If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic)   Pictures from the Gemini space program in the 1960s   (theatlantic.com) divider line 46
    More: Cool, Project Gemini, Apollo program, Langley Research Center, wind tunnels, Imperial Valley, flight controls, Baja California, Kennedy Space Center  
•       •       •

3228 clicks; posted to Geek » on 05 Apr 2012 at 11:14 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



46 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-04-05 10:09:19 AM
i40.tinypic.com

Looks like Aldrin is using a Pickett slide rule there, probably an N600-T, same model they used for the Apollo missions.
 
2012-04-05 10:13:19 AM

dittybopper: Looks like Aldrin is using a Pickett slide rule there, probably an N600-T, same model they used for the Apollo missions.


It still amazes me that a man walked on the moon before the invention of the pocket calculator.
 
2012-04-05 10:32:35 AM

nekom: dittybopper: Looks like Aldrin is using a Pickett slide rule there, probably an N600-T, same model they used for the Apollo missions.

It still amazes me that a man walked on the moon before the invention of the pocket calculator.


Want to be even more amazed? A typical *PHONE* today is way more powerful than the computers aboard the Apollo spacecraft. The computer that was used to land on the Moon had about 4 kilobytes worth of RAM, and about 72 kilobytes of ROM. In actual practice, though, it was half that: The computer used 16 bit "words", not a more typically modern 8 bit "byte", so functionally it would have been more like 2K RAM and 36K of ROM, and it loafed around at a sedate 2 MHz processing speed.

To put that into perspective, a dirt cheap throwaway cellphone these days has 10 Megabytes of memory.
 
2012-04-05 10:33:22 AM

nekom: dittybopper: Looks like Aldrin is using a Pickett slide rule there, probably an N600-T, same model they used for the Apollo missions.

It still amazes me that a man walked on the moon before the invention of the pocket calculator.


Still amazes me that there's more computer power in my phone than in that spacecraft
 
2012-04-05 10:36:03 AM
Yeah... what dittybopper said

/grumble
 
2012-04-05 10:36:39 AM
I'm just amazed the sharpness and blueness of those pictures, even compared to today.
 
2012-04-05 10:37:07 AM
cdn.theatlantic.com

HAI GUIZ! WHAT'S GOING ON HERE?

Gemini was probably my favorite of all the 1960s space programs, mainly because
it was all about basic research. Very hands-on and blue collar, in a high tech
sort of way.

And, in some ways, the Gemini capsule was a more advanced piece of
hardware than the Apollo. The basic Apollo capsule was designed during the
final stages of the Mercury program before they had any significant manned
spaceflight time. When they realized that they needed a whole lot of practical
experience before trying a moonshot, they comissioned the Gemini program,
and McDonnell/Douglas took a lot of input from the actual astronauts, which
resulted in a solid design.

Check out what Encyclopedia Astronautica says about it (new window)
 
2012-04-05 10:52:41 AM

dittybopper: nekom: dittybopper: Looks like Aldrin is using a Pickett slide rule there, probably an N600-T, same model they used for the Apollo missions.

It still amazes me that a man walked on the moon before the invention of the pocket calculator.

Want to be even more amazed? A typical *PHONE* today is way more powerful than the computers aboard the Apollo spacecraft. The computer that was used to land on the Moon had about 4 kilobytes worth of RAM, and about 72 kilobytes of ROM. In actual practice, though, it was half that: The computer used 16 bit "words", not a more typically modern 8 bit "byte", so functionally it would have been more like 2K RAM and 36K of ROM, and it loafed around at a sedate 2 MHz processing speed.

To put that into perspective, a dirt cheap throwaway cellphone these days has 10 Megabytes of memory.


Hell, one phone today probably has more computing power than all the
computers at NASA back in those days.
 
2012-04-05 10:55:01 AM

DjangoStonereaver: dittybopper: nekom: dittybopper: Looks like Aldrin is using a Pickett slide rule there, probably an N600-T, same model they used for the Apollo missions.

It still amazes me that a man walked on the moon before the invention of the pocket calculator.

Want to be even more amazed? A typical *PHONE* today is way more powerful than the computers aboard the Apollo spacecraft. The computer that was used to land on the Moon had about 4 kilobytes worth of RAM, and about 72 kilobytes of ROM. In actual practice, though, it was half that: The computer used 16 bit "words", not a more typically modern 8 bit "byte", so functionally it would have been more like 2K RAM and 36K of ROM, and it loafed around at a sedate 2 MHz processing speed.

To put that into perspective, a dirt cheap throwaway cellphone these days has 10 Megabytes of memory.

Hell, one phone today probably has more computing power than all the
computers at NASA back in those days.


Yet more confirmation that it ain't the hardware, it's how you use it.
 
2012-04-05 10:57:43 AM

dittybopper: DjangoStonereaver: dittybopper: nekom: dittybopper: Looks like Aldrin is using a Pickett slide rule there, probably an N600-T, same model they used for the Apollo missions.

It still amazes me that a man walked on the moon before the invention of the pocket calculator.

Want to be even more amazed? A typical *PHONE* today is way more powerful than the computers aboard the Apollo spacecraft. The computer that was used to land on the Moon had about 4 kilobytes worth of RAM, and about 72 kilobytes of ROM. In actual practice, though, it was half that: The computer used 16 bit "words", not a more typically modern 8 bit "byte", so functionally it would have been more like 2K RAM and 36K of ROM, and it loafed around at a sedate 2 MHz processing speed.

To put that into perspective, a dirt cheap throwaway cellphone these days has 10 Megabytes of memory.

Hell, one phone today probably has more computing power than all the
computers at NASA back in those days.

Yet more confirmation that it ain't the hardware, it's how you use it.


Amen. Physics can be a powerful ally.
 
2012-04-05 11:02:43 AM

DjangoStonereaver: Amen. Physics can be a powerful ally.


That, and when you really get right down to it, for 99.99% of the things you might need to do with math outside of accounting type stuff, 4 significant digits is accurate enough.

/My Pickett N200ES Pocket Trig has a broken screw.
//That gives me a geek sad.
///Still waiting on it getting fixed.
 
2012-04-05 11:22:19 AM
These pictures make me sad because:

- I wasnt alive to see this firsthand and be a part of it.

- I will probably be dead before this country does anything like it again.
 
2012-04-05 11:35:10 AM
I remember my father working on the Titan II and components of the instrument pod that was on the back of the capsule at Martin Marietta, now Lockheed-Martin, at the Middle River plant in the 60's. Of all the things he built during his career there, 1936 -1973, I think the Gemini program was what he was most proud of.
 
2012-04-05 11:39:17 AM
To the Greatest Generation and the Boomer Generation, fark YOU! I hate you, you farking douche bag nitwit retards. I hate you for continually gutting NASA funding, for denying us the chance at space.
 
2012-04-05 11:39:50 AM
Nuclear missile:
upload.wikimedia.org

Gemini:
www.wallyschirra.com

Not very subtle that this was about winning the Cold War.
 
2012-04-05 11:44:48 AM

Slaves2Darkness: To the Greatest Generation and the Boomer Generation, fark YOU! I hate you, you farking douche bag nitwit retards. I hate you for continually gutting NASA funding, for denying us the chance at space.


honestly, on the one hand i agree.

on the other hand, without faster than light travel, all the space walks ever made add up to little more than mental masturbation since there is nothing much out there of value that we can actually use.

hmm. knowledge is great, but is there any real reason to fund a ridiculously expensive space program?

there is NO reason to go to mars other than to say we did.
there is NO reason to back to the moon, moon dust makes a moon base impossible or at least highly impracticable.

there is NO reason for man to try to go to any of the other planets in our solar system and no way for man to reach beyond that.

Until Cochran invents the warp core I suppose there is no real point to space or space travel.
 
2012-04-05 11:44:57 AM
The first model I ever built was a Revell Gemini.

/Little brother blew it up with a firecracker when I was in school.
 
2012-04-05 11:45:20 AM

Nem Wan: Nuclear missile:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

Gemini:
[www.wallyschirra.com image 200x299]

Not very subtle that this was about winning the Cold War.


NASA used the Titan II more as a cost-saving measure than as a propaganda
tool, though you're not wholly off-base.
 
2012-04-05 11:46:00 AM
Not very subtle that this was about winning the Cold War.

They used the Titan missile to launch the Gemini because that's what was available. The Saturn I and V were the only rockets developed solely for the space program, but they came later.
 
2012-04-05 11:51:11 AM

Nem Wan: Nuclear missile:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

Gemini:
[www.wallyschirra.com image 200x299]

Not very subtle that this was about winning the Cold War.


They used the same booster because it was a reliable heavy lift vehicle, and it was available, and available immediately: Gemini was fast-tracked and didn't have the extended development time that Apollo had, so they couldn't really develop a civilian rocket in time.
 
2012-04-05 11:56:43 AM

dittybopper: Nem Wan: Nuclear missile:
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

Gemini:
[www.wallyschirra.com image 200x299]

Not very subtle that this was about winning the Cold War.

They used the same booster because it was a reliable heavy lift vehicle, and it was available, and available immediately: Gemini was fast-tracked and didn't have the extended development time that Apollo had, so they couldn't really develop a civilian rocket in time.


This. The Redstone/Atlas/Titan platforms were guided missle hardware, and the Saturn was the first "man-rated" launch vehicle. I recall reading in some archives of some of the Gemini and Apollo astronauts describing how the Titan's course corrections were pretty brutal for those in the capsule, as they weren't designed with biological payloads (people) in mind. By comparison, they stated the Saturn/Apollo stack was like driving a Cadillac.

I miss those days... Remember watching all of them from Glenn on up.
 
2012-04-05 12:11:35 PM
Baffles me that our government's animosity with Russia motivated the development of such awesomeness. Can anyone point to something awesome that's resulted from our animosity with Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan?

/crickets
 
2012-04-05 12:22:42 PM

ladyhawk: Baffles me that our government's animosity with Russia motivated the development of such awesomeness. Can anyone point to something awesome that's resulted from our animosity with Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan?

/crickets


I get a kick out of it when people lump Afghanistan in with Iraq and Iran. It's like they can't remember anything that happened more than a couple of years ago.
 
2012-04-05 12:27:04 PM
Lovely, inspiring photos.
 
2012-04-05 12:46:40 PM

TXEric: This. The Redstone/Atlas/Titan platforms were guided missle hardware, and the Saturn was the first "man-rated" launch vehicle.


I believe the original term was "man rated ammunition", which puts it in perspective how dangerous this all was.
Nothing like the threat of nuclear Armageddon and a communist wave to help engineers and politicians put the scoot on.

/The Devil in me wishes something like it would happen again.
/Maybe its just a decade or two of glory but, man, what a time to be alive.
 
2012-04-05 12:59:00 PM
Those space-o-nauts have no excuse for being so handsome.

Nice earth pics.
 
2012-04-05 01:12:20 PM

OtherLittleGuy: I'm just amazed the sharpness and blueness of those pictures, even compared to today.


I wonder if they were shooting 35mm or some higher-res format.
 
2012-04-05 01:28:26 PM

frepnog:
there is NO reason to back to the moon, moon dust makes a moon base impossible or at least highly impracticable.



Nazis figured it out...

images4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-04-05 01:41:45 PM
I can't imagine how Frank Borman and Jim Lovell spent 2 weeks in the "Gusmobile."
 
2012-04-05 02:14:56 PM

dittybopper: ladyhawk: Baffles me that our government's animosity with Russia motivated the development of such awesomeness. Can anyone point to something awesome that's resulted from our animosity with Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan?

/crickets

I get a kick out of it when people lump Afghanistan in with Iraq and Iran. It's like they can't remember anything that happened more than a couple of years ago.


Can anyone point to something awesome that's resulted from our animosity with Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan Iran or Iraq or Afghanistan? FTFM

It wasn't my intention to lump them together. More just a realization that the US conflicts since the Cold War haven't had "side benefits" (if you will) on the same scale. The US space program was born during the Cold War. While it was originally a child of hostility, the space program outlasted it's "parent" by years, grew up, moved out and resulted in some pretty epic science. (And yes, trolls, I'm well aware that there is still a military defense/offense component of the space program).

If there is something of similar awesomeness that's resulted from the US conflicts since the Cold War, I'd like to know. Medical advancements, technology advancements - things that advance us human beings in this universe. It would be a nice counterpoint to the evening news, you know?
 
2012-04-05 02:31:04 PM
I drew gazillions of pictures of Gemeni space capsules when I was a kid. So cool...
 
2012-04-05 02:34:54 PM

ladyhawk: dittybopper: ladyhawk: Baffles me that our government's animosity with Russia motivated the development of such awesomeness. Can anyone point to something awesome that's resulted from our animosity with Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan?

/crickets

I get a kick out of it when people lump Afghanistan in with Iraq and Iran. It's like they can't remember anything that happened more than a couple of years ago.

Can anyone point to something awesome that's resulted from our animosity with Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan Iran or Iraq or Afghanistan? FTFM


"Smart" bandages that combine compression with blood-clotting medicines. I used these in Iraq in 2006. They work.

That's just on the US side. The UK troops had this nifty little syrette for morphine (an upgrade from the syrette first used in WWII) that you could operate with one hand - in case you needed your other hand for, oh, a tourniquet or something - that also had a red dye marker on the end that automatically marked your hand if you used it to prevent overdoses.

That's just off the top of my head, but then again I was in medical/IDG. I'm sure the combat guys would have other ideas.

/the Brimstone missile, for instance
 
2012-04-05 02:35:01 PM

Coelacanth: The first model I ever built was a Revell Gemini.

/Little brother blew it up with a firecracker when I was in school.


Yeah, with detachable equipment module and working hatch doors ...Gemini was cool.
 
2012-04-05 03:09:38 PM

ladyhawk: If there is something of similar awesomeness that's resulted from the US conflicts since the Cold War, I'd like to know. Medical advancements, technology advancements - things that advance us human beings in this universe. It would be a nice counterpoint to the evening news, you know?


Look around you. Technology is advancing at an ever quickening pace. Medical advancements seem to happen every day. Remember that you won't be able to point to specific things except in hindsight.

Consider this: Back in 2001, nobody owned a "smartphone" as we currently understand them. We don't *NEED* conflicts to do amazing things, but conflicts are still going to happen, and technology is still going to advance.
 
2012-04-05 03:46:21 PM

Dick Gozinya: These pictures make me sad because:

- I wasnt alive to see this firsthand and be a part of it.

- I will probably be dead before this country does anything like it again.


You'll be dead in 2017? Sorry to hear.
 
2012-04-05 03:56:02 PM

bbfreak: Dick Gozinya: These pictures make me sad because:

- I wasnt alive to see this firsthand and be a part of it.

- I will probably be dead before this country does anything like it again.

You'll be dead in 2017? Sorry to hear.


You know what makes me sad? A thread about a nifty set of geeky cool pix turned into a typical Fark thread (though tamer than most).
 
2012-04-05 03:56:06 PM
Yes its unfortunate that we don't have a replacement for the shuttle right this moment but Boeing/Space X will be flying humans at least by 2017. Which would be a 5 year gap vs the Apollo-Shuttle 6 year gap. Have a problem with that? Blame Congress/Obama. No, as I've mentioned many times in other threads Obama isn't the only one to blame. It'd be great if we as a nation could be bold again when it comes to space and science, instead the future is uncertain yet even so we've got a great chance of having the most efficient/cheapest and robust space program ever in the next 5 to 10 years.
 
2012-04-05 04:27:30 PM
Space... you magnificently intriguing, nearby enemy and friend. There's a lot still to be done in space.

Saying there is no point in space travel until we invent a warp-core or the likes is... flawed logic. I understand your reasoning, but I don't believe a warp-core will be invented without gradual progress, or continual development. For that space needs to be explored. Whether manned or unmanned.

It is a definite certainty that our planet has a limited lifetime, same as our galaxy. If wen as a species, wish to survive, we should develop ourselves as a spacefaring people. With all combined intelligence of the human race, space offering limitless opportunities, yet being very restrictive, there would be a significant advantage to having that option.

At the rate populations is increasing, crisises arise, the rate of consumption, having another planet to plunder or populate wouldn't be such a bad thing.

Too bad that before interstellar travel is possible we'll need a few centuries of continuous development on new engine, material and construction technologies. That said, the moment exploitation of space is financially attractive a lot more players will join the space-game, and development can continue at an increased pace.

Once we reach that threshold however, interesting stuff might happen.
 
2012-04-05 04:53:18 PM
JJ Abrams is mixed up in this somehow....
cdn.theatlantic.com
 
2012-04-05 04:53:37 PM
No reason to go? In the asteroid belt there are probably gold nuggets the size of a canned ham 747. You don't have to get it to Earth, people will pay you to not bring it home.

There are now about 760 discovered exoplanets, and some of these are already interesting enough to start talking about how to get a closer look. We're going to find loads more.

Like Gemini was to Apollo, going to Mars and other places would help us learn how to go farther, reliably, whether manned or not.

"Man must explore..."
 
2012-04-05 05:03:33 PM

dittybopper: bbfreak: Dick Gozinya: These pictures make me sad because:

- I wasnt alive to see this firsthand and be a part of it.

- I will probably be dead before this country does anything like it again.

You'll be dead in 2017? Sorry to hear.

You know what makes me sad? A thread about a nifty set of geeky cool pix turned into a typical Fark thread (though tamer than most).


He was being dramatic, unless he really will be dead by 2017. Reusable space capsules will fly by 2017 at least, with Americans on board. If I had a choice of witnessing the Gemini space program and the private spaceflight programs of Space X, Boeing, etc I'd choose now. Its going to be a glorious amount of science/exploration and spaceflight in the next 10 years like we've never known before. It is somewhat worrisome that it gets a bit hazy past those 10 years, but I wouldn't throw in the towel just yet.
 
2012-04-05 07:09:10 PM
For you younger Farkers: Look at those photos, the richness, the colour. That is why we lamented the end of Kodachrome a couple of years back.
 
2012-04-05 09:17:44 PM
You should read "Lost Moon". Lovell talks about how the Titan rocket was a tough ride. You'd pull eight or nine gees on the way *up*, and the avionics would turn and twist the vehicle all over the place fishing for the right trajectory. Apollo was the "old man's" rocket, it only subjected them to three gees.
 
2012-04-05 09:59:58 PM

dittybopper: bbfreak: Dick Gozinya: These pictures make me sad because:

- I wasnt alive to see this firsthand and be a part of it.

- I will probably be dead before this country does anything like it again.

You'll be dead in 2017? Sorry to hear.

You know what makes me sad? A thread about a nifty set of geeky cool pix turned into a typical Fark thread (though tamer than most).


What makes me sad is the caption fail on the very first pic. Other than, these pics are amazing! I was 2 weeks old when that first picture was taken, and it was several years later before this was even on my radar. It wasn't until the 80's and I got to know a little bit about the arcade video games that were so very cool at the time and how elegantly written they were, because memory was still so expensive, that it occurred to me how much less these guys had to work with...
 
2012-04-06 02:12:41 AM
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/gemini040412/s_g01_431G04Hf . jpg

The first pic is in my wallpaper collection.
 
2012-04-06 02:29:47 AM
And I am looking forward to the first flight of the Orion spacecraft.

Splashdown party here I come!
 
Displayed 46 of 46 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report