Analyst - 25/4/2008 5:03 AMQuotejanmb - 25/4/2008 10:57 AMQuoteWilliam Barton - 16/4/2008 6:17 PMI'll say what I always say in these matters: We live in a world where the majority of human beings believe the universe was built and is operated by one or more supernatural beings.Fortunately, I doubt this is really the case.A majority may be registered as religious, but a lot less actually believe.We shouldn't start talking about religion. Always gets muddy pretty fast.Analyst
janmb - 25/4/2008 10:57 AMQuoteWilliam Barton - 16/4/2008 6:17 PMI'll say what I always say in these matters: We live in a world where the majority of human beings believe the universe was built and is operated by one or more supernatural beings.Fortunately, I doubt this is really the case.A majority may be registered as religious, but a lot less actually believe.
William Barton - 16/4/2008 6:17 PMI'll say what I always say in these matters: We live in a world where the majority of human beings believe the universe was built and is operated by one or more supernatural beings.
Hoonte - 20/5/2008 5:46 AMI really don't see why to convince the hoax believers. I think the average hoax believer will not change their minds what ever I say. And does it really matter.. I know wat is true, trying to convince somebody doesn't make it any more true. So if somebody believes it is fake. fine.. If he wants to 'spread the word', fine..
Jorge - 18/4/2008 1:09 AMGranted, Apollo's computers were *really* memory-limited. The AGC had 36K 15-bit words of fixed memory, 2K of erasable memory while the AEA had 2K 18-bit words of fixed memory, 2K erasable. But the software was written *really* tightly, mostly in assembly language, and MIT and TRW threw a *lot* of clever people at it. You can really accomplish a lot with a little memory if you make every bit count.
Being experienced pilots didn't help the Apollo crews with the computers - they needed a lot of training to operate the primitive user interfaces of the AGC and AEA. (The AEA in particular - the user interface was a keypad with two numerical LED displays to allow the crew to "peek" and "poke" memory locations directly.)
And as you say, MCC played a big role. Due to those same memory limitations, the AGC had no capability for targeting translunar midcourse burns, the LOI burn, or the TEI burn - those were all computed on the ground.
So like you, I really can't see how they can claim it couldn't have been done - especially when the software design documents and the actual source code are all out there on the web so people can see how it *was* done.
kneecaps - 21/5/2008 2:39 PMQuoteJorge - 18/4/2008 1:09 AMGranted, Apollo's computers were *really* memory-limited. The AGC had 36K 15-bit words of fixed memory, 2K of erasable memory while the AEA had 2K 18-bit words of fixed memory, 2K erasable. But the software was written *really* tightly, mostly in assembly language, and MIT and TRW threw a *lot* of clever people at it. You can really accomplish a lot with a little memory if you make every bit count.The flight software was in my opinion almost a work of art. The depth and breath of function that was implemented in the programs is fantastic. The 'Art' of programming has been lost in today's age of inexpensive storage.
My summary is this. It would have been more difficult to fake the landings that it was to actually make the landings.