Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #407467

Re: Apollo 11

Show all headers | View raw

Am 29.01.2017 21:07, schrieb Gary Harnagel:
> On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 12:16:56 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>
>> Am 29.01.2017 12:20, schrieb Gary Harnagel:
>>>
>>> But it was not necessary to land a probe first.  Apollo 8 and 10 went into
>>> orbit around the moon and returned to earth, so the mass of the moon was
>>> known from the characteristics of those orbits.
>>>
>>> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo.html
>>
>>
>> Well. I have some doubts.
>>
>> I have for instance once figured out, how much fuel is required for
>> landing of the lunar lander 'Eagle' and how much the return ascend would
>> require, to catch up with the orbiter.
>>
>> My calculation showed, that the lander had enough fuel to decelerate
>> from orbit velocity  to zero velocity in respect to the Moon and to
>> safely sink with stop at zero sinking velocity at the surface.
>
> But you're not a rocket scientist, so your calculations are meaningless.

Tsiolkovsky's 'rocket equation' is not that difficult.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsiolkovsky_rocket_equation

To find the correct data to plug into it, is actually a little tricky.


And I have only dim memories about the specific factors to use in case 
of the Apollo lander. And since I'm a little too lazy now, to search for 
such information, you can calculate it yourself (or whoever might be 
interested).

The lander was kind of two-staged rocket, where the decent used one 
stage and the other was for the ascent.

So the ascent stage was a one staged rocket and had to reach Moon's orbit.

Some extra fuel for additional changes of hight, velocity and direction 
was certainly needed, to catch up with the orbiter.

But about - say - 80 % of the fuel in the ascent stage could be used for 
ascent to orbit and acceleration to orbit velocity.

Since gravity is low on Moon, the ascent is relatively easy.

More challenging is the high orbit velocity, since inertia does not change.

But REALLY difficult was the required precision of all the maneuvers of 
that craft - literally on the dark side of the Moon..

There were no ground stations to assist and certainly nothing like GPS 
or similar.




TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-27 10:57 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-27 16:05 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Juliana Auerbach <jaot@tognaenn.org> - 2017-01-28 00:18 +0000
      Re: Apollo 11 JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-27 16:41 -0800
        Re: Apollo 11 Juliana Auerbach <jaot@tognaenn.org> - 2017-01-28 01:14 +0000
          Re: Apollo 11 JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 11:33 -0800
            Re: Apollo 11 Juliana Auerbach <jaot@tognaenn.org> - 2017-01-28 20:22 +0000
          Re: Apollo 11 JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 11:34 -0800
            Re: Apollo 11 Juliana Auerbach <jaot@tognaenn.org> - 2017-01-28 20:19 +0000
              Re: Apollo 11 JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-01-28 17:21 -0800
                Re: Apollo 11 Juanita Forney <iatiet@oetnnrn.org> - 2017-01-30 12:33 +0000
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-27 16:46 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-28 12:48 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-28 13:16 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-29 13:04 +1100
    Re: Apollo 11 John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-10 17:08 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-28 13:24 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-28 13:34 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2017-01-29 07:36 +0100
    Re: Apollo 11 Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-29 03:20 -0800
      Re: Apollo 11 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2017-01-29 20:16 +0100
        Re: Apollo 11 Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-29 12:07 -0800
          Re: Apollo 11 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2017-02-01 06:24 +0100
        Re: Apollo 11 "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-01-29 22:43 +0100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-29 12:05 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-29 15:27 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-01-29 15:40 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-30 12:37 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-31 11:18 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-30 15:58 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-30 16:18 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-31 11:22 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-30 16:42 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-01-31 12:13 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-31 10:01 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-01 12:14 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-01-31 14:51 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-01 12:24 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-02 12:11 +1100
    Re: Apollo 11 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-02-01 21:35 -0800
      Re: Apollo 11 "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-01 22:05 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-01 15:39 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-02 11:37 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-03 09:40 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-02 15:22 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-03 11:52 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-03 11:55 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-04 11:44 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-03 15:25 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-04 12:49 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-05 12:07 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-05 12:16 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-06 08:35 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-06 11:49 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-07 10:58 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-07 13:32 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-08 12:49 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-08 11:13 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 12:34 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-09 11:11 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-10 10:53 +1100
    Re: Apollo 11 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-02-12 11:09 -0800
      Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-13 11:52 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-10 11:01 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-11 11:42 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 11:21 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-12 12:00 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 11:44 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-13 11:51 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-12 13:43 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-13 10:23 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-14 09:54 -0800
    Re: Apollo 11 Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-15 14:26 +1100
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-14 10:49 -0800
  Re: Apollo 11 numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-14 10:52 -0800

csiph-web