Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#81

Post by jcitme »

bdunbar wrote: post #78
Retric wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, the thermal protection system was delicate because of weight issues. If the shuttles design goal was to get 20 people to LEO safely and they had anywhere close to the same budget to work with they could have used a few inches of titanium as part of the thermal protection system vs just glued on tiles that are less dense than Styrofoam. PS: The surface area to weight is directly related to reentry heating. A pe…

Again, the thermal protection system was delicate because of weight issues. I was not disagreeing with you. * A person can do reentry in little more than one of those old style space suits and a parachute,* Are you sure? If one is in orbit, one will re-enter hypersonic. This implies a whole lotta friction as you careen through the atmosphere.

Nitpick: It's not drag friction as much it was compressive heating. I suppose if you can avoid the compression, it wouldn't be as much of an issue...

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#82

Post by kryptiskt »

bdunbar wrote: post #78
Retric wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, the thermal protection system was delicate because of weight issues. If the shuttles design goal was to get 20 people to LEO safely and they had anywhere close to the same budget to work with they could have used a few inches of titanium as part of the thermal protection system vs just glued on tiles that are less dense than Styrofoam. PS: The surface area to weight is directly related to reentry heating. A pe…

Again, the thermal protection system was delicate because of weight issues. I was not disagreeing with you. * A person can do reentry in little more than one of those old style space suits and a parachute,* Are you sure? If one is in orbit, one will re-enter hypersonic. This implies a whole lotta friction as you careen through the atmosphere.

Here is an example of a one man entry system consisting of nothing but a strap on heatshield and a retro-rocket gun: http://www.astronautix.com/craft/moose.htm

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#84

Post by Rastafarian »

excuse-me wrote: post #76
Rastafarian wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the shuttles were designed as nuclear, space bombers.

The wings WERE a military requirement but nothing quite that silly. It was to enable a launch from Edwards AFB in California, insert or extract a polar orbit payload and land on US soil. Importantly it allowed them to choose the orbital insert point while they were over US territory where nobody was watching precisely where it went.

Silly? It's a well known design requirement - the shuttle has to be able to enter the atmosphere, slow down and deliver a nuclear bomb over any target on Earth (e.g. Moscow).

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#85

Post by Xcelerate »

Xcelerate wrote: post #26
tieno wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My appreciation circuits were fried at that point. Too few women, too many men. So this text both brought me on the verge of tearing up and annoyed me. Bravo!

"Men" as in mankind. It's just the way that word is used. I'm pretty sure Armstrong wasn't trying to be misogynistic there.

I'm a bit disappointed that this rather useless post of mine has increased my karma points more than anything else I've written.

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#86

Post by gruseom »

wensing wrote: post #79
kragen wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russell as in Steve Russell? Because, if so, I think you've done things much more significant than land men on the moon.

Looks like it: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3519747 and other comments verify.

I noticed that too, but Steve Russell wrote the first LISP interpreter on the IBM 704 in 1959 (http://www.iwriteiam.nl/HaCAR_CDR.html#Steve). The IBM 7094 came out in 1962 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_7090). So I'm betting that our russell isn't Steve. He's a perfectly good russell nonetheless :)

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#87

Post by opminion »

russell wrote: post #29

We need to be reminded that once we did great things. I worked at MIT Instrumentation Lab on a compiler for the guidance software for the moon missions. My contribution was insignificant, but I am still proud to have been part of it. My only regret was that I never made it to Florida to watch a Saturn V take off.

If it is the case that the space race was a byproduct of the cold war, then there isn't much reason to feel nostalgic.

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#88

Post by bdunbar »

kryptiskt wrote: post #82
bdunbar wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, the thermal protection system was delicate because of weight issues. I was not disagreeing with you. * A person can do reentry in little more than one of those old style space suits and a parachute,* Are you sure? If one is in orbit, one will re-enter hypersonic. This implies a whole lotta friction as you careen through the atmosphere.

Here is an example of a one man entry system consisting of nothing but a strap on heatshield and a retro-rocket gun: http://www.astronautix.com/craft/moose.htm

Here is an example

Heh - I've seen that before, or something like it.

But that's more involved than 'space suit, retro-rocket, parachute'.

Be a heckuva ride.

Re: Men Walk On Moon - July 20th 1969

#90

Post by GeorgeTirebiter »

ahelwer wrote: post #70
rimantas wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, there is no problem. People looking for problems where are none are problem though.

All right, I'll pop in here I guess. This has obviously veered incredibly off-topic and I can absolutely forgive Armstrong for using that language so many years ago. Now, that being said language is powerful and inclusive language is important. I wouldn't dismiss this as a problem so candidly. Just registering my support for Tieno's issues so you don't dismiss them as a lone super-PC-police-person. Also, "that's just…

At that time, it was commonly understood that "men" in such a context included "women". This was before womens' lib, etc. English is an evolving language; basically, 43 years ago, "men" in this use meant something different than it does today.
Post reply on HN