If artemis is having problems now, then how did the apollo shuttles do it 60 years ago? Was it that hard really? I just think your doing your smug little thing again.
Now, my guess would be that they are trying to speed up the mission, maybe instead of hanging in orbit for a day waiting for the perfect time to go down, they are going down at a steeper/harder angle. Straight from their orbit around the moon.
But the article doesnt say that, instead its very vague about everything. Even the bit about radiation breaking the power distribution bit was interesting.
I doubt they would leave something as crucial as power to digital devices where the 0's and 1's become easily corrupted by stray cosmic particles.
It cant be much different than the apollo shuttles, one would think....Hell maybe even a backup analog computer is prolly not a terrible idea. You think with the manufacturing abilities we have now they couldnt create a very small compact one a fraction of the original size. Shrugs.
Little inconsistencies like this is why OP may be onto something here....
WHEN NEIL ARMSTRONG and Buzz Aldrin landed on the moon in 1969 as part of the Apollo 11 mission, it was perhaps the greatest achievement in the history of engineering. Many people don’t realize, though, that an important ingredient in the success of the Apollo missions and their predecessors were analog and hybrid (analog-digital) computers, which NASA used for simulations and in some cases even flight control. Indeed, many people today have never even heard of analog computers, believing that a computer is, by definition, a digital device.
If analog and hybrid computers were so valuable half a century ago, why did they disappear, leaving almost no trace? The reasons had to do with the limitations of 1970s technology: Essentially, they were too hard to design, build, operate, and maintain. But analog computers and digital-analog hybrids built with today’s technology wouldn’t suffer the same shortcomings, which is why significant work is now going on in analog computing in the context of machine learning, machine intelligence, and biomimetic circuits.
If artemis is having problems now, then how did the apollo shuttles do it 60 years ago?
With different materials, almost certainly.
I just think you’re doing your smug little thing again.
Having the ability to self-reflect on a narrative for more than five seconds has nothing to do with personal vanity. The OP’s “argument” is the equivalent of saying, “THEY SAY WE HAD FIREPROOF BUILDINGS IN THE PAST AND WE DON’T HAVE THEM NOW, THEREFORE WE NEVER HAD THEM” while purposely ignoring the fact that we don’t use asbestos anymore for a reason.
Now, my guess would be that they are trying to speed up the mission…
I think the motherfucking retards in charge of the program have finally realized they can’t glide on taxpayer dollars forever in the face of private competition outpacing them. So yes, this could very well be something they’re doing. I agree with that hypothesis.
…they are going down at a steeper/harder angle.
This is exactly the kind of reflection I mean; good work. “What if the materials were good enough for the original mission, but penny-pinching suits and government red-tape dipshits have changed the mission parameters such that the materials don’t work anymore?” is a far more congruent argument than “WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON AT ALL BECAUSE THE COLLAPSED UNITED STATES CAN’T DO WHAT THE APEX UNITED STATES COULD!”
I doubt they would leave something as crucial as power to digital devices where the 0's and 1's become easily corrupted by stray cosmic particles.
The Space Shuttle had three redundant flight computers, each written in different architectures. The idea was that if any two were hit by radiation or cosmic rays, the third would be able to pick out the incongruities in their reports. And even if they weren’t, if one was malfunctioning and sending bad telemetry data, having two others report concurring data (on entirely different code bases) would expose the one that was wrong and allow the crew to cut it out of the loop.
So they can definitely do digital-only. They just need ludicrous levels of redundancy. And I’m not sure they’re competent enough for that anymore, since NASA’s mission is now to help muslims and not go to space.
Hell maybe even a backup analog computer is prolly not a terrible idea.
Weight. That’s the only reason I’d agree with them not to include one. The weight of an analog machine is massive. You’d destroy your payload margins.
Soooooooo, Artemis 1 was launched in Nov. of 2022 and we are just now hearing about this problem? It was in space for only 25 days, yet the damage looks like it could only happen if it were subjected to a decade or two of Earth weather. Hmmm, is NASA shining us on in order to get more funding or did the spacecraft have some problems reentering the Earth's atmosphere? Is NASA going back to the original manufacturer and looking through their QC sheets to see what happened to cause such loss of mass? Will we ever know the truth or will NASA be like the Biden administration and obfuscate the truth behind ridicule and double worded babble speak from their Q-tipped headed mouthpiece?
You objectively don’t have a point, so I won’t bother asking what you think your point is supposed to be.
Its obvious to me?
If artemis is having problems now, then how did the apollo shuttles do it 60 years ago? Was it that hard really? I just think your doing your smug little thing again.
Now, my guess would be that they are trying to speed up the mission, maybe instead of hanging in orbit for a day waiting for the perfect time to go down, they are going down at a steeper/harder angle. Straight from their orbit around the moon.
But the article doesnt say that, instead its very vague about everything. Even the bit about radiation breaking the power distribution bit was interesting.
I doubt they would leave something as crucial as power to digital devices where the 0's and 1's become easily corrupted by stray cosmic particles.
It cant be much different than the apollo shuttles, one would think....Hell maybe even a backup analog computer is prolly not a terrible idea. You think with the manufacturing abilities we have now they couldnt create a very small compact one a fraction of the original size. Shrugs.
Little inconsistencies like this is why OP may be onto something here....
https://spectrum.ieee.org/not-your-fathers-analog-computer
With different materials, almost certainly.
Having the ability to self-reflect on a narrative for more than five seconds has nothing to do with personal vanity. The OP’s “argument” is the equivalent of saying, “THEY SAY WE HAD FIREPROOF BUILDINGS IN THE PAST AND WE DON’T HAVE THEM NOW, THEREFORE WE NEVER HAD THEM” while purposely ignoring the fact that we don’t use asbestos anymore for a reason.
I think the motherfucking retards in charge of the program have finally realized they can’t glide on taxpayer dollars forever in the face of private competition outpacing them. So yes, this could very well be something they’re doing. I agree with that hypothesis.
This is exactly the kind of reflection I mean; good work. “What if the materials were good enough for the original mission, but penny-pinching suits and government red-tape dipshits have changed the mission parameters such that the materials don’t work anymore?” is a far more congruent argument than “WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON AT ALL BECAUSE THE COLLAPSED UNITED STATES CAN’T DO WHAT THE APEX UNITED STATES COULD!”
The Space Shuttle had three redundant flight computers, each written in different architectures. The idea was that if any two were hit by radiation or cosmic rays, the third would be able to pick out the incongruities in their reports. And even if they weren’t, if one was malfunctioning and sending bad telemetry data, having two others report concurring data (on entirely different code bases) would expose the one that was wrong and allow the crew to cut it out of the loop.
So they can definitely do digital-only. They just need ludicrous levels of redundancy. And I’m not sure they’re competent enough for that anymore, since NASA’s mission is now to help muslims and not go to space.
Weight. That’s the only reason I’d agree with them not to include one. The weight of an analog machine is massive. You’d destroy your payload margins.
do you get alerts when I post?
Yeah, you’re not s-banned (that word is, though!)
Soooooooo, Artemis 1 was launched in Nov. of 2022 and we are just now hearing about this problem? It was in space for only 25 days, yet the damage looks like it could only happen if it were subjected to a decade or two of Earth weather. Hmmm, is NASA shining us on in order to get more funding or did the spacecraft have some problems reentering the Earth's atmosphere? Is NASA going back to the original manufacturer and looking through their QC sheets to see what happened to cause such loss of mass? Will we ever know the truth or will NASA be like the Biden administration and obfuscate the truth behind ridicule and double worded babble speak from their Q-tipped headed mouthpiece?
https://www.space.com/nasa-artemis-1-orion-heat-shield-office-inspector-general