Scrapped LEMs

On 22 Nov 2003 05:41:56 GMT, (Andre Lieven)
wrote:

Now, go **** Brad Guth in my kill file.

....Excuse me, he's ****ing Brad Guth in *my* killfile hell. Go find a
troll of your own to torment ;-P


OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

OM (om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org) writes:
On 22 Nov 2003 05:41:56 GMT, (Andre Lieven)
wrote:

Now, go **** Brad Guth in my kill file.

...Excuse me, he's ****ing Brad Guth in *my* killfile hell. Go find
a troll of your own to torment ;-P

Hey, if we share them out this way, that would *increase* their
torment... g

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

You're also forgetting that LM ascent stages were crashed for a
scientific reason. The seismometers left on the moon

I am well aware of that. But 11 had no seismometer to test. The available
thrust of the CM stack was adquate to take the LM along to earth. Heck the LM
engines helped bring 13 back. The service module had large thust reserves
having been originally designed for direct insertion.

Now I ask again with whatever fuel was left onboard 11s LM ascent stage could
it have been taken along with earth insertion and nuged into heliocentric
orbit

"Hallerb" wrote in message
...
|
| I am well aware of that. But 11 had no seismometer to test.

False.

| The available thrust of the CM stack was adquate to take the
| LM along to earth.

False.

| Heck the LM engines helped bring 13 back.

Apples and oranges. Apollo 13 never went into lunar orbit.

| The service module had large thust reserves
| having been originally designed for direct insertion.

Irrelevant. That was never carried through into final design or
construction.

| Now I ask again with whatever fuel was left onboard 11s LM
| ascent stage could it have been taken along with earth insertion
| and nuged into heliocentric orbit

How many times do you have to be told "no"?

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

In message , Hallerb
writes


You're also forgetting that LM ascent stages were crashed for a
scientific reason. The seismometers left on the moon

I am well aware of that. But 11 had no seismometer to test.

Nonsense. It had the EASEP (Early Apollo Scientific Experiment Package)
a solar-cell powered system because the full ALSEP wasn't ready.

--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

Nonsense. It had the EASEP (Early Apollo Scientific Experiment Package)
a solar-cell powered system because the full ALSEP wasn't ready.

Ahh they didnt crash 11s intentionally and dont know where it impacted or when/

So I ask again Any chance it could of been put in a stable orbit for retrieval
generations later?

| The available thrust of the CM stack was adquate to take the
| LM along to earth.

False.

I dont believe you. Consider that the service module inserted the entire stack
for lunar orbit to begin with. Now you claim the service module wasnt big
enough to bring the ascent stage out of lunar orbit?

Werent some safety plans caling for just this?

(Hallerb) wrote:


Nonsense. It had the EASEP (Early Apollo Scientific Experiment Package)
a solar-cell powered system because the full ALSEP wasn't ready.

Ahh they didnt crash 11s intentionally and dont know where it impacted or when/

No, they left it in orbit to 'run it to exhaustion'.

So I ask again Any chance it could of been put in a stable orbit for retrieval
generations later?

Nope.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

(Hallerb) wrote:

| The available thrust of the CM stack was adquate to take the
| LM along to earth.

False.

I dont believe you. Consider that the service module inserted the entire stack
for lunar orbit to begin with. Now you claim the service module wasnt big
enough to bring the ascent stage out of lunar orbit?

They used the vast majority of their fuel to slow down into Lunar
orbit.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

No, they left it in orbit to 'run it to exhaustion'.

Place in heliospheric would of accomplished the same thing.

Is trhere a place I can ask this question of NASA officially in some manner.
Foir curosity sake.