Sunday, July 19, 2009

"That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."

The Apollo 11 mission was the first manned mission to land on the Moon. It was the fifth human spaceflight of Project Apollo and the third human voyage to the Moon. Launched on July 16, 1969, it carried Mission Commander Neil Alden Armstrong, Command Module Pilot Michael Collins, and Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Eugene 'Buzz' Aldrin, Jr. On July 20, Armstrong and Aldrin became the first humans to walk on the Moon, while Collins orbited above. The mission fulfilled President John F. Kennedy's goal of reaching the moon by the end of the 1960s, which he expressed during a speech given before a joint session of Congress on May 25, 1961:

"Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, my copartners in Government, gentlemen-and ladies:

"The Constitution imposes upon me the obligation to "from time to time give to the Congress information of the State of the Union." While this has traditionally been interpreted as an annual affair, this tradition has been broken in extraordinary times.

"These are extraordinary times. And we face an extraordinary challenge. Our strength as well as our convictions have imposed upon this nation the role of leader in freedom's cause.

"No role in history could be more difficult or more important. We stand for freedom.

"That is our conviction for ourselves--that is our only commitment to others. No friend, no neutral and no adversary should think otherwise. We are not against any man--or any nation--or any system--except as it is hostile to freedom. Nor am I here to present a new military doctrine, bearing any one name or aimed at any one area. I am here to promote the freedom doctrine".

Part One of Four
I. (Introduction)
II. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PROGRESS AT HOME

Part Two of Four
III. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PROGRESS ABROAD
IV.
V. OUR PARTNERSHIP FOR SELF-DEFENSE

Part Three of Four
VI. OUR OWN MILITARY AND INTELLIGENCE SHIELD
VII. CIVIL DEFENSE
VIII. DISARMAMENT

Part Four of Four
IX. SPACE
X. CONCLUSION

IX. SPACE
"Finally, if we are to win the battle that is now going on around the world between freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievements in space which occurred in recent weeks should have made clear to us all, as did the Sputnik in 1957, the impact of this adventure on the minds of men everywhere, who are attempting to make a determination of which road they should take. Since early in my term, our efforts in space have been under review. With the advice of the Vice President, who is Chairman of the National Space Council, we have examined where we are strong and where we are not, where we may succeed and where we may not. Now it is time to take longer strides--time for a great new American enterprise--time for this nation to take a clearly leading role in space achievement, which in many ways may hold the key to our future on earth.

"I believe we possess all the resources and talents necessary. But the facts of the matter are that we have never made the national decisions or marshalled the national resources required for such leadership. We have never specified long-range goals on an urgent time schedule, or managed our resources and our time so as to insure their fulfillment.

"Recognizing the head start obtained by the Soviets with their large rocket engines, which gives them many months of leadtime, and recognizing the likelihood that they will exploit this lead for some time to come in still more impressive successes, we nevertheless are required to make new efforts on our own. For while we cannot guarantee that we shall one day be first, we can guarantee that any failure to make this effort will make us last. We take an additional risk by making it in full view of the world, but as shown by the feat of astronaut Shepard, this very risk enhances our stature when we are successful. But this is not merely a race. Space is open to us now; and our eagerness to share its meaning is not governed by the efforts of others. We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must fully share.

"I therefore ask the Congress, above and beyond the increases I have earlier requested for space activities, to provide the funds which are needed to meet the following national goals:

"First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish. We propose to accelerate the development of the appropriate lunar space craft. We propose to develop alternate liquid and solid fuel boosters, much larger than any now being developed, until certain which is superior. We propose additional funds for other engine development and for unmanned explorations--explorations which are particularly important for one purpose which this nation will never overlook: the survival of the man who first makes this daring flight. But in a very real sense, it will not be one man going to the moon--if we make this judgment affirmatively, it will be an entire nation. For all of us must work to put him there.

"Secondly, an additional 23 million dollars, together with 7 million dollars already available, will accelerate development of the Rover nuclear rocket. This gives promise of some day providing a means for even more exciting and ambitious exploration of space, perhaps beyond the moon, perhaps to the very end of the solar system itself.

"Third, an additional 50 million dollars will make the most of our present leadership, by accelerating the use of space satellites for world-wide communications.

"Fourth, an additional 75 million dollars--of which 53 million dollars is for the Weather Bureau--will help give us at the earliest possible time a satellite system for world-wide weather observation.

"Let it be clear--and this is a judgment which the Members of the Congress must finally make--let it be clear that I am asking the Congress and the country to accept a firm commitment to a new course of action, a course which will last for many years and carry very heavy costs: 531 million dollars in fiscal '62--an estimated seven to nine billion dollars additional over the next five years. If we are to go only half way, or reduce our sights in the face of difficulty, in my judgment it would be better not to go at all.

"Now this is a choice which this country must make, and I am confident that under the leadership of the Space Committees of the Congress, and the Appropriating Committees, that you will consider the matter carefully.

"It is a most important decision that we make as a nation. But all of you have lived through the last four years and have seen the significance of space and the adventures in space, and no one can predict with certainty what the ultimate meaning will be of mastery of space.

"I believe we should go to the moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not, we should decide today and this year.

"This decision demands a major national commitment of scientific and technical manpower, materiel and facilities, and the possibility of their diversion from other important activities where they are already thinly spread. It means a degree of dedication, organization and discipline which have not always characterized our research and development efforts. It means we cannot afford undue work stoppages, inflated costs of material or talent, wasteful interagency rivalries, or a high turnover of key personnel.

"New objectives and new money cannot solve these problems. They could in fact, aggravate them further--unless every scientist, every engineer, every serviceman, every technician, contractor, and civil servant gives his personal pledge that this nation will move forward, with the full speed of freedom, in the exciting adventure of space."

President Kennedy was died on November 22, 1963.
Apollo 11 lifted off at 13:32 UTC (9:32 a.m. EDT) July 16, 1969.
(From the Kennedy Space Center).

Landed on the Surface of the Moon at 20:17 UTC (4:17 PM ETD) on July 20.
("Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed")

Neil Armstrong stepped on the lunar surface at 02:56 UTC on July 21 (10:56pm EDT, July 20), 1969
("That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind")

Six and a half hours after landing, Buzz Aldrin joined him, describing the view as "Magnificent desolation"

After about seven hours of rest, they were awakened by Houston to prepare for the return flight. Two and a half hours later, at 17:54 UTC (1:54 PM EDT), they lifted off the lunar surface. (Mission had more than 2.5 hours afoot on the lunar surface).

On July 24 July 24, 1969 at 16:50:35 UTC (12:50:33 PM EDT) Apollo 11 splashed down in the Pacific Ocean 2,660 km (1,440 nm) east of Wake Island, or 380 km (210 nm) south of Johnston Atoll, and 24 km (15 mi) from the recovery ship, USS Hornet.

Wikipedia: Apollo 11
John F. Kennedy
JFK Presidential Library
UTC CLOCK

206 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 206 of 206
Ken Meyer said...

Shane, wrote, "I think the record shows who's been 'right' more often"

How often you've been wrong vs right is of little interest to most people; what is important is that your posting *now* is inaccurate. While some readers of these blogs have always preferred to read "facts" that reinforce their preconceived notions, others really would like to know what's going on with the product. It is for that latter group that I bother correcting your inaccuracies.

Along those lines, you were also quite wrong in your most recent post when you wrote, "Hawker Beechcraft never got closer than a casual visit to ABQ, during Chapter 11."

Actually, that is completely false. HBC had a whole team of guys in the data room for days on end reviewing nearly every angle of the Eclipse operation. In the end it turned out that HBC is in its own financial straits and couldn't take on this project at this time, but your idea that they never really looked at it in detail is just wrong.

Ken

Ken Meyer said...

Shane wrote, "If it's such an attractive asset, why are we waiting, a full four months after Chapter 7, with not even a sniff of the possibility of a deal?"

I'm afraid that's incorrect, too, Shane. The Chapter 7 Trustee has said there have been several bids and described some weeks ago how he was negotiating an Asset Purchase Agreement.

Everyone should be able to sniff the details of a deal very soon.

Ken

Unknown said...

Mr. Meyer is absolutely correct with the release time of the SBs. It happened miraculously when the furlough of 97% of the company was in effect just before the announcement of the CH7 and subsequent effective closure. That miffed some people to be sure, but in the end it's good for the fleet. There were a few "VPs" handling it and some paperwork happened to fly North a piece. Or should I say NNE. So much for EAC NDA's with respect to IP. That's why some folks were a bit upset. Employees got stiffed for their last check and were still reminded of the obligations under the invention and NDA in a letter dated 02/25/09. Specifically..." In light of your employment with EAC ending 02/19/09 it is imperative that you review your obligations under the attached INDA. Your obligations under your INDA continue in force following your termination..." It was a deal in the making for quite a while and in the end it's certainly good for the owners since there ARE capable folks handling the mods (FIKI that is...several shops are doing the Garmin mods) in a nice and compliant facility. The safety record of the EA500 is stellar no matter how you slice it. Simply put...nothing has went in. Can't say that for the early Cirrus to be sure. So long as the released SBs are better than the drafts it's good to go. As for the value of the IP, it's all going to the same place in the end anyway. Mr. Meyer I use your name since your one of the more vocal owners (if not the only one) on this blog and you provide good info that otherwise wouldn't get here. I sincerely wish you all the best as I do for anyone flying an E500.

Baron95 said...

Shane asked....What the hell were all those ABQ employees doing with their time, for all those years?
========================

Hi Shane, I'm far from being a process/documentation guy, far from it, I hate it, BUT, I know this...

It is very EASY for a company like Eclipse, with a plane that has multiple configurations (pre-ETT, Avio, Avio NG) and a fast changing set of fixes to be WAY behind on documentation and/or to lose configuration control. Par for the course, I'd say.

However, once they get to one stable config AvioNG 1.5+G400, it is relatively straightforward to document that, and update the fleet to that standard.

I'm pretty sure Eclipse had that last config reasonably well documented or they'd not have gotten EASA cert.

My guess (wild) is that Socata did not find sufficient doc for the fleet in the field, and/or found too many discrepancies between docs and actual aircraft.

Why they got so scared about that, I don't know. What did they expect?

If you remember the conversations on your blog between CW and myself on JOB 1 - we always said it was to do an inventory of docs, planes, mods, configs. The only disagreement is that I thought it would take a few million and CW thought it would take a few hundred thousand to do it. But it is somewhere in that range. Should not have scared an established manufacturer. Maybe it is because SOCATA never did a GA acquisition before.

Baron95 said...

Hi Julius,

This is how it works...way over simplified...you build a computer model...design test parts (fuselage barrels, wing boxes), buld scale or full size test parts, test them, see where they fail/deform/delam, calibrate your model, build final parts, test, if they are under limit, you reinforce, if they are over limit, you shave weight, then you start bringing things together, you start running your load and fatigue tests, you get measurements from sensors, check against predictions, keep going until you prove the design meets cert criteria, than keep going....if you are over margin, you adjust your models, and plan a block cut to save weight.

This latest problem happened at an interface point. These parts have NEVER before been put under test as a joint unit with full scale production parts. The stress readings on the sensors were not matching the model AND there was material delam on the fuselage join.

Why was the model so wrong (125% vs 150%)? Was this interface tested before on scale parts? Boeing is being tight lipped about this - not good. They better announce a fix and a schedule soon and get ZA001 in the air followed shortly by the other test planes.

I am very skeptical that the fix will be as simple as putting 36 2" square titanium patches on the plane and sending it on its way. I hope it is, but I don't believe it will be.

Phil Bell said...

New "headline post" is up!

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 206 of 206   Newer› Newest»