Jay
Quote:

"Note that I didn't specify the temperature of the coffee."

SAMU: Yes you did

Jay
Quote:

"In your thermos example"

SAMU: My thermos example reads as follows:

Quote:

"Imagine a thermos bottle with warm coffee inside."

And in your very next sentence

Jay:"Yes. The intent was to introduce hot coffee into an environment that had previously been at equilibrium."

SAMU:you're not even reading your own messages.

Jay:You left out radiation in your example

SAMU: No I didn't.

Quote

"leaks out via conduction through the spring and the mouth to the hull where it radiates or is conducted away."

I note that you didn't give examples of other objects lower than 50.

As to the rest of your message, I'll answer the salient points. For you also the sapient points. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

Say we put a hollow metal sphere filled with air out in cislunar space. We keep it from rotating. The side facing the sun will get hot. The side facing away from the sun won't get as hot. Heat will conduct through the material from the hot side to the cold side. So the cold side will be a little warmer than the temperature it would reach without being connected to the hot side.

The hot side will radiate in all directions: back towards the sun out to the sides into the sphere. It will also conduct heat to the shaded side and to the air inside the sphere. Will the space side get a lot colder than the hot side? It will if the material conducts a lot slower than it radiates. The metals of the skin of Apollo (titanium) conduct quickly. Titanium absorbs and radiates rather slowly compared to it's conductivity.

Your black ball example is in error. The black ball will reach equilibrium faster but they will both reach the same equalibrium tempreture.

SAMU: 3) If an object at 38 degrees in sunlight radiates at a lower rate than it absorbs, what is it's steady state tempreture? Higher or lower than 38 degrees?

Jay:Higher. In the simple scenario the temperature of the object rises until its radiation rate is equivalent to the absorption rate.


SAMU: You can answer that question without knowing the material or reflectivity or "quantified" absorbtion rate or "quantified" radiation rate or "quantified" conduction rate. You don't say it's going to maintain the tempreture of 38 degrees by throwing all the heat comming in the hot side out of the cold side. You know that all points of the object will absorb more than they radiate until they reach the equalibrium tempreture that will cause them to radiate all the heat being absorbed.

Unless you compare the Apollo to the moon where the hot rocks on the sun side are conveyed to the extrasolar side by the moon's rotation where they cool at their radiation rate based on thier tempreture until they reach their dark side equalibrium or are conveyed back into the sunlight where they absorb heat again until they reach their sunside equalibrium. In the case of the moon the heat of the heat of hot rocks is conveyed to the cool side more slowly than they radiate. Apollo spacecraft titanium surfaces don't have that kind of gradient or internal insulating properties. It conducts heat to the cool side much faster than it radiates it. The tempreture of the cool side is pretty close to tempreture of the hot side.


I note you don't disput the acuracy of the examples regarding tempreture just assert that they don't apply to Apollo.

If you think that two objects of different materials, reflective, absorbtive, conductive and radiative rates side by side in the sun in space at equalibrium tempreture will be at different tempretures then that is the crux of your lack of general knowlege.


Tell you what, plug these figures into your computer.

A 1 X 10 X 10 inch alumunnium plate and a 1 X 10 X 10 inch steel plate in an oven at 400 degrees F will have an equalibrium tempreture of what? In space at 1AU what?

SAMU



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SAMU on 2001-11-13 21:55 ]</font>

I like this question, because (in my humble opinion) it strikes directly at the heart of the issue.

Is the plate face on to the sun...or edge on?

If the plate is face on, the equilibrium temperature will be greater than if it is edge on.

Is the plate polished to a mirror finish, or is it sanded to a matte finish? Is it painted white, or black?

(I went for a walk today, wearing a black t-shirt. I got HOT, even though it was a cool day...)

If the plate is rotating, then there's a LOT more math involved...

SAMU: you're trying too hard. Relax, do.

Jay [from] Utah: okay, yes. I'm not a physicist (I've played one in films) but I've read everything Asimov and Sagan and Clarke have published... I can't do the math, but I can grok the explanations... I trust you, and I hope you'll correct me when I boo-boo....

Silas


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Silas on 2001-11-13 22:41 ]</font>

I've now seen this link to a "NASA Kids" web page discussing temperature in relation to the ISS (http://kids.msfc.nasa.gov/News/2001/...tationCool.asp) posted here a couple of times. Specifically, reference to the statement, "The Sun can heat up one side of the Space Station to 250° F (121° C)!"

I thought folks might be interested to know that I just ran across a slightly less simplified version of the same information (simple enough for laypersons, rather than simple enough for children) at http://www.spacer.com/news/iss-01n.html. In fact, based on the language used and the publication dates, I suspect the kids' page was simplified from this very article. Note that here, it states in somewhat more precise language, "Without thermal controls, the temperature of the orbiting Space Station's Sun-facing side would soar to 250 degrees F (121 C), while thermometers on the dark side would plunge to minus 250 degrees F (-157 C)...Fortunately for the crew and all the Station's hardware, the ISS is designed and built with thermal balance in mind -- and it is equipped with a thermal control system that keeps the astronauts in their orbiting home cool and comfortable" (emphasis added). As in the Apollo spacecraft, this thermal control system comprises both active and passive components.

So, can we extrapolate meaningfully from a quoted temperature gradient along the surface of an ISS-shaped object with no thermal control system whatsoever (active or passive) in low earth orbit, to determine the interior air temperature in an Apollo capsule in cislunar space with at least passive thermal controls operating to minimize heat input from the sun?

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Salvius on 2001-11-14 00:57 ]</font>

Here's another.

Take two ballons one big and one little and put them in a stream of water side by side. Which one will fill faster and when full which one is more full? If you increase the pressure of the stream then the ballons will fill more but they will be equally full.

But this is all just more thermodynamics.(a priori)

Find and post the things without active heat exchange in cislunar space that support an assertion of lower tempreture than the things I have found that support an assertion of a higher tempreture.

That is called experimental (empirical) proof. And it is at hand.


SAMU

Another good one: http://pss.fit.edu/moldwin/thermal.pdf, "Spacecraft Thermal Control", by Prof. Mark Moldwin.

He gives an equation to calculate equilibrium temperature in orbit given the absorptivity and emissivity of the material. Unfortunately, his tables don't seem to have been reproduced in that pdf file. I dug around a little looking for values for those hypothetical aluminum and steel plates. Putting them in orbit (rather than in an oven, where heat transfer is dominated by conduction/convection, and is therefore an entirely different physical situation), and assuming the steel plate was painted white for some reason, by my amateurish calculations, the steel plate has an equilibrium temperature about 23% cooler than the aluminum plate. Make of that specific calculation what you will, the fact remains that different materials in space have different equilibrium temperatures, depending on their absorptivity (mostly in the 0.25-2.5 um wavelengths) and emissivity (>5 um wavelengths).

BA if this is too long...let me know and I'll edit it down more...

my comments are in italics.

SAMU says:
About your message.

Quote:

"Actually, I find the rebuttals of more interest."

Which one was your favorite?

SAMU

These are just some of them and they are cut up and out of order.

JayUtah:

First, albedo. Geometric albedo concerns only zero-phase diffuse reflection. It does not consider specular reflections, which in many substances accounts for a vastly different visual phenomenon. The moon's albedo is measured as low as 0.07 and as high as 0.12, meaning it diffusely reflects between 7% and 12% of the light it receives back toward the source of the light. The earth's albedo is somewhere in the 0.30 range, considerably brighter than the moon. In fact, when you see pictures of both the earth and the moon taken by outbound interplanetary spacecraft, you have to artificially brighten the moon because the correct exposure for the earth leaves the moon a rather unimpressive dark brown. This I didn't know.

The moon appears bright from earth because it's a the brightest object in an otherwise lightless environment. Look at a candle in daylight, then look at one in an otherwise dark room. This I understood

Second, asphalt. Or more properly, "bitumin asphalt concrete". "Concrete" is, in the general engineering sense, anything composed of an aggregate and a cement. In what we commonly call concrete, the aggregate is sand and gravel and the cement is Portland cement or other such compound. "Asphalt" (bitumin) is the cement in the asphalt concrete used in roadway construction. The aggregate is usually pea gravel. The bitumin asphalt holds the aggregate together in the same way Portland cement holds the aggregate together in concrete. This I've had some experience with - briefly having worked in the aggregates industry (a company I worked for temporarily recycled asphalt).

...snipped...

The thermal behavior of an object in space under solar radiation is directly affected most strongly by the reflectivity of that object. The Apollo command module was covered in aluminized Kapton insulation. The lunar module was covered in several blankets of aluminized Mylar insulation. The geometric albedo of these materials as applied to the spacecraft is in the 0.50 neighborhood. (It differs from the values for aluminum because the Kapton and Mylar sides were outboard.) I didn't know the material used in the lunar module

The Bad Astronomer:

I have pictures of asphalt I took that make it look bright white. How things look depends on many things, not the least of which is how you expose the film. There are pictures of the Moon's surface making it look pitch black, too. Worse, the illumination of the lunar surface depends on the angle of the sunlight with respect to the camera as well. Understand over/under exposure of film and it's effects on the appearance of surfaces.

Snipped...

David Simmons

snipped...

One more time. Aluminum reflects anywhere from 85% to 91%(depending upon surface treatment such as anodizing, roughening, etc.) of the light that falls on it. Solar energy at earth orbit is 0.033 cal/sec/cm^2. This means that about 0.0043 cal/sec/cm^2, as an assumed overall average, actually enters the aluminum. If the aluminum radiates as a black body the temperature of the skin would be about -36 deg C, or about -32 deg F. The astronauts would rapidly freeze to death. Interesting info here and I can confirm it too.

And, by the way, that heat input is only for those square cms. that are at right angles to the suns rays. Most parts of the capsule exterior would be at some grazing angle less than 90 deg and the heat input to those parts would go way down.I hadn't considered this originally myself - but referring back to JayUtah's information - this is presented there also.

snipped...

Karl:

I don't think any of the titanium was exposed so it's not relevant. Metal tends to run hot, (like the polished aluminum). White paint tends to run cold, it it used for radiators. Epoxy white paint Absorptance = .2 Emittance = .85, Acrylic white paint Absoptance = .22 Emittance = .88

The exposed surface of the LM and CM were multilayer thermal blankets.

From another post:

As an interesting part of the side issue, a polished aluminum mirror put in orbit to perform the function you are describing would run very hot, the a/e values for that material are listed as: absorptance = .35 and emittance = .04 for and a/e of 8.75

A 'mirror' made of black paint would run much cooler: absorptance = .97 emittance = .91

If you really want it to run cold, make your mirror out of Optical Solar Reflectors ( silvered quartz mirrors with Teflon): absorptance = .08 emittance = .81

It's amazing how intutition fails totally when dealing with thermal optical properties.

Information I didn't have, but that can be confirmed...

K. Hovis:

snipped... The LM's were made primarily from Titanium, the outer skins being .015" thick in many places. Titanium loses 10% of its strength and will enlongate about 10% of a part's length when exposed to 200 deg. F heating for 1/2 hr. (Check MIL-HNDBK-5F for 6Al-4V Ti).Milspecs I understand...and I know where to check the info

Donnie B.:

Snipped...

The main question is, if an Apollo spacecraft lost nearly all electrical power, would the cabin warm up or cool down?

Your own evidence shows that the designers were coping with a major heat buildup problem(under normal conditions) -- so much so that they had to provide lots of active cooling. The issue becomes, what is the source of that heat? We know of three possibilities: solar radiation, the astronauts' metabolisms, and the onboard electronic equipment. Which was the main contributor?

If it was the electronics, your claim falls apart, because all the CM systems were shut down, and the LM systems were running at a minimum level (and still being actively cooled, I might add -- you can't use a computer as a space heater without causing it to fail in both capacities).

OK, so how do we determine where the heat came from? We can discount the astronauts themselves. Their body heat wasn't nearly enough to require all that refrigeration. So was it the sun, or the electronics? I say that the presence of the radiators proves that it was the latter.

Remember, weight is critical on any space mission, and the lunar missions especially so. Refrigeration systems are heavy, and the more heat they have to dissipate, the heavier they get. So a spacecraft designer is going to do everything in his power to reduce the amount of heat that has to be removed.

But an electrical or electronic system can only get so efficient (given a particular era's technology). This was in the infancy of mircocircuits, and even a modern computer puts out quite a bit of heat. So for a given roster of electrical gear, there would be an irreducible heat budget.

But solar gain is something you can do something about, and it's not only easy to do but costs nothing in weight. That's to make the spacecraft as highly reflective as possible, reducing the solar gain so as to make the cooling system's job that much easier. A shiny surface doesn't weigh any more than a dark one -- maybe less.

In summary:
- Apollo had active cooling systems.
- So, Apollo had to get rid of excess heat.
- So, Apollo would have been designed to absorb as little solar heat as possible.
- So, since it still needed radiators even though it was reflective, the heat source was something else.
- So, the heat source was internal electrical equipment.
- The electrical equipment was nearly all turned off after the explosion on 13.
- Therefore, the cabin got cold.

I've said all I care to say on this topic. Have a nice, paranoia-filled life, SAMU.

Those old electronics ran hot. They still have cooling problems with electronics. That was one of the assumed problems with exceeding a 586 processor - cooling it.

JayUtah

snipped...

Quote:
B.A.:The Moon is not a specular reflector

True, but asphalt is. I wasn't trying to describe the moon as much as I was trying to point out that geometric albedo is a poor quantification of the total lighting properties of a surface. Something like asphalt with a "low" albedo can actually reflect enough light in the specular sense (not measured by albedo) to impair vision. The glare off the asphalt roadways here in Utah is quite striking.

You mention the moon's emphasis on zero-phase lighting. That's correct, visually verifiable from earth, and quite evident in the Apollo lunar surface photographs. Again, geometric albedo does not account for these "special" lighting effects, hence it is a poor quantification for the lighting properties of the lunar surface.

Quote:
SAMU:You want to talk metals? Now you're talking my bussines.

The skill of cutting metal to a pattern given to you by someone else is not equivalent to the skill of determining those patterns. That happens to be my busines. When you cut tailcones or wing spars or what have you, you're simply following the instructions given to you by people like me who work out the designs for you. I've heard this many times when refering to engineers. That the person actually doing the job and working with the material knows more - that's simply not the case - as for understanding the all the considerations that go into the best material - I'll leave that to the engineers. I'll just constrain my *****es to not enough room to actually perform necessary maintenance when they do the layout design for a peice of equipment.

snipped...

The arguments you offer in favor of your assertions demonstrate that you don't understand thermodynamics. A proper understanding of thermodynamics is necessary to the claims you're making. Not only do you seem rather ignorant on the subject of thermodynamics, you seem especially antagonistic to those who are trying to educate you. I enjoyed the discussions regarding thermodynamics at the last job I had. This is sounding familiar, and reinforcing that which I was learning about there.

snipped...

Quote:
SAMU: there is no legitimatly supported theory as to why Apollo 13 got cold when enormous expense is invested in throwing a cooling system that is designed to manage deadly heat up there and it "has to be turned off".

What do you mean by "legitimately supported"? The thermodynamics numbers others have posted seem correct to me. The only quantitative arguments you have made don't constitute valid thermodynamics.

The cooling of the command module has been explained to you as plainly as it can be. The primary source of heat on the Apollo spacecraft was the electronic equipment. The heat production of the astronauts and that absorbed from the sun is very small in comparison. If you run the electronic equipment you must also run the cooling units. If you turn off the electronic equipment you do not need the cooling units. You must either run both or neither.

Without that electronic equipment, the only sources of heat are the astronauts themselves and the radiant heat absorbed from the sun. You've been shown the black-body figures for an object in that situation, which you have sidestepped.

snipped....

Christopher Ferro

Jay,

Well, I have come across one bit of albedo stuff online that talks about how difficult it is to compare albedos on Earth with that of objects in space.

http://www.roboticobservatory.com/je...ech/albedo.htm

I will note that comparing the albedo of grass to that of lunar surface material as this author does, is not a "fair" comparison either. Grass looks green to us mostly because chlorophyll absorbs most of the red and blue wavelengths it receives. The brightness of grass is also due to our eyes/brains manipulating the contrast. The problem there is that one can measure albedo in various wavelengths.

Here is a report from an instrument called GOME:

http://www.sron.nl/divisions/eos/gome_moon.html

It shows the albedo falling withing the 6-12% zone, on average, with what seems to be a slight, linear increase in albedo from Near UV to Near IR wavelengths.

CJSF

Great links - but JayUtah got to say that first. Something else to add...

JayUtah

Christopher, excellent material!

I especially like Medkeff's straightforward and comprehensive examination of the geometry of the lunar regolith and its effect on light. me too. Not only does this dispel the incorrect use of albedo as a practical measure of lighting properties, it gives the beginner something of a foothold on what is otherwise an obscure bit of science. Well I can say I understood a good portion of what was said here.

It's difficult to convey in purely textual form the geometrical nature of the behavior of reflecting light. A few years ago I came across a visual representation scheme for incident and reflected light used by computer graphics people, namely Cook, Torrance, and Sparrow. It represents the intensity of reflected light in any direction by a vector along that direction whose magnitude is proportional to the reflection intensity. The set of all such vectors form a surface composed of the vector heads, and which conveys for some incident light direction the total character of the reflected light. Would you believe this...in computer animation we use specular, blinn, phonng, and someother type of light reflectivity - and we can layer the info - hey maybe I can create an accurate moon now! Not likely - but I can try.

JayUtah

Quote:
BA and JayUtah, you two mention "specular reflector" vs. the albedo. I do not understand what you mean. Could you please explain?

The various definitions of albedo do not generally account for any lighting conditions other than Lambert surfaces -- those which reflect light uniformly in all directions regardless of incident light angle. This I didn't know.

In contrast to the Lambertian surfaces we find materials which reflect greater amounts of light in a particular direction congruent to the incident light angle. We term this "specular reflection". Roadway glare is one example of it.Yup! need this for the computer animation stuff - but I went about it through trial and error - now I have info that I can actually plug into the system that it can use - and hopefully *look* correct. Easier than playing and rendering for 4 or 5 hours.

snipped...

_________________
Time crumbles things; everything grows old under the power of Time and is forgotten through the lapse of Time.
~Aristotle

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Trish on 2001-11-14 04:55 ]</font>

Maybe you did. Or at least, HVAC 101.

The heat arriving from the sun is being radiated. If the "shiny side" of the capsule is sufficiently reflective, very liitle heat will be absorbed and conducted into the capsule.

The heat in the capsule is conducted through the skin and then radiated into space.

Look at the insulation commonly used on HVAC (air conditioning) ducting. It is fiberglass bating with an aluminum skin on one side. The aluminum faces out to reflect radiated heat, but some is absorbed, hence the bating to lessen conduction into the ducting, so the cool air stays cool on a sunny day.

Now try a cold day when the duct is carrying hot air. The air's heat conducts (inefficiently) through the bating and the aluminum and radiates away, while the aluminum still reflects the sunlight.

You could try painting your house with aluminized paint. This might lower your cooling bills in the summer, but those winter heating bills would be nasty.

SAMU: Tell you what, plug these figures into your computer.

I don't have the software anymore. As I said, it's quite expensive. It's expensive because thermal equilibrium of a complex constructed object in space under radiation conditions is not just a matter of adding some watts here and subtracting some watts there.

In all of this hoo-hah you've missed the main point of my length article. I tend to ramble, so I understand. I'll be very concise. Just a few questions.

1. Must all systems at thermal equilibrium also be isothermal?

2. What does "form factor" mean in the context of radiative heat transfer?

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-6/ch1.htm


Aurora 7 SECOND U.S. MANNED ORBITAL SPACE FLIGHT, MAY 24, 1962 M. Scott Carpenter

Cabin and pressure-suit temperatures were high but not intolerable

See
Life Support System

2 thirds down the page

Note

[MISSING] Figure 1-9.-Schematic diagram of the environmental control system.

Temprature remarks edited from transscript of flight recorder P=pilot CC=capcom

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi.../appendix2.htm

Just above halfway down the page.

CAPE CANAVERAL (FIRST PASS)


00 50 17
CC
Okay. Blood pressure starting. We suggest that you do not exercise during the blood pressure since your temp is up.

00 50 23.5
P
Roger. This is the story on the suit temp. I have increased two 10-degree marks since lift-off. And now about-well, 15 degrees above launch mark. My steam vent temperatures read 69 and 80 [degrees]. I'll take one more stab at increasing or decreasing temperature by increasing flow rate. If this doesn't work, I'll turn them off and start lower Over.

4 minutes later

00 54 28.5
CC
Roger. Your suit temperature is down a bit at this point.

00 54 31.5
P
Say again, Deke.

00 54 33
CC
Your suit temperature is down, which is good.

00 54 36.5
P
Well, that's a result of an increase in flow lately. I would think that-I'll try increasing rather than decreasing.

One minute later.


00 55 37
CC
Roger. Okay. The Cape now advises to keep the suit setting where it was since it's coming down.

00 55 44.5
P
Roger. I-for your information, I have increased it just slightly. My readings now are 7 [psia] and 7 [psia] on suit and cabin. What are my inverter temperatures and thruster line temperatures, Deke? Are they okay?

00 56 29
CC
Roger. We're going to have the flare in approximately 2 minutes. We'll give you a read out on your temperatures.



00 57 00
CC
Roger. Understand. All systems okay. We have your temperatures. Your 150 inverter, 152 [degrees]. Your 250 inverter, 167 [degrees]. Do you copy? Over.

01 01 29
P
Roger. Suit temperature is now 70 [degrees]. Suit temperature is 70 [degrees]. Steam exhaust is 70 [degrees]. The cabin exhaust is 80 [degrees].

01 01 43
CC
Roger. Do you confirm-do you have your-back down to the black scribe mark?

01 01 51
P
That is negative. I have then both set on seven at this time and-an increase in setting resulted in a decrease- in suit temperature. I think I'd like to try-try them at this setting a little while longer. Over.


01 11 10
P
Roger. I've been reading you for some time. I've tried to contact you on HF with no success. My status is good; the capsule status is good; control mode is fly-by-wire; gyros caged; maneuver is off. The fuel reads 74-85 [percent). Oxygen is 87-100 [percent]. The cabin temperature is a bit high at 104 [degrees]. The suit-steam vent temperature is 70 [degrees], and cabin is 80 [degrees], but I believe they're coming down. Over.


01 13 13.5
CC
Did you-could you comment on whether you are comfortable or not-would you . . . a 102 [degrees] on body temperature.

01 13 21
P
No, I don't believe that's correct. My visor was open; it is now closed. I can't imagine I'm that hot. I'm quite comfortable, but sweating some.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi.../appendix3.htm


01 19 51
P
Excess cabin-water light came on at that time. I'll have to go back all the way down and off. Suit is-still high. The cabin-water gage is reading-plus 9, which is hard to believe.

01 20 15
P
My temperature, my body temperature doesn't feel . . . feel bad at all. My suit-yes, my suit temperature is down now, also.

01 20 32.5
P
But the steam vent temperature is-still about-70 [degrees].

01 27 33.5
P
Roger, Guaymas, loud and clear. My control mode is now fly-by-wire; gyros are caged, I'm in-maneuver is off. I'll go to automatic mode directly. My status good; the capsule status is good. The fuel is 69-69 [percent], oxygen is 88-100 [percent]. The cabin steam vent has gone to plus 10, I believe that's a bad gage reading, and suit temperature steam vent is coming down slowly, now reading 68 [degrees]. Over.

01 28 16
CC
Roger. Understand 68 [degrees]. How is your temperature comfort? Over

01 28 19
P
Roger. My body comfort is good. I am tracking now a very small particle, one isolated particle, about-there is another, very small, could be a light snowflake.

01 28 40
CC
Roger. We're reading-we're having a-a bad body temperature reading on you, 102.4 [degrees], probably erroneous.

01 28 48.5
P
I can't believe it. My suit temperature shows 60 [degrees] and I feel quite comfortable. I'm sure I would be sweating more than this if my temperature were 102 [degrees].

01 28 59.5
CC
Your suit-inlet temperature, near 61 [degrees], so it looks pretty good.

0129 04
P
Roger.

01 36 08
C
Could you give us a cabin steam and suit temperature, please?

01 36 11
P
Roger. Suit steam is 69 [degrees] and cabin is plus 11. That dropped down very suddenly when the excess cabin-water light came on. I think I'm going to-increase . . . I'll try to increase suit-water flow one more time. If that doesn't work I'll drop-down-to closed and start over again.

01 36 46
CC
Aurora Seven, cut back your cabin water.

01 36 49
P
Okay. Cabin water going back. I'll start now at two. This is 20 degrees below launch value.

01 48 27
P
Roger, Canary. My status is good; the capsule status is good; my control mode is automatic; gyros normal, maneuver off. Fuel 51-68 [percent], oxygen 85-100 [percent]; my cabin steam vent temperature now is picking up and reading about 19, suit steam vent temperature still reading 70 [degrees]. I have backed it off to zero and reset it at one. Over.

01 49 09
CC
. . . cabin exhaust temperature. Over.

01 49 11.5
P
Cabin exhaust temperature is climbing back up to 19. Over.

01 57 01
CC
Aurora Seven, how are you feeling? Your body temperature is up somewhat. How do you feel? Over.

01 57 07.5
P
Roger. I feel fine. Last time around I-someone told me it was 102 [degrees]. I don't feel, you know, like I'm that hot. Cabin temperature is 101 [degrees]. I'm reading 101 [degrees], and the suit temperature indicates 74 [degrees].

01 57 38.5
CC
Are you perspiring any?

01 57 41.5
P
Slightly, on my forehead.

01 57 50
P
Since turning down the suit water valve, the suit steam vent temperature has climbed slightly-am increasing from one to two at this time. This should bring it down. The cabin steam vent temperature has built back up to 40 [degrees].

01 58 27.5
CC
Roger, Aurora Seven, everything looks okay now. We seem to have lost the body temperature readings from previous stations. We are reading 102 [degrees] right now, but as long as you feel okay right now.

01 58 42
P
Roger, I feel fine.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi.../appendix4.htm

02 04 38.5
P
Roger. My status is good; the capsule status is good; my control mode is automatic; gyros are normal; maneuver is off. Control fuel is 51 [percent] and 69 [percent]; oxygen is 82 [percent] and 100 [percent]. That's about all except I have, so far, been unable to get my suit steam vent temperature down much below 70 [degrees]. Steam vent, or the water control valve setting at this time is 4 at the prelaunch mark. It may be too high. Turning it off at this time and going to three, which is where the cabin is set. Over.

02 11 13
P
That is negative Except this problem with steam vent temperature. I'm going-I'll open the visor a minute; that'll cool-it seems cooler with the visor open.

02 12 28
CC
Aurora Seven, Indian Ocean Cap Com. I do not read your transmission.

02 12 32
P
Roger. Indian Cap Com, Aurora Seven

02 12 35.5
CC
Out.

02 15 11.5
P
Well, I have-I am in record only, and I am getting warm now.

02 15 34
P
Don't know what to with the cabin.

02 15 45
P
I'll turn it up and see what happens.

02 17 45
P
That's as close to zero as I can make it. At 02 17 49, my rates are zero and attitudes are zero plus, or at zero, minus 3, minus 48. Let those rest awhile, and I'll see what we can do about suit temperature.

02 18 14
P
Cabin is rising. Suit temperature seems to be rising too. I'm going to let it go out until 02 25 00 to see if this is going to bring it down some.

02 18 49
P
I don't need to exercise. I really don't feel I need the exercise. I would get too warm.

02 23 28
P
Roger. My status is good; control mode is fly-by-wire; gyros normal; maneuver off. Fuel is 45-6-70 [percent], that's 45-70 [percent], and oxygen is 84-100 [percent]. I have only one minor problem, and that is my inability to get the suit steam vent temperature down, Deke.

02 23 56.5
P
Roger. What's it running now?

02 23 58.5
CC
Well, I'm reading 70 [degrees]. I'm really a little at a loss as to how to get it down, my suit-water valve is set now past the marks. This doesn't seem to being it down, and neither does putting it . . . negative. That's wrong. The cabin was past the marks The suit temperature is at prelaunch value of about four. I'm going to go to a setting of plus 6 at this time and see if that will bring it down below 70 [degrees]. Over.

02 24 40.5
CC
Okay. Fine. We're indicating 84 [degrees] suit which is a bit high.

02 24 44.5
P
Roger. My gage shows 7,76 [degrees] on the suit.

02 24 50
CC
Rog.

02 28 07
P
Cabin temperature is 107 [degrees].

02 28 10.5
CC
Cabin 107 [degrees].

02 28 48.5
CC
Sunrise 04.19 00.

02 23 54.5
P
Roger. Copy.

02 28 59
CC
Well, it sounds like you're doing real well up there, Dad.

02 29 01.5
P
Roger. It's a little warm.

02 29 04
CC
I suspect so.

02 30 05.5
CC
Would you give us another readout on your suit steam temp? Has this changed any?

02 30 09.5
P
It may have gone down just a tad. It's about zero now; I mean about 70 [degrees] now. It was a little bit higher. The visor is closed and I'm beginning to feel a little cooler.

02 30 24
CC
Very good.

02 30 27
CC
We indicated 2-degree drop at suit inlet, so it sounds like you're making out a bit.

02 33 22.5
CC
Roger. Could you give us . . . could you give us cabin temperature?

02 33 31.5
P
Roger. Cabin temperature is 102 [degrees] at this time.

02 33 37
CC
Roger. What is the suit temperature?

02 33 41
P
Okay, stand by.

02 33 49.5
P
Suit temperature is 74 [degrees]; suit steam exhaust is 71 [degrees].

02 33 58.5
CC
Roger. Understand. Are you feeling a little more comfortable at this time?

02 34 02.5
P
I don't know. I'm still warm and still perspiring, but not really uncomfortable. I would like to I would like to nail this suit temperature problem down. It-for all practical purposes, it's uncontrollable as far as I can see.

02 34 26.5
CC
Roger. Understand. You might have to wait a few more minutes before this takes effect. You are on No. 6. Is that right?

02 34 34
P
That is right. Suit temperature is No. 6.

02 34 39
CC
Roger. Systems reports that your suit temperature has dropped 2 degrees over station, if that's any encouragement to you.

02 34 44.5
P
Roger. Thank you. It is.

02 39 35
P
I guess I'd better try to get that xylose pill out. I hate to do this.

02 40 57.5
P
Oh yes. There is the xylose pill. It didn't melt. All tie rest of the stuff in here did melt.

02 41 31
P
Okay. Xylose pill being consumed at 02 41 35 The rest of the food is pretty much of a mess. Can't stand this cabin temperature.

02 43 51
P
Roger, George. My control mode is manual. The gyros are caged, maneuver is off. Fuel is 45 and 64 [percent], a little ahead of schedule. Oxygen reads 82-100 [percent]. Steam vent temperature in the suit is dropping slightly. It's a little below 70 [degrees]. Cabin is 4.6 [psia]. Suit temperature has dropped to about 71 [degrees] now. All the power is good, and here is A blood pressure. Over.

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi.../appendix5.htm


02 51 43
CC
. . . temperature exhaust . . . steam exhaust?

02 51 39
P
Roger. Suit exhaust is 70 [degrees]. Cabin exhaust is 49 [degrees].

02 59 16.5
P
Roger. Control mode is manual, gyros normal, maneuver off. Fuel is 45-50 [percent]. Balloon is out. Oxygen 81-100 [percent]. And my status is good. The capsule status is good, except I'm unable to get a reasonable suit steam exhaust temperature. Still reading 70 [degrees]. Over.

02 59 42
CC
Roger, seems to me as long as suit inlet is going down that you could continue to increase flow until you feel comfortable.

02 59 52.5
P
Roger.

02 59 55
CC
Understand you're GO for orbit three.

02 59 58
P
I am-Roger. I am GO for orbit three.

03 00 00
CC
Seven, this is California.

03 00 12
P
Go, California.

03 00 15
CC
General Kraft is still somewhat concerned about auto fuel. Use as little auto; use no auto fuel unless you have to prior to retrosequence time. And I think maybe you might increase flow to your inverter heat exchanger to try to bring the temperature down. They are not critical yet, however.

03 00 38
P
Roger, I have gone from 4 to 5 on the inverter at this time. And I think I'll increase just a tad on the suit.

03 00 49.5
CC
Roger. You're sounding good here. Give you a period of quiet while I send Z and R cal.

03 00 55.5
P
Roger.


03 07 32
P
Roger. Control mode, manual; gyros normal; the maneuver switch is off.. Fuel is 45-45 [percent]; oxygen is 70 [percent], or, correction, oxygen is 80 and 100 [percent]. Suit temperature is 68 [degrees], now and coming down pretty well. Suit steam vent temperature is 69 [degrees], and beginning to be a little more comfortable. Over.

03 08 12
CC
Roger, and how do you feel, now?

03 08 15
P
I feel pretty good. Still warm.

03 08 18
CC
Okay, sounds like you'll be all right.

03 09 28.5
CC
Roger. Surgeon suggests that you drink as much water as you can.

03 10 11.5
CC
Would you give us your-your temperature control valve settings, please''

03 10 20
P
Roger, suit is 7.5, cabin is about 10. That's 10 on the cabin and 5 on the inverters.

03 28 13
P
The cabin temperature has dropped considerable now, and the setting I have on the suit is 7.

03 28 20.5
P
Am going to increase it just a tad more.

03 28 40
P
My suit valve, water valve temperature now is-about 8.

03 39 31.5
P
Roger. My status is good, the capsule status is good. I am in drifting flight on manual control. Gyros are caged. The fuel reads 45-42 [percent], oxygen 79-100 [percent]. Steam vent temperatures both read 65 [degrees] now; suit temperature has gone down nicely. It is now 62 [degrees], and an the power is good. The blood pressure is starting at this time. I've just finished taking some MIT pictures, and that is all I have to report at this time.

03 40 16.5
CC
Roger, Aurora Seven I copy your control mode manual; gyro caged; fuel 45-42 [percent]; oxygen 79-100 [percent]; and I did not hear the last part of your transmission. How do-

03 40 31.5
P
Roger. My status is good; the suit temperature has reduced considerably; steam vent temperatures now read 69 [degrees] on cabin and suit, suit temperature is 62 [degrees], and cabin temperature is 101 [degrees]. Over.

03 40 12.5
CC
Roger. Suit temperature 62 [degrees], and cabin temperature 101 [degrees]. Your blood pressure is starting-and understand you are on the manual. Understand also you are drifting for awhile.

03 41 10
P
That is Roger. I am

56 19.5
P
Excess cabin water light is on at this time, 03 56 24. Am going to turn it down just a tad- so it will be just about where the suit is. I would say, let's see, from that, that it jumped down to freezing.

03 57 08
P
Roger. Deke, my control mode is manual; gyros are caged; the maneuver switch is off. My fuel reads 45 and 42 [percent]; the oxygen is reading 76 and 100 [percent]; steam vent temperatures are 68 [degrees] on the suit and I just got excess cabin water light; the needle dropped down to 20. Reset cabin water at about 6 and in this capsule it seems optimum settings are right between 6 and 7. Outside of that, all things, all systems are good. And blood pressure is starting now

04 06 32.5
CC
You say visor is open?

04 06 35.5
P
That's negative. I did not open it. I won't open it until I get through with these readings. Phecda now extincts at 1.7 in the mid, in mid position between the haze layer and the earth. Okay, Woomera, my-my status is very good. The suit temperature is coming down substantially. Steam vent temperature is not down much, but the suit environment temperature is 60 [degrees]. I'm quite comfortable. Cabin temperature is 101 [degrees]; cabin is holding an indicated 4.8; oxygen is 75-100 [percent], all d-c power continues to be good, 20 Amps; both a-e busses are good; fuel reads 46 and 40 [percent].]. I am in drifting flight. I have had plenty of water to drink. The visor is coming open now. And blood pressure is coming your way at this time.

04 08 00.5
P
Hello, Woomera, Woomera Cap Com, this is Aurora Seven. Did you copy my last? Over.

04 09 27.5
P
Cabin temperature, cabin water flow is all the way off and reducing back to about 7.5 now a little bit less. At this time cabin steam vent going to record only.

04 09 52.5
P
Cabin steam vent is 10; suit steam vent is 62. I would like to have a little bit more pad on the temperature, but I can't seem to get it. The suit temperature is 60 [degrees]; the cabin temperature continues at 102 [degrees]. I have 22 minutes and 20 seconds left for retrofire. I think that I will try to get some of this equipment stowed at this time.

04 11 07.5
P
There is the moon.

04 11 31.5
P
Looks no different-here than it does on the ground.

04 11 51
P
Visor is open and the visor is coming closed now at this time.

04 12 28
P
I have put the moon-in the center of the window and it just drifts very, very little.

04 12 49.5
P
There seems to be a stagnant place in the, my helmet. The suit is cool, but along my face it's warm.

04 51 12.5
P
Snorkle override now. Emergency flow rate on. Emergency main fuse switch at 15 [1,000 ft.], standing by for the main chute at 10 [1,000 ft.].

04 51 33.5
P
Cabin pressure, cabin altimeter agree on altitude. Should be 13,000 [feet] now.Mark 10; I see the main is out, and reefed, and it looks good to me. The main chute is out. Landing bag goes to auto now. The drogue has fallen away. I see a perfect chute, visor open. Cabin temperature is only 110 [degrees] at this point. Helmet hose is off.

04 52 39.5
P
Does anybody read. Does anybody read Aurora Seven? Over.

04 52 54.5
P
Hello, any Mercury recovery force. Does anyone read Aurora Seven? Over.

04 53 04.5
CC
Aurora Seven, Aurora Seven, Cape Cap Com. Over.

04 53 07.5
P
Roger. Say again. You're very weak.

04 53 13
CC
Aurora Seven, Aurora Seven, Cape Cap Com. Over.

Splashdown

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/...nscript-1.html

Friendship Seven February 20, 1962
AIR-GROUND COMMUNICATIONS OF THE MA-6 FLIGHT

CAPE CANAVERAL (FIRST ORBIT)

00 35 40
46.9
P
Roger. This is Friendship Seven. The window, attitude indications, and periscope all check right together in good shape. I can see the dark side coming up in the periscope back behind me at present time. Cabin pressure is 5.5 and holding. Cabin temperature is 95 [degrees]. Relative humidity is 28 [percent]. I have turned the cabin-my suit temperature onto the increased water position for more cooling. Steam temperature is presently indicating 61 [degrees]. Oxygen is 75-100 [percent]. I didn't give suit temperature. Suit inlet temperature is 65 [degrees] and pressure is 5.8. Over.

00 16 35
0.0
P
That is affirmative. Attitude: roll 0 [degrees], yaw 2 [degrees] right, pitch -33 [degrees]. Rates are all indicating zero. I am on ASCS at present time. The clock is still set for time to ret, for retrograde time of 04 plus 32 plus 28. I have retrograde times okay from Bermuda. Cabin pressure holding steady at 6.7. Cabin air 90 [degrees]. Relative humidity, 30 [percent]. Coolant quantity is 68 [percent]. Suit environment is 65. Suit pressure is indicating 5.8. Steam temperature 60 [degrees] on the suit. I am very comfortable. However, I do not want to turn it down just yet. Primary oxygen is 78 [percent]; secondary, 102 [percent]. Main bus is 24. Number one is 25, 25, 25. Standby one is 26; Standby two is 25; Isolated, 29, and back on main. Ammeter is indicating 23. ASCS is 112. Fans are 112. Over.

00 35 40
46.9
P
Roger. This is Friendship Seven. The window, attitude indications, and periscope all check right together in good shape. I can see the dark side coming up in the periscope back behind me at present time. Cabin pressure is 5.5 and holding. Cabin temperature is 95 [degrees]. Relative humidity is 28 [percent]. I have turned the cabin-my suit temperature onto the increased water position for more cooling. Steam temperature is presently indicating 61 [degrees]. Oxygen is 75-100 [percent]. I didn't give suit temperature. Suit inlet temperature is 65 [degrees] and pressure is 5.8. Over.

SAMU



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SAMU on 2001-11-17 04:59 ]</font>

And your point is? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif[/img]

The point is, if you all can't come up with data and/or crunch the numbers to support the lower temp reported by 13 than the data I find which supports a higher temp expectation then I figure I am on the right track.

SAMU

Oh! I see. Since they had trouble keeping a first generation spacecraft cool (which was 1) So filled to the brim with active electrical and electronic equipment that there was barely room for one person to sit, and 2) Painted black), therefore, a third generation spacecraft which was painted white (except for the areas that were reflective foil) and had all but the bare minimum of equipment turned off must have been hot too. Get real. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_evil.gif[/img]

__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson

You make it sound as if they were flying ships full of 1940s era radio parts made of zink plated vacume tubes stone knives and bearskins. The transister had been invented by then. Also if you had read the complete transscript you would see that his heating problems happened almost immediatly when he was in the sun. It cooled off when he passed into the night side.

Since generations of spacecraft were mentioned. Did you know that the Atlas rocket built for NASA's 6 mannned flights of the Mercury program were built in the hundreds armed with nuclear warheads. Followed by the Titan rocket used for the 10 maned Gemnini flights and also built in the hundreds armed with nuclear weapons. and dozens of other types of rockets built in the hundreds armed with nuclear weapons. Finaly Saturn 5, built in the dozens for 11 manned Apollo missions at a cost of billions of dollars and armed with NO? nuclear weapons? Ever? Not even once? covertly?

SAMU



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: SAMU on 2001-11-17 21:07 ]</font>