To The Moon

[valamhic]

Note the angle of the sun in that Hammer and feather video. The sun most have been about 30 degrees up for the shadow to fall that way.

 

[valamhic]

Hypergolic fuels burn clear in a vacuum.

It's not the only fuel that burns clear.


View: https://youtu.be/lmEsU-QYxNk?si=y_VSo6moZ4Zbs7ip

That is what I laboured so hard to get you to say. To commit. You are of course totally wrong and this goes to the heart of my argument. There are too effects, 1 is the huge plume of smoke which dies disperse faster in a vacuum and the second is the flame from the nozzle which is exactly the same in a vacuum or on earth. We are discussing hypergolic propellant and you post a video and methanol. Two totally different fires.

What you say is a myth, intuitive thinking.

 

[valamhic]

Hypergolic fuels burn clear in a vacuum.

It's not the only fuel that burns clear.


View: https://youtu.be/lmEsU-QYxNk?si=y_VSo6moZ4Zbs7ip

Show us where and when methanol was used as a propellant in the Apollo missions? This is the first I heard of it. Moreover this video is in air, 20% oxygen. Totally different.

 

[valamhic]

The only scenario left is that all the scenes were fake but the did go to the moon? Could that happen? The Russians never conformed that they tracked Apollo.

 

[SaintJavelin]

That is what I laboured so hard to get you to say. To commit. You are of course totally wrong and this goes to the heart of my argument. There are too effects, 1 is the huge plume of smoke which dies disperse faster in a vacuum and the second is the flame from the nozzle which is exactly the same in a vacuum or on earth. We are discussing hypergolic propellant and you post a video and methanol. Two totally different fires.

What you say is a myth, intuitive thinking.

I'm sorry, Val. Hypergolic flames burn clear in a vacuum.

You can see it here.


View: https://youtu.be/57o-t2y4zHc?si=KSs1NFgirZCFAuTC


Once the Titan 2 is clear of the silo, it's rising on an clear flame (the smoke is from other combustible materials in the silo).

In a vacuum, the flame would not be contrained by air pressure and would speed out far more leaving even less to see.

And we can still see the damage to the lower stage and dust from the launch of the LM upper stage.

 

[SaintJavelin]

Show us where and when methanol was used as a propellant in the Apollo missions? This is the first I heard of it. Moreover this video is in air, 20% oxygen. Totally different.

But it's a clear flame. This fact does exist.

 

[valamhic]

I'm sorry, Val. Hypergolic flames burn clear in a vacuum.

You can see it here.


View: https://youtu.be/57o-t2y4zHc?si=KSs1NFgirZCFAuTC


Once the Titan 2 is clear of the silo, it's rising on an clear flame (the smoke is from other combustible materials in the silo).

In a vacuum, the flame would not be contrained by air pressure and would speed out far more leaving even less to see.

And we can still see the damage to the lower stage and dust from the launch of the LM upper stage.

Are you blind as well as stupid. There is loads of smoke and a very visible flame. Air does not react with the combustion and has no effect. I can see the flame clearly and the launch was in bright sunlight. The Apollo was in semi dark light.

 

[valamhic]

How many does this jackass need to see

launch of titan 2 missile - Search Videos

www.bing.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the minute man missile.https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=launch+of+titan+2+missile&mid=7761B8257865CEA537ED7761B8257865CEA537ED&FORM=VIRE

 

[valamhic]

It is disgraceful that other posters will not accept the obvious that hypergolic rocket motors
emit smoke and flame. The lefties are deluded and Kangal cannot accept he was made a fool of

launch of titan 2 missile - Search Videos

www.bing.com

 

[Hermit]

Step outside. Hike up a mountain. (I've been to Everest Base Camp, I guarantee you the air is thinner).

If the atmosphere was inside a container, then air pressure and air density would be constant everywhere as you ascend.

Gas pressure gradient is possible in a container. Gas pressure gradient requires a container, because without the container there would be nothing for the gas to press against to create the gradient.

Thus fuckin cunt is raving, no one ever mentioned gravitational fields

Your buddy Kangal brought up gravitational fields, and you even quoted his post:

Gravity affects gases in several ways:

1. Density stratification: In a gravitational field, gases tend to stratify based on their density, with heavier gases settling towards the bottom and lighter gases rising towards the top. This is known as density stratification or buoyancy.
2. Pressure variation: Gravity also affects the pressure of gases. In a gravitational field, the pressure of a gas decreases with height, as the weight of the gas above exerts less pressure on the gas below.
3. Atmospheric effects: Gravity plays a crucial role in shaping the Earth's atmosphere. The gravitational force of the Earth holds the atmosphere in place, preventing it from escaping into space. Gravity also causes the atmosphere to be denser at lower altitudes and thinner at higher altitudes.

And we see all these effects.

What has this to do with the topic. Do you believe the film of the ascent module lifting off the moon in Apollo 15 and 17 is real or fake?

 

[valamhic]

The exhaust in a vacuum can be a different shape, but it is still there.

What does the exhaust plume of a rocket look like in vacuum?

There are plenty of photos of rocket tests and launches in atmosphere, and in these the exhaust plume tends to be a long thin flame. Is this true for when rocket engines operate in a vacuum? My gu...

space.stackexchange.com

 

[SaintJavelin]

There is loads of smoke and a very visible flame.

The smoke is not actually from the exhaust directly. As the rocket rises you can see the flame peter out and dissipate.

Here's another example.


View: https://youtu.be/tRXSa8AadYU?si=f3uEVOzMDNkox0CH


After the initial dust and smoke there's actually very little smoke from the engines themselves.

And these are far more powerful than the LM ascent engine.

 

[valamhic]

So at l

Gas pressure gradient is possible in a container. Gas pressure gradient requires a container, because without the container there would be nothing for the gas to press against to create the gradient.


Your buddy Kangal brought up gravitational fields, and you even quoted his post:

So long last I know what you are saying, You are saying that a hypergolic rocket motor working under load in a vacuum emits no flame visible to the human eye at all and the smoke generated escapes onto surrounding area that in such a way that it cannot be observed.

The flame you say cannot be seen ever when looking up from below.

Am I correct in my analysis of your claims?

 

[valamhic]

The smoke is not actually from the exhaust directly. As the rocket rises you can see the flame peter out and dissipate.

Here's another example.


View: https://youtu.be/tRXSa8AadYU?si=f3uEVOzMDNkox0CH


After the initial dust and smoke there's actually very little smoke from the engines themselves.

And these are far more powerful than the LM ascent engine.

That is not what the various videos of Titan 2 launched show. There is no visible flame or smoke from either of the 2 Apollo lunar ascent modules from their initial ignition to the last view after pitch over.

 

[SaintJavelin]

That is not what the various videos of Titan 2 launched show. There is no visible flame or smoke from either of the 2 Apollo lunar ascent modules from their initial ignition to the last view after pitch over.

It's a much weaker engine, in a vacuum.

Loading…

i.sstatic.net

 

[Hermit]

So at l

So long last I know what you are saying, You are saying that a hypergolic rocket motor working under load in a vacuum emits no flame visible to the human eye at all and the smoke generated escapes onto surrounding area that in such a way that it cannot be observed.

The flame you say cannot be seen ever when looking up from below.

Am I correct in my analysis of your claims?

I'm not talking about rockets. I'm talking about the impossibility of the gas pressure which we have on earth existing next to a vacuum (space). Space is impossible, therefore all claims of going to the moon or space are false.

 

[SaintJavelin]

Gas pressure gradient is possible in a container.

Let's see your proof.

 

[valamhic]

I'm not talking about rockets. I'm talking about the impossibility of the gas pressure which we have on earth existing next to a vacuum (space). Space is impossible, therefore all claims of going to the moon or space are false.

Right, well that needs to be discussed separately because I am juggling a few balls. So clarify if you agree on the basics. Air pressure is at 1 bar at sea level. Do you agree its pressure reduced with elevation?

 

[valamhic]

Hermit says there is no such thing as space. There is air all between the earth and moon and around the sun, How can I argue with that

 

[Hermit]

Let's see your proof.

Are you saying that it is not possible to have a gas pressure gradient in a container?


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXnaVvgaYY8


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNYCdbDKOhA


Gas pressure formulas, e.g. PV = nRT, include V for volume, i.e. the volume of a container. How can you have volume without a container?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir64EcRkf5Q


Pressure Gradients in Natural Gas Reservoirs:

Pressure Gradients in Natural Gas Reservoirs

Abstract. Procedures for computing turbulent flow of gas in steady state near the well bore and a graphical method for predicting unsteady state laminar flow at distances from the well have been combined to compute pressure gradients in gas reservoirs.Methods are discussed for predicting single...

onepetro.org

Even FlatEarth.ws says you can have a gradient in a container:

In reality, the gas inside the container is also affected by gravity and will also have a pressure gradient, just like the gas outside.

pressure-gradient – FlatEarth.ws

flatearth.ws