Quote:
On 2001-11-04 03:10, SAMU wrote:
The other Apollo spacecraft had cooling systems working. The way a cooling system works in space is by compressing the heat and radiating it.
|
Actually, there are at least two ways to get rid of excess heat in space. One is to radiate it. Another is the one I mentioned in my earler post: use a coolant to absorb the heat, and dump the coolant (and its heat) by venting it. I'm not sure what you mean by "compressing" the heat; I don't believe heat is compressible. Concentrating it, perhaps? or compressing a coolant fluid, as in a refrigerator? I am not aware of any active refrigeration systems on Apollo, except those in the space suit life support systems. If there was any active refrigeration, it would have been shut off to conserve energy (which was the most limited resource after the explosion). So yes, that would have tended to make the capsule warm up, not cool off -- *if* there was active refrigeration, and *if* the remaining heat sources in the cabin were producing more heat than passive radiation could remove.
Quote:
Quote:
"there's NO WAY they were not going to keep Apollo 13 in the Passive Thermal Roll. I understand that this was vital to prevent damage to several vital systems, including the heat shield."
And what would have done the damage? Heat.
|
As another poster pointed out, this is incorrect. The heat shield, for example, was not exposed to sunlight during the mission (it was covered by the Service Module); and even if it were, the heat wouldn't have bothered it. After all, it was designed to survive far greater heat during reentry (and dissipate that heat by ablation). The purpose of "passive thermal mode" was to keep all external parts of the spacecraft at moderate temperatures, rather than have some parts baking in the sun and other parts freezing in shadow. It was the temperature difference (gradient) that was undesirable.
Quote:
|
As to the mention of two EVA suits...
|
The problem with any space suit (either the launch-day pressure suits or the moon suits) is that they are not like regular clothing. They don't "breathe". For this reason, they require active thermoregulation systems -- coolant pumped through the liner -- and this means they consume power. Once again, that was the resource they could least afford.
My guess would be that an astronaut wearing a "turned-off" spacesuit would begin to overheat, sweat profusely, and eventually die of heat stroke.
Quote:
|
As mentioned in the initial message I suspect a covert mission. I don't think they staged an explosion. I think they may have staged an entire mission to cover a covert mission. If a covert mission, did they actually land? Possibly, possibly not. Did they bring a lander with them at all? Possibly, possibly not. Did they bring several tons of somthing else with them? Possibly,...possibly.
|
Well, I don't know about anybody else, but this sounds to me like pure paranoid conspiracy-mongering. What on earth (or off it) would the point be? And if there were such a covert mission, how has it been covered up so thoroughly for so long? There would have been hundreds of people involved. This argument can also be applied to the standard "moon hoax" theory, and it's equally powerful here.
The problem is, your proposed conspirators are both too smart (clever enough to organize a huge coverup and keep it secret for 40 years) and too dumb (not smart enough to figure out whether the cabin should get hot or cold).
So the idea of a vague conspiracy to do something-or-other isn't very persuasive to me. And you got to this because you have an intuitive suspicion (with no supporting evidence) that it got too cold in the spacecraft? Sorry, no sale.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Donnie B. on 2001-11-04 14:16 ]</font>