Jim'll'paint it is a pop culture hero!
Whether we’re talking climate change, moon landings, Obama’s birth certificate etc, there’s always someone who cannot be bothered to invest x number of years of their life educating themselves in a particular area, learning about scientific methodology and critical, rational analysis but feels that their opinion is just as valid as established, peer reviewed fact. I refer to it as the Pruitt Phenomenon, there’s political capital in conspiracy theories these days for whatever reason.
This is me and I claim my £5. There's no such thing as moon landings, end of. Its a political conspiracy. In addition, you need to start adding together all things NASA. Why are there no more Space shuttles? No, its not money, there's loads of that that can be printed. How come we haven't gone a leap beyond Smartphones? Why has mobile tech stalled? Why aren't we quickly awash with electric cars even though the have nth of the computing need of an iPhone? Its because we beyond the pinnacle of publicly aware developed Alien technology from Roswell thats why, and on our own we are capable of nothing else.
There I said it.
Why are there no more Space shuttles?
Because they got a bit explody. Also, they were costing a fortune.
How come we haven’t gone a leap beyond Smartphones? Why has mobile tech stalled?
What would you actually want? My current phone is more powerful than a laptop of a few years ago.
on our own we are capable of nothing else.
So nothing was developed before the 1950's?
I think I have just been trolled.
Also, IF that’s actually true, how on earth do you keep a couple of hundred media types, who crave fame and money, quiet
In theory if you got a bunch of "true patriots" you might be able to pull that off. The main problem I see is that I cant see how the USSR could be fooled and it would have been a dream PR occasion for them.
Why are there no more Space shuttles? No, its not money, there’s loads of that that can be printed.
Yeah that normally goes down well. There is no political will for it.
How come we haven’t gone a leap beyond Smartphones?
Like what? There are various things being worked on. Main drawback currently are batteries
Why aren’t we quickly awash with electric cars even though the have nth of the computing need of an iPhone?
In what way?
Its because we beyond the pinnacle of publicly aware developed Alien technology from Roswell thats why, and on our own we are capable of nothing else.
Glad you said it.
Not that believe a word of it mind.
There is plenty of tech developments in modern life that far supersede even the simplest of IT tech from 10years ago, never mind 15... and you work in that industry so you must understand even the basic SDLC employed developments.
Its all about Political will, Governemnt funded space programmes fell flat when the Shuttle kept killing its astronauts.. printing money wasn’t the limiting factor, it was the political will of producing a space vehicle for what was back then a highly controversial subject.
If your view is “Aliens gave us all the current tech, and humans have been unable to supersede” any then I think you should have a chat with one of the major players in the high tech industry.. for thier POV.
What will you do with your virtual £5 ?
You have an interesting viewpoint, not one I would have given you credit for.
Dissonance (and someone else, earlier)
yes, maybe you could keep some people quiet, for a while, but hundreds of attention seeking filmmakers? I’m doubtful tbh.
not for 50 years anyway.
As you picked my posts, I will reply.
If you can’t explain something simply, so that anyone can understand the basics as a starting point for them you don’t understand the subject as well as you think.
I was not refuting anything, therefore it wasn’t straw man.
Thanks for your other points.
bsims
i know theres been a lot of back and forth, but your original question was:
If the Americans built a VTOL system for the moon landing craft why did they have to buy the Harrier from Britain? Genuine question, no one i have ever asked has been able to give me a decent answer, all I get is something about more cost effective. (which would be unusual for the US military, they like tech in house)
You seem to be implying that the Americans were not able to create a working vtol system to land on the moon.
Here is the wikipedia article about the test bed vehicle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Landing_Research_Vehicle
and here is video of it flying (the most popular video is one of it being destroyed in a test while being flown by Neil Armstrong but it had flown successfully many times before).
So bearing in mind that you've (hopefully) just read an article about the device you claim could not exist, and seen a video of it flying. What was your point?
You have an interesting viewpoint, not one I would have given you credit for
I'm not sure whether to be flattered or insulted 🙂
I was trolling above, but on that particular point there is part of me that believes it. There plenty of conjecture yet also evidence to show that there were technological leaps and bounds not associated with financial or political will. I don't have the time to search for an post links now, but there was recorded leaked conversations, and documents about "communications devices" within about 5 years of Roswell of which the description matches an iPhone. Its long been rumoured that the (mainly US) military harbor alien technology propulsion systems and have used them (UFO's) and they/NASA have gradually understood, used and leaked other component parts. Coupled with our own science, we've moved on with tech in some industries that far outweighs others.
My quip about Cars is correct - we went from talking through a wire to iPhone X in the space of time its taken to make a Sinclair C5 a bit bigger. Wtf? Surely at that pace of development for something thats seen as fundamental to our environment we should all being driving them now. But wait - politically the oil industry needs to remain, or is it that we just don't know how to migrate a fundamental technology from comms to vehicular use? Oh but we do, because we have Tesla, then other crappy imitations which in a strange parallel to the telecoms story, the original iPhone release sees one organisation light years ahead of others until replication allows them to catch up. Vis a Vis, was Jobs/Musk leaked some technology by design?
Yeah I’ve seen the videos and referred to them, not said they don’t exist. The question I asked is self explanatory. Some posters have been able to add detail to a possible answer.
I have asked why could they not make one for an aircraft and the viewpoints are procurement/ different kind of vtol/ one not vtol/ different scenario.
The divide I claim does not exist is an American only designed and made vstol aircraft in service. Which seems odd given the tech and money they had to throw at it.
I have read the sr 71 was signed off accidentally by Congress ( who thought they were getting a different plane) which if actually true shows how much money was available to defence projects.
It's time to play … "troll or stupid"…
Vis a Vis, was Jobs/Musk leaked some technology by design?
Leaving aside the accuracy of your claims (you do seem to be buying into PR hype). Who exactly would be "leaking" that technology?
If you can’t explain something simply, so that anyone can understand the basics as a starting point for them you don’t understand the subject as well as you think.
Okaaaay, one has a jet engine, which sucks in air, mixes it with aviation fuel and also has these little itty bitty wings on each side..actually why should I dumb down for someone who cannot tell the difference between a Harrier jump jet and the Lunar Module? Go and read the Junior Encyclopaedia of Space.
I was not refuting anything, therefore it wasn’t straw man.
Are you currently sitting in an industrial unit in the vicinity of St Petersburg BTW? It would explain a great many things.
Who exactly would be “leaking” that technology?
Well if we all knew that....
But we all know that governments & media are used to dictate to us, who's to say that whats available to the public isn't dictated by a higher power, all it politicians, masons, aliens, Rameses the 3rd, the WI who knows...]
No we work from home now.
So are you saying thrust vectoring varies according to the fuel used or the laws of motion vary according to the fuel used?
So bearing in mind that you’ve (hopefully) just read an article about the device you claim could not exist, and seen a video of it flying. What was your point?
I think the point is that the flying bedstead isn't a VTOL fighter aircraft.
People really shouldn't need it explaining that aeroplanes and spacecraft aren't the same thing.
Its all getting a bit Father Dougal
Richmtb, are you saying the the Earth is governed by different laws of physics?
Nice straw-manning there.
I'm not able to translate this into Russian for you, but here you go:
I prefer the term straw mannery,
I’m a contractor from Laos so I don’t speak Russian
This might help:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrier_Jump_Jet
No I'm saying aeroplanes and spacecraft are different, they are designed for completely different jobs in complete different environmnents. What they are doing looks superficially similar but its actually not. The universal nature of physical laws is utterly irrelevant if you are describing different things.
"No Dougal, this cow is small those are far away"
Also saying "are you saying" and then saying something I didn't say is a fairly basic logical fallacy.
It might even have a name
I'm amazed that you read the technical document and have calculated the corresponding thrust to lift ratios allowing for gravitational differences so quickly. I doff my cap.
I like that scene, makes me laugh. Still doesn’t change the fact that thrust vectoring is thrust vectoring.
richmtb, you are saying that because you imply that the method of going up and down is different, not the same through different generation methods.
pjm - I ve got my st Petersburg team on it.
The point I’m making is they had most of the tech and knowledge and then didn’t take the next step, as most seem to be saying the jet version is harder. Had they done a us harrier the lander would have been better, no?
do you think the us was unable to generate enough thrust with a jet engine or was it the transition as wobbiscott suggested?
The LM had Velcro carpet, excellent, I might email my question to NASA.
Still doesn’t change the fact that thrust vectoring is thrust vectoring.
I can thrust vector my car exhaust to provide more or less downforce as required but that doesn't mean I can successfully build a vtol aircraft to fulfil a complex mission profile, at a price that suits the government of the day and meets the prevailing wants of the air force procurement staff at the time.
The point I’m making is they had most of the tech and knowledge and then didn’t take the next step, as most seem to be saying the jet version is harder. Had they done a us harrier the lander would have been better, no?
They made a jet/rocket version, as someone else has linked to, the LLRV. Taking test rig technology and turning it into a working combat aircraft is not a simple matter. And no, there is probably not that much that doing one would have improved the other. Some technology transfer, maybe, but as has been said several times before, these are very different problems. Air breathing engine vs rocket, very different atmospheres and gravity, very different tasks to perform.
do you think the us was unable to generate enough thrust with a jet engine or was it the transition as wobbiscott suggested?
They did have some versions over the years that almost got it, see XV4, XFV12 for examples. As did the French and the Russians, Mirage IIIV and Yak 38 as examples. Basically, VTOL is a really hard thing to do well enough to work for a combat aircraft. Making a VTOL aircraft is not the hard part so much as making a VTOL aircraft the is useful in combat. The harrier just happened to be one that hit the sweet spot.
Your car exhaust isn’t designed for vtol though.
So you are saying that overcoming gravity and slowing forward momentum whist maintaining stability is harder than doing it in low gravity and having to thrust vector in nearly all directions to maintain stability in controlled descent?
Your car exhaust isn’t designed for vtol though.
Neither was the Lunar Module. Your misconception is that is doing the the same job as a Harrier
I see, what was it designed for?
Your car exhaust isn’t designed for vtol though.
Thrust vectoring is thrust vectoring though, right?
Very good, do you have an answer for my question?
Which one? Seriously though, I'm struggling to work out what you;re getting at- you've posited that being able to do thrust vectoring/steering of a vertically landing vehicle of some sort in one particular set of circumstances must have some relevance to doing the same with a completely different vehicle in a completely different set of circumstances. Many people have given you answers as to why the two scenarios are very different problems. I gave you an (admittedly silly) example of the extreme of your statement that 'thrust vectoring is thrust vectoring' to highlight what an odd point it is and yet as far as I can tell you're asking the same question of 'why is it different' again, with no attention paid to the answers people have already given you.
The lunar landing module isn't a V/STOL aircraft. It was designed to decay orbit around a low gravity rock until it literally bumped into it. It was 'controlled' in the sense that they could (slightly) adjust the speed and direction "a bit" but it's not an "aircraft" in any sense of the word. There really wasn't much to actually design, it mostly relies on physics.
If you can’t explain something simply, so that anyone can understand the basics as a starting point for them you don’t understand the subject as well as you think.
Ironically, it's not that simple. No matter how good a barman you might be, you can't pour a pint into a half pint pot.
Swanny, 8 posts up I asked which you thought was harder.
so nick you are sayingin relation to that question, that it is easier to control an object to perform vertical movement on the moon?
Swanny, 8 posts up I asked which you thought was harder.
OK. Honestly? I don't know. They are really different problems. If I was going to go out on a limb I'd say that the systems level engineering to make the harrier work as a combat aircraft (as opposed to just making a flying engine) might have been trickier, but that's probably because I understand it better. It might equally be that (made up example alert) they solved a load of intricate technology problems around making extra lightweight rocket nozzles for the lander. They are really different problems.
If you're then going to make a statement of 'well, they could do one why didn't they do the other' then it's rather missing the point.
Thanks
It was the US Marines that wanted the Harrier. Not the Army or Navy.
It was not popular with others as they wanted "proper" fast jets. The Navy didn't want little carriers, they wanted, massive Super Carriers, which the Harrier doesn't need but F15s do.
It was more the lack of political interest in developing something that could be seen as a threat to their "core business".
Also, any VTOL aircraft is a compromise, why compromise if you don't need to?
It wasn't any lack of engineering capability that stopped the US from building their own.
I’m not sure whether to be flattered or insulted
@kryton
Neither really, certainly not an insult.. I think I know your online persona well enough to never make such a judgement.
Just (from my point of view) a little odd comment you made regarding the tech and lack of progression. Working in that vast industry I wouldn’t have though those thoughts would have even entered your mind. Good to have a different POV though.
FWIW I believe the human race either had assistance from Aliens, or there were a few transported here by accident and passed on thier knowledge and skills and thereby the human race developed far quicker that we would have if left alone. Obvs I’ve no proof when/if/why nor how, but there was a giant leap in human development from early man to the age where we made tools etc.
I understand all of that gobuchul, it just seems strange that the us didn’t do it in house for a major division of its military.
cougar, you can pour 1 pint into a 1/2 pint glass, the customer needs to drink it in two easier to swallow measures.
Dance, little monkeys, dance!
The bigger question is why did people not notice the moon people landing here first. Makes you think
Fly my pretties!
The moon people got a cloaking device from the Klingons. Because they couldn’t develop their own from low visibility space ship paint.
I think too many kids give up any kind of education in the sciences too early.
