Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: OftheOhio
Perhaps someone can explain how this wrinkly, gappy, thin-skinned, taped-together, low-quality structure (below, as a composite of several official NASA photographs) is the best that 1969 US technology could manufacture as its testament to moon exploration. Or did the craft not simply not wear well in its travel to the moon?

We're now told that the technology required to transit the Van Allen Radiation Belts and go 238k to the moon and back has been lost to NASA via accidental destruction. The modern spacecraft Orion is now designed specifically to have the equivalent of six feet of lead shielding--like nothing Apollo had--to allow for safe human transit.


6 posted on 08/02/2020 4:25:56 PM PDT by rx (Truth will out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: rx

I explain it away as pictures of mock-ups. I made a few conceptual models myself back in the day. You have to remember this is back before CAD, back when the nation had real draftsmen. This thing was obviously very complex. It was the way we did things back in the day. I’ve personally seen several different style water and wind tunnels. They worked.


7 posted on 08/02/2020 4:55:16 PM PDT by OftheOhio (never could dance but always could kata - Romeo company)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: rx
A lot of the wrinkly stuff you see is not the pressure vessel, but very thin Mylar thermal shielding. The wrinkles developed over time from differential thermal stress as well as mechanical stresses from firing the thrusters and the DPS engine. The actual LM cabin pressure vessel varied in thickness, but at its thinnest it was about the same thickness as a metal beverage can. In other places it was thicker.

Transit time through the VAB zone was quite brief for the Apollo missions. We actually have fairly good data on VAB exposure rates, going back to the Gemini 10 flight, which was the first manned spacecraft to penetrate a portion of the Van Allen belts (the South Atlantic Anomaly). Maximum mission duration for Apollo was in the range of 12 days (Apollo 17 made it to 12 days, 14 hours). Of more concern for long-duration missions is primary cosmic radiation. There is some thought of using Orion for long-duration flights, either to Mars or an asteroid, so shielding for that kind of spacecraft would likely be heavier than needed for the relatively short-duration lunar missions. Shielding against primary cosmic radiation (primarily high-energy protons) is challenging because exposure comes from secondary reactions in the shielding itself (sometimes called build-up). The newer shielding is probably some compositte material that provides protection against the primary particles while minimizing secondary emissions.

20 posted on 08/06/2020 7:06:52 PM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson