on myself. If we chose to allocate the funds we spend on NASA to roads and bridges, I would have a better commute. Again, what's the issue with my statement? Please understand I made no value judgements in my first post. I didn't say we shouldn't fund NASA. I said the question is how do we wish to allocate our limited resources.

 

[PPC1052]

Space exploration would make our living conditions better.

I do love me some Tang!

Granted, there are secondary benefits. I suppose the better way to phrase it is, how do we want to allocate our limited resources to maximize welfare?

 

[PPC1052]

What if other civilizations scattered across billions of light years throughout the Universe does not use the concept of money to determine what they do? It's not about them ignoring money or got rid of it, it's what if they never came up with the concept of money in the first place then did things like spaceflight because they wanted to do it.

If they are like humans, they would have a stagnate economy that amounted to nothing because it was limited to a barter system, and was eventually overrun by competing civilizations with greater economic might that allowed for vastly greater technological advances and could support vastly greater armies.

 

[MAKG1]

Every dollar the government spends is a dollar that was taken from the people. If I weren't taxed to fund NASA, I could spend the money on myself. If we chose to allocate the funds we spend on NASA to roads and bridges, I would have a better commute. Again, what's the issue with my statement? Please understand I made no value judgements in my first post. I didn't say we shouldn't fund NASA. I said the question is how do we wish to allocate our limited resources.

The entire annual NASA budget could fund a handful of bridges. That's it. I think you vastly overestimate how much of your money goes to NASA. It works out to about $75 per person in 2011. You could spend it on one hour (almost) in a Cessna 152. For comparison, Medicare is about $3000, and DoD and Social Security are each about $2500.

If you want to make a difference in the budget, you have to target where the money actually is, not the high profile expenditures that aren't terribly significant.

And FYI, those fancy new 787 engines with the chevrons, as well as the composites the airframe is made out of, the weather radar, understanding of wind shear and microbursts, the supercritical wing it uses, and a bunch of other aviation technologies are NASA spinoffs. It's not just Tang.

 

[denverpilot]

The entire annual NASA budget could fund a handful of bridges. That's it. I think you vastly overestimate how much of your money goes to NASA. It works out to about $75 per person in 2011. You could spend it on one hour (almost) in a Cessna 152. For comparison, Medicare is about $3000, and DoD and Social Security are each about $2500.

I'm still waiting for my personal line-item veto and a readable bill.

 

[fgcason]

Every dollar the government spends is a dollar that was taken from the people. If I weren't taxed to fund NASA, I could spend the money on myself

No you couldn't. The tax rate will remain exactly the same. If it's 40.5843784% right now, delete nasa and it'll be 40.5843784% tomorrow after nasa is gone. The money they take will instead of going to nasa will vanish into the great gov't money abyss. Prove me wrong if you can.

If they are like humans

That is a big unreasonable assumption. There is no reason at all that they should be like humans or have to behave like humans or base their entire civilization on wallstreet or the US dollar. The only common ground with us that they have to start from is basic physics, the same universe and they live on a rock going around a star. Beyond that, it's countless bazillion trillions of random variables. Money is not a Universe standard, it's an earth human cultural standard for the last couple thousand years only out of 15 billion years and one heck of a huge volume of the Universe.


If it's money that's the big deal driving if NASA is operating full out or shut down, go after money. Shut down the DOD, not NASA. That is where a bucket load of money is going. HUD is another. DHS/TSA too. And basically anything that's bantered around in DC will put NASA to shame in the $$$ department. Just a guess here however microsoft's annual budget probably blows nasa completely out of the water.

Money is just an excuse to stop doing things that are interesting or fun and definitely put an end to exploration of any kind.

 

[Bob Noel]

I do love me some Tang!

Granted, there are secondary benefits. I suppose the better way to phrase it is, how do we want to allocate our limited resources to maximize welfare?

Take the long view, staying on this planet will just stagnate us. In the long run, we either explore or we die.

 

[PPC1052]

The entire annual NASA budget could fund a handful of bridges. That's it. I think you vastly overestimate how much of your money goes to NASA.

Sigh. How can I have vastly overestimated how much money goes to NASA? I didn't estimate anything. I made no value judgments at all about whether the number should be bigger or smaller. I just noted the number is greater than zero.

 

[PPC1052]

It works out to about $75 per person in 2011. You could spend it on one hour (almost) in a Cessna 152. For comparison, Medicare is about $3000, and DoD and Social Security are each about $2500.

Great, a data point I can work with. If we didn't spend money on NASA, I could go a steak dinner. See, that wasn't so hard was it? Note, I am not saying that is what we should do, just that there are options on how to spend money.

 

[denverpilot]

Money is just an excuse to stop doing things that are interesting or fun and definitely put an end to exploration of any kind.

I suggest you go explore, and send me all of your money, then. LOL

 

[PPC1052]

That is a big unreasonable assumption.

Wait, now you want to take me on as to what is the nature of some hypothetical alien culture? Seems to me pretty obvious neither one knows the answer to that one. But don't you think that the fact such alien races may be different was the entire reason I predicated my conclusory statement on that assumption in the first place?

 

[fgcason]

Great, a data point I can work with. If we didn't spend money on NASA, I could go a steak dinner. See, that wasn't so hard was it?

You still couldn't have your steak dinner because they would still take the money from you anyway and leave you sitting on the sidewalk starving. They can shut nasa down with all the promises you care to hear and you will still miss that meal. It's just how they operate.

$75. Bah-humbug. I took on a load of fuel and propane the other day that was three times that amount. NASA can keep my $75 and I'm willing to send them an additional $75/year for more really unique pictures even if they don't do any real science in the meantime.

just that there are options on how to spend money.

Which makes the wildly unrealistic assumption that they will actually do something else useful with the money. They won't. Beancounters collect money and sit on it, they don't do anything useful with it.

But that brings us back to the money is everything nonsense. When it comes to it, on the whole we are not interested in exploration or ideals or adventure or anything like that. All we really want to do is just want to sit in our little cesspool and stagnate until we die due to boredom.

 

[PPC1052]

Take the long view, staying on this planet will just stagnate us. In the long run, we either explore or we die.

A perfectly reasonable position.

 

[Dr. O]

As others have noted, 'computers' on the bomb were women not machines...
Eniac was the first electronic computer and was not operational until after the end of WWII in 1945, being announced to the public in 1946... There is no way it could have been involved in the program for the bomb...
Bardeen and Brittain had the first working (but not practical) transistor in the last two months of 1947... Shockley convinced Bell Labs executives to invest more money and lab time into developing this device... Then tried to get the patent put in his name in 1948 (massive egotist) as a field effect device but Bell Lab Executives wisely knew that claim was not new and the patent would be denied... TI marketed the silicon transistor in 1954... Anyway, it is a long story you can look up... The result is that computers were indeed used in NASA for the moon mission and by the giant defense contractors who built the machines that went to the moon... Slide rules were going away by the late 1950's as calculating devices for industry... As I lean back and look up there is a Sans and Strieffe, 12 inch, log log anti-log, slide rule in it's leather case on the shelf above... I pull it down at times and do log calculations just for fun... I like the look, the feel of the smooth as butter cursor, and the smell of the grease, but I use a graphing calculator for any equations I actually need to calculate... OTOH, 3 significant figures will do most everything that needs doing so even if we had not invented electronic calculators, we would have made it to the moon eventually...

 

[olasek]

Take the long view, staying on this planet will just stagnate us. In the long run, we either explore or we die.

First find me a suitable destination out there otherwise I rather 'stagnate' among meadows, trees, vineyards and lakes :wink2:

 

[Threefingeredjack]

First find me a suitable destination out there otherwise I rather 'stagnate' among meadows, trees, vineyards and lakes :wink2:

Read The High Frontier by Gerard K O'Neil. Not a permanent solution, but the opportunity to expand our skills is intriguing.

 

[Bob Noel]

First find me a suitable destination out there otherwise I rather 'stagnate' among meadows, trees, vineyards and lakes :wink2:

Don't think in terms of just the destination. The journey is a necessary part. Consider the poor pilots that only think about getting to the flight's destination, they are missing out on the joy of flying.