Apollo One, the FBI, and Scott Grissom

On 10 Jun 2004 20:52:15 -0700, (LaDonna Wyss)
wrote:

ctually, I'm getting confused--far too many personalities in here to
keep them all straight.

....Much is explained about LaDoper in this one sentence.

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

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:19:38 GMT, (Derek
Lyons) wrote:

Could we in future move substantive comments out of the troll threads
into appropriately named threads of their own? It's better netiquette
and hopefully wil make the group read 'cleaner' since it allows for
the killfiling of individuals rather than threads.

(I'm know, I'm guilty too... But I'm taking the pledge.)

....Tell you what, D, I'll take the pledge too. But only after I finish
this round of bashing the silly little retarded troll one more time
before I go to bet. Besides, I've got two site redesigns in process
that are going to take most of my time for the next week, so it's
better to apply my wit and wisdom there.

Of course, if you guys haven't gotten rid of the trailer troll and her
sodomy partner by the end of the month, all bets are off...:-)

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

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:52:13 -0500, Herb Schaltegger
wrote:

I know that one of the pacing factors for the later Apollo flights was
the hypergolics in the LEM - once loaded, they only had so long before
they would (something, presumably corrode the piping) - so fire it or
dump 'em. Were the CM RCS tanks a similar pacing feature?

I think it was degradation of the seals in the propulsion system valves
but I may be mistaken in my recollection.

....AIUI, it was primarily the seals and gaskets, but also some
long-term issues with the tankage itself. ISTR another comment some
years ago on the original sci.space group about reaction with
something in antislosh baffling, but that one's so old that google
couldn't find it even if Henry donated the backup tapes.

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

In article ,
(LaDonna Wyss) wrote:

(Derek Lyons) wrote in message
...
Herb Schaltegger wrote:
If you're truly an "investigator", why don't you spend less time on
idiotic posts like this one and answer Scott Hedrick's questions about
your "team mates", rk's and Michael Gardner's questions and comments
regarding your statement about the electrical loads, currents,
impedances and cabling in the spacecraft, my comments about the LiOH
canister testing you allege should have occurred, or Daniel's comments
regarding the test procedures?

Herb; Could we agree to keep these messages to one a day or so? This
tactic never does really work and merely worsens the signal-to-noise
ratio.

D.

Actually, I'm getting confused--far too many personalities in here to
keep them all straight. I do know I TRIED to answer Schaltegger on
that issue when he emailed me,

I've never emailed you, liar.

but of course he used a bogus return
address so I was unable to send the reply. I have two emails from RK
sitting in my inbox to which I will respond in the AM; something I
read in here earlier this evening has had me busy for hours and I'm
ready to call it a night.
What comment did you make about the LiOH canister? I recall
Schaltegger's email,

I've never emailed you, liar.

but I don't remember which was your particular
post, and you can see we now have about three dozen threads going
here. Would you refresh my memory, or better yet, email me with the
question/comment you had?

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

"Terrell Miller" wrote in message
. .. ironic, innit?

Alas, I don't suspect she has the capacity to understand it...

But then, she likes to torture old ladies with autopsy reports.

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...
I do know I TRIED to answer Schaltegger on
that issue when he emailed me

Why don't you simply post your answers here?

For that matter, why don't you post the email you say came from Herb here?

OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:19:38 GMT, (Derek
Lyons) wrote:

Could we in future move substantive comments out of the troll threads
into appropriately named threads of their own? It's better netiquette
and hopefully wil make the group read 'cleaner' since it allows for
the killfiling of individuals rather than threads.

(I'm know, I'm guilty too... But I'm taking the pledge.)

...Tell you what, D, I'll take the pledge too. But only after I finish
this round of bashing the silly little retarded troll one more time
before I go to bet. Besides, I've got two site redesigns in process
that are going to take most of my time for the next week, so it's
better to apply my wit and wisdom there.

Of course, if you guys haven't gotten rid of the trailer troll and her
sodomy partner by the end of the month, all bets are off...:-)

OM

Your "wit and wisdom?" ROFLMAO!

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message
om...
Your "wit and wisdom?"

Clearly, it's more than you can handle.

"The hatch just blew!"
"C'mon, mom, you know you paid the life insurance premium that time. If on'y
you'd have remembered to pay the premium before tampering with the capsule.
We'd be set for life. Roll over, will you? I wanna be on top this time..."

OM om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote in message . ..
On 10 Jun 2004 07:32:31 -0700, (LaDonna Wyss)
wrote:

Did I say the hypergolics were on board?

...You've implied that they were.

I said they fired the thrusters, and they did fire the thrusters

...And turning the key on an engine is going to do jack **** if
there's no gas in the tank. Here, let me show you a basic example of
how your logic works:

"Hello, Ford Motor Company Tech Support. How may I help you?"

"Yes, my name is LaDonna Wyss. I just crashed my car into a tree, and
the engine block is split in two. How can I get going again?"

"Well, ma'am, it sounds like you're going to have to replace the
engine at least, but then again from what you've told me you're
probably better off buying a new car."

"A new car?!?!? But...but...but...but I gave to the Audubon Society!"

...And that, dear LaBimbo, is your problem. For you, logic *is* a
chirping bird in a tree surrounded by a wreath of pretty flowers that
smell bad.

OM

Your "analogy" defies logic. Turning on the key in the ignition when
there is no gas in the car actually DOES do something. Have you ever
tried it? Even on fumes the car will ATTEMPT to turn over, which
tells you the starter is OK, and the battery is probably OK, then you
check the gas gauge, and VOILA!

"Charleston" wrote in message news:iU8yc.10833$fZ1.1540@fed1read03...
"Ami Silberman" wrote:

"LaDonna Wyss" wrote in message

OM, you are such a windbag. Did I say the hypergolics were on board?
I said they fired the thrusters, and they did fire the thrusters. If
you people are not going to take the time to learn what happened out
there that day, how can you pretend to debate?

Um, I thought that "fired the thrusters" meant "issued the command that
caused the thrusters to fire, causing the thrusters to operate in such a
manner as to cause thrust."

It does mean exactly that when they are connected correctly. The you can
operate them dry or wet.

Dry = no propellants.

Wet = propellants loaded. NASA has a silly habit. They label such things
"loaded". They do this in many different ways so that unsuspecting workers
don't get killed. Where the hell is Kim Keller when we need him?

Daniel

Thanks, Daniel.