NASA "Hidden Figure" during Space Race dies at 101
Discussion
Amazing story this is> Astronauts get much of the glory, and rightfully so, but the behind the scenes people that make things happen are often overlooked. Same thing in many industries I suppose:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/ka...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/ka...
Edited by Jimbeaux on Monday 24th February 16:19
I try to remind people that the Apollo ships had less computer power than a cheap calculator, or some such comparison. Astronauts with pencil and paper and slide rules recalculating orbit rentry angles when something went wrong etc. I find that amazing. Some younger people don’t seem to believe it or think it possible.
Beati Dogu said:
Your phone charger probably has way more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer. No joke.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/306119-your-ph...
I can believe that. It astounds me who remembers watching the Moon landingS, I know it must be on another level for tech savvy youngsters who have never lived without technology. https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/306119-your-ph...
Beati Dogu said:
Your phone charger probably has way more computing power than the Apollo guidance computer. No joke.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/306119-your-ph...
I can believe that. It astounds me who remembers watching the Moon landingS, I know it must be on another level for tech savvy youngsters who have never lived without technology. https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/306119-your-ph...
bolidemichael said:
I would highly recommend the podcast series 13 minutes to the Moon which tells the story of the NASA Space Programme and the ambitious goals set by President J F Kennedy and the galvanising effect that this had on the nation.
It's a very intimate insight into the young and risk embracing team in the control room and also, transports you into the feeling within the space shuttles as they both orbit the moon, as in the case of Apollo 11 and actually land on the moon.
All of it is nicely produced and framed by a spacious and fitting soundtrack from Hans Zimmer, who also invented the Zimmer frame, as modelled by Harvey Weinstein in his recent court appearances.
To sit atop multiple stories of explosives that some scientists with pencils and slide rules put together and get exploded into orbit took testicular Grande’ of legendary proportions. It's a very intimate insight into the young and risk embracing team in the control room and also, transports you into the feeling within the space shuttles as they both orbit the moon, as in the case of Apollo 11 and actually land on the moon.
All of it is nicely produced and framed by a spacious and fitting soundtrack from Hans Zimmer, who also invented the Zimmer frame, as modelled by Harvey Weinstein in his recent court appearances.
Eric Mc said:
Because that isn't strictly speaking true.
The on board computers were pretty limited - even by the standards of the day. The navigation computer on both the Apollo Command and Lunar Modules were deliberately kept simple because it was thought reliability was far more important than capability. The reason why they could keep them simple was because they were not 100% reliant on them. They had on board "old style" navigation aides, such as a sextant. And, most importantly, NASA had access to the most powerful computers in the world, on the ground, at a number of locations. So all the really serious number crunching was done with those. On Apollo 13 when the spacecraft had to pretty much completely powered down, it was STILL possible to navigate the spacecraft using a combination of star sightings through the sextant and the ground computers.
Thanks Eric, I appreciate the correction. The on board computers were pretty limited - even by the standards of the day. The navigation computer on both the Apollo Command and Lunar Modules were deliberately kept simple because it was thought reliability was far more important than capability. The reason why they could keep them simple was because they were not 100% reliant on them. They had on board "old style" navigation aides, such as a sextant. And, most importantly, NASA had access to the most powerful computers in the world, on the ground, at a number of locations. So all the really serious number crunching was done with those. On Apollo 13 when the spacecraft had to pretty much completely powered down, it was STILL possible to navigate the spacecraft using a combination of star sightings through the sextant and the ground computers.
I suppose the part about the ships having little computing power was correct. I forgot about the huge ones on the ground. Interesting though that the space modules had navigation tools similar to wooden ocean shops of old!
Eric Mc said:
They used computers - lots of them.
The myths surrounding Apollo grow by the day.
I am actually giving a lecture to a group in a few weeks on the myths and false stories that have grown up around the Apollo project.
Of course, this is nothing to do with crazy conspiracy theories, but everything to do with how some of the stories behind Apollo have been simplified and, in some cases, falsified over the 60 plus years of the story. Much of this drifting from the truth has not been intended to deliberately mislead. It's more to do with how writers and documentary makers have picked up on comments and statements made in other accounts and then encapsulated them as "facts" - and also how TV programmers have been sloppy and lazy in putting their stories together - partly to keep costs down and partly to keep the story fairly easy for the average viwer to understand.
The main area of myths that I will be tackling are -
The over emphasis of the German influence on the hardware development
The true facts behind the launch of the programme
The true story of the Block I and II Apollo Command Module and the true impact of the Apollo 1 fire
The true international aspects of Apollo - it wasn't as "All American" as many might think.
Why the programme was cut short.
The Apollo legacy today and how it is influencing current programmes
That would be great to attend. Sorry I am across the pond at the moment. Is it available for viewing afterwards? Do you expect some moon landing hoaxers to show up and shout you down? The myths surrounding Apollo grow by the day.
I am actually giving a lecture to a group in a few weeks on the myths and false stories that have grown up around the Apollo project.
Of course, this is nothing to do with crazy conspiracy theories, but everything to do with how some of the stories behind Apollo have been simplified and, in some cases, falsified over the 60 plus years of the story. Much of this drifting from the truth has not been intended to deliberately mislead. It's more to do with how writers and documentary makers have picked up on comments and statements made in other accounts and then encapsulated them as "facts" - and also how TV programmers have been sloppy and lazy in putting their stories together - partly to keep costs down and partly to keep the story fairly easy for the average viwer to understand.
The main area of myths that I will be tackling are -
The over emphasis of the German influence on the hardware development
The true facts behind the launch of the programme
The true story of the Block I and II Apollo Command Module and the true impact of the Apollo 1 fire
The true international aspects of Apollo - it wasn't as "All American" as many might think.
Why the programme was cut short.
The Apollo legacy today and how it is influencing current programmes
Eric Mc said:
We don't record our talks so no video, I'm afraid. I don't expect any "moon-hoax believers" but you never know.
A recent talk (not by me) was on the work and theories of Dr Emanuel Velikovsky - and that got a bit lively.
I understand Eric; thanks for your continued work toward preservation and understanding of this important legacy to humanity. A recent talk (not by me) was on the work and theories of Dr Emanuel Velikovsky - and that got a bit lively.
bolidemichael said:
Jimbeaux said:
Eric Mc said:
That's the essence of science - being sceptical.
You are correct sir. Just poking fun. I think you underestimate your contributions in these events. I’m with the other poster, we need to up your bookings.
bolidemichael said:
Jimbeaux said:
bolidemichael said:
Jimbeaux said:
Eric Mc said:
That's the essence of science - being sceptical.
You are correct sir. Just poking fun. I think you underestimate your contributions in these events. I’m with the other poster, we need to up your bookings.
All of this while remaining humble. Tough task but Eric pulls it off. bolidemichael said:
Jimbeaux said:
bolidemichael said:
Jimbeaux said:
bolidemichael said:
Jimbeaux said:
Eric Mc said:
That's the essence of science - being sceptical.
You are correct sir. Just poking fun. I think you underestimate your contributions in these events. I’m with the other poster, we need to up your bookings.
All of this while remaining humble. Tough task but Eric pulls it off. 
DeejRC said:
Eric most definitely isn’t in the industry!
And what I meant Jim was that the reality of working inside said industry is much less exciting that these threads imagine it to be. An awful lot of what gets said in these threads is also comically incorrect.
Much on PH is comically incorrect, on many subjects. I assume, however, You are referring to aeronautics and space flight?And what I meant Jim was that the reality of working inside said industry is much less exciting that these threads imagine it to be. An awful lot of what gets said in these threads is also comically incorrect.
Eric Mc said:
For anybody who works in any industry - when it is your day to day job, it may lose whatever gloss it may have once had in your mind before you entered said industry.
I admit that accountancy never started off with much gloss in the first place, but activities that the public perceive as being glamourous or exciting, can become "just a job" if it is something you do every day.
Well said. I am an avid fisherman. People often say I should “go pro”; meaning the pro Bass fishing prize circuit, and get paid for what you enjoy doing anyway. To which I reply; “Then it becomes a job instead of a hobby”. That does change the complexion. I admit that accountancy never started off with much gloss in the first place, but activities that the public perceive as being glamourous or exciting, can become "just a job" if it is something you do every day.
DeejRC said:
Sorry Jim but that comparison doesn’t hold true. I love what I do, I may be cynical as hell about it all at times, but ultimately I enjoy the lunacy.
I’m also aware of the irony that is me decrying the comic ignorance and yet offering no insights or balance. Afraid that’s the modus operandi I’ve stuck with since the turn of the century and it probably won’t alter for the foreseeable. Unless I finally make good on the retirement plans and live on the farm brewing...but chance would be a fine thing
It might be a fine thing but “I think therefore I am” might work for you re the farm and brewing. I’m also aware of the irony that is me decrying the comic ignorance and yet offering no insights or balance. Afraid that’s the modus operandi I’ve stuck with since the turn of the century and it probably won’t alter for the foreseeable. Unless I finally make good on the retirement plans and live on the farm brewing...but chance would be a fine thing
To my comparison. I suppose I would enjoy fishing too. However, it is a competition and one must win to get paid. That is the part that would take the joy out of fishing for me. Pressure to win being the opposite of fishing to enjoy and relax.
DeejRC said:
Ah Jimbo, we are both part of the great capitalist societies of the West, ergo we both know full well that said philosophical nugget should now read: we tax, therefore, you are!
Alas, you are correct sir. Might I offer the logical addendum to that; “The only sure thing is death and taxes”. Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff