Re: Return to the moon

On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 02:18:11 +0000 (UTC), cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx (Chris
Adams) wrote:

>Once upon a time, Matt Ion <soundy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>>> The 100% oxygen atmosphere at ground pressure was a
>>> problem waiting to happen,
>>
>>That's what I'm talking about, "seemed like a good idea at the time."
>
>You cut off the part where I said there was more than one contributing
>factor. Given as much flammable material was in that capsule, it is
>quite possible that a fire could have happened in normal Earth air.
>
>>Okay, so "rushing" was a major contributing factor to the fire, and it
>>probably would have happened anyway. Would it have been as catastrophic
>>without the 100% oxygen atmosphere? Very likely not.
>
>Since it still took something like 2 minutes to open the hatch, it is
>quite likely that it would have been fatal.
>
>I heard *** Gordon talk a couple of weeks ago, and one thing he said
>about Apollo I was that the inside of the capsule was practically
>wall-papered with velcro. They wanted to be able to stick a pen or
>flight plan or whatever anywhere. However, the glue (and maybe the
>velco itself) happened to be flammable; nobody had really thought about
>it. They just loaded up the capsule with materials that are flammable
>in normal Earth air (and worse in 100% oxygen) without realizing the
>consequences.
>
>Also, the wiring insulation (and many other substances) gave off toxic
>gas when burned. That's what killed the astronauts; they were not
>burned by the fire.
>
>When you have electrical shorts in an environment full of flammable
>material that give off toxic gas where the only exit takes 2 minutes to
>open, it doesn't take 100% oxygen to kill people.
>
>Was the 100% oxygen a contributing factor? Sure, there's no doubt.
>Would it have happened without that? There's a very good chance;
>hopefully we'll never find out.
>
>>Thus my assertion that the deaths of those astronauts can't really be
>>blamed on the "rush", but more on what you'd think someone would have
>>figured out sooner was a pretty dumb idea....
>
>If they'd stopped to think about it, they'd have changed it. They
>didn't stop; they had a deadline to meet.
>
>>Consider that it probably occured to someone long before in the design
>>stage that a fire in the capsule was possible (was any sort of
>>fire-supression system included, or even a little hand-held
>>extinguisher?), and the very idea of providing a pure-oxygen atmosphere
>>should have set of someone's alarm bells.
>
>IIRC (I don't remember for sure), they did not have any kind of fire
>supression system or even an extinguisher, at least not up through
>Apollo I. I know they do have fire extinguishers on the Shuttle now;
>the control panels have holes here and there that fit the extinguisher
>nozzle.
>
>I suggest you read some of the accounts; they were in such a hurry, they
>really didn't stop to consider crew safety much at all (except in the
>big "put a man on the moon and bring him safely home" sense).

Michael Collins's "Carrying the Fire" gives apretty good account IIRC
..

.