A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

recovered F-1 engines - which mission?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 27th 13, 08:17 AM posted to sci.space.history
Philip Lantz[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default recovered F-1 engines - which mission?

Jan Philips wrote:
Greg (Strider) Moore wrote:
And if they're actually accurate. i.e. we don't know the CEP.


What is CEP?


Circular error probable
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_error_probable
  #22  
Old March 27th 13, 04:15 PM posted to sci.space.history
Jeff Findley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,388
Default recovered F-1 engines - which mission?

In article ,
says...

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

In article 466b157b-d460-4b7f-8909-b6a816cc9875
,
says...

On Mar 25, 10:57 am, Dean wrote:
On Monday, March 25, 2013 3:52:44 AM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:

theres a pretty photo of one of the stages impacting the ocean in a

rather spectacular fashion, taken by a fishing boat that probabky

shouldnt of been there

Where might this picture be?

i had a link to it a long time ago but lost it


Without actual evidence, you don't a claim. The area downrange was off
limits precisely because of the risk of a stage or debris impacting a
vessel. What you're asserting is that security wasn't good enough in
the late 60's and early 70's to prevent such a thing from happening.

As is said in many online forums: Pics, or it didn't happen.


I'll note I have heard this too from other sources (more reliable ones) and
am searching now.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=7086.0 does repeat the
claim but mentions a German freighter which rings a bell.

More on this:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...?topic=28468.0

Including a link to NTRS.gov that.. well doesn't do much good right now.


19900066485_1990066485.pdf

I've only got about 60 NTRS documents on my local machine, and this
isn't one of them.

I guess I'll let Bob slide on this one, since NTRS is currently offline.

:-(

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
  #23  
Old March 27th 13, 08:49 PM posted to sci.space.history
GordonD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 151
Default recovered F-1 engines - which mission?

"Greg (Strider) Moore" wrote in message
m...
"Rick Jones" wrote in message ...

Jan Philips wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:44:53 -0000, "GordonD"
wrote:


"Apollo - The Definitive Sourcebook" by Rich Orloff and David
Harland has the impact points. For instance Apollo 10's S-IC was
30.188 deg N, 74.207 deg W while Apollo 11's was 30.212N,
74.038W. I don't know how big an area a location to that accuracy
would cover.


Those are pretty accurate locations. At the equator, 0.001 degree
is about 100 meters, and it is less than that at those locations -
if they are rounded properly and not converted from less-accurate
minutes and seconds.


Well, they are certainly precise. We might assume accuracy. The
timelords over in comp.protocols.time.ntp often point-out the
distinction between precision and accuracy when discussing time and I
suspect the same applies for location.


Exactly.

BTW, I did find:


http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apol...rth_Impact.htm



That site is the on-line version of "Apollo by the Numbers" which is the
previous edition of the Sourcebook I mentioned above. In the current edition
the impact points are included in the main text rather than tabulated.

http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/SP-4029.htm
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."

  #24  
Old March 28th 13, 01:14 AM posted to sci.space.history
Jan Philips
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 54
Default recovered F-1 engines - which mission?

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 06:48:34 -0700, Fred J. McCall
wrote:

If they had the position to the nearest second in minutes and seconds,
the precision is 0.000277777777 of a degree. And no, you can't
"specify any number of digits"....


You seem to be assuming that they measure either to 0.001 degree or 1
second. You can measure to a fraction of a second or 0.0001 degree or
0.00001 degree.
  #25  
Old March 28th 13, 03:28 PM posted to sci.space.history
marcus hall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default recovered F-1 engines - which mission?

In article ,
Fred J. McCall wrote:

The statement was that a 'minutes/seconds' figure was LESS ACCURATE
than a 0.001 degree solution.

That statement was absolute bull****.

Are you starting to get my point now?


I had thought that the original statement was that if the original data
was in minutes/seconds and was converted to decimal with too many digits
after the conversion. For instance, 25 minutes is .4166667 implies much
more precision than is approriate.

marcus hall

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Falcon 9 - First stage to be recovered! Alan Erskine[_3_] Space Shuttle 20 December 13th 10 09:58 PM
SRB's not recovered? Dac Space Shuttle 4 December 28th 06 06:46 PM
Photos of Discovery's Recovered Left SRB [email protected] Policy 1 August 3rd 05 01:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.