UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Mar > Mar 28

Re: An E-Mail To BadAstronomy On Apollo 11 UFO -

From: James Smith <lunartravel.nul>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:02:53 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
Fwd Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:32:03 -0400
Subject: Re: An E-Mail To BadAstronomy On Apollo 11 UFO -

>From: Brad Sparks <RB47x.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 05:26:29 EDT
>Subject: Re: An E-Mail To BadAstronomy On Apollo 11 UFO

>>From: James Smith <lunartravel.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 11:37:06 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
>>Subject: Re: An E-Mail To BadAstronomy On Apollo 11 UFO

>>I have to agree with Lan about the coordinate system being Earth
>>Centered Inertial and not body (CSM) centered as you seem to
>>think it is. Thus the -X is not really retrograde.

>The Apollo 11 Mission Report describes the effects of the
>Separation (or Evasive) Maneuver on its arrival at the moon as
>slowing the spacecraft arrival time by about 32 minutes, meaning
>the burn was indeed _retrograde_. Velocity changes from
>maneuvers in that report in Table 7-II Trajectory Parameters are
>related to what is designated the "Space-fixed Velocity" changes
>in the "body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system. "
>(PDF p. 93). But when the report tabulates the maneuvers with X,
>Y and Z components in Table 8.6-II Maneuver Summary a footnote
>states that "Velocities are in earth- or moon-centered inertial
>coordinates; velocity residuals are in body coordinates."

Re-examining the Apollo 11 Mission report (Table 7-II) shows
that you are right about the "retrograde" firing. It lists the
space fixed velocity before and after firing. For the separation
and midcourse maneuvers, there is a velocity reduction.  Live
and learn! TLI and TEI have velocity increases as one would
expect before and after firings. Also the LOI has a velocity
reduction as one would expect.  So much for my calculations.

Now we are left with the complex situation you have described

>But it does show drawings that seem to indicate about a 50-
>degree forward not backward ejection contrary to the 75-to-90-
>degree backward ejection angles I was given by NASA engineers
>many years ago, relative to the spacecraft body X-axis. (See PDF
>p. 16.) This would mean that there could be a forward 40-degree
>velocity component instead of a backward 15-degree velocity
>component to the SLA panel ejection.

The minimum jettison angle with respect to the S-IVB axis was
supposed to be 90 degrees, thus no forward velocity component at
release.  Only these telescopic SLA images can help here.

>This reiterates what I said about the difficulty in dogmatically
>asserting the true distances and directions of the SLA panels
>from simplistic calculations of a _single_ number for velocity,
>such as say 5 mph, without regard to directions of motion,
>gravitational changes in single numbers like "5 mph," geometric
>spread effects, and the two critical Apollo rocket firings. It
>may be better to simply study earth-based telescopic photos of
>Apollo 11 with its SLA panels.


Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com