It looks like that genuine "Apollo" capsule never was in space.

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on January 24, 2016, 03:15:32 PM

Quote from: rabinoz on January 24, 2016, 02:41:11 PM

A little word of advice: Stop cluttering up your posts with massive images that simply cannot fit on anyone's screen (sorry, my monitor is only 1920x1280 and not 3840×2160 or 7680×4320) - it is just useless and makes your posts so hard to read!

Dear rabinoz,

As indicated at the very beginning of this topic, that great picture was kindly provided to me by frenat. Thus, you've just proven that you do not read this thread and/or do not understand its topic.


If my posts are so hard for you to read, just do not read them.

"there are far more expert people around in this topic than you"
What a capital idea.

So, dear experts, what're the temperatures at the locations of those handles during the atmospheric entry?

Is it possible that those shiny stainless steel handles, after atmospheric entry and landing, are still bright, shiny and show no signs of strong heating?

YOU DONT NEED TO USE MASSIVE TEXTS AND IMAGES, WE ARE NOT BLIND

When you post an image, put .....   width=500 in the code

Example:
 [ img width=500 then the close square bracket ]image address [/img then close square bracket ]

Yet, when I asked how you guys insert a GIF file as an avatar 'cause mine's not working, that was totally ignored...
 

Finally, could you say something meaningful about the temperatures? Thanks.

Shouldn't you have told that to frenat?

Quote from: Humble_Scientist on January 24, 2016, 04:15:14 PM

Shouldn't you have told that to frenat?

I posted it once and not in this thread.  Don't try to blame YOUR failures on me.

Wow, dear frenat. Your picture is great. Which failure you're talking about, it's magnificent. Thanks to you, the readers have a chance to carefully inspect the surface of the "spaceship" themselves and make their own conclusions. Isn't that wonderful?
 

"Command module heatshield requirements, including heating versus time curves, were established by NAA for several design trajectories. A computer program method of analyzing the charring ablation process had been developed. By this means, it was possible to calculate the mass loss, surface char layer temperature, amount of heat conducted through the uncharred ablation material and insulation into the cabin, and temperature profile through the ablator and insulation layers. In February, NAA determined that a new and more refined computer program would be needed."

ASPO reported that a different type of thermally restive stainless steel  would be used for the Apollo CM heatshield - . Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM; CSM Heat Shield. ASPO reported that a different type of stainless steel would be used for the CM heatshield. The previous type, that had been formulated for re-entry temperatures, proved too brittle at cryogenic temperatures. Aside from their low temperature properties, the two metals were quite; similar and no fabrication problems were anticipated.

I'm not sure if this is going to help clarify why some pictures show handles and others don't,   all I've been able to find out is that they are called "EVA Handles"  They are grab points for Extra Vehicular Activities.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/NASA-tries-to-get-a-handle-on-relic-auction-3051835.php

One interesting bit of trivia, is that the EVA handles had a radioactive disk of promethium 147  which would glow so that they could still be able to see the grab handles if they had to do an EVA  in darkness.

The location of the handles varied slightly depending on the mission plan,   but I'd expect the two immediately below the main hatch would be common to multiple missions.

As to why there are pictures with the handles missing,  I'd only be guessing,   maybe they hadn't got round to putting them back?   There was a disposal protocol for radio active materials,  so it's likely the flight handles were removed because of the small amount of radio active material,  and replaced with new handles for display purposes.

I'm going to agree partly with Humble_Scientist,  and suggest that it's quite possible those particular handles have never been in space.  But the rest certainly has.

Quote from: Rayzor on January 24, 2016, 05:27:01 PM

I'm not sure if this is going to help clarify why some pictures show handles and others don't,   all I've been able to find out is that they are called "EVA Handles"  They are grab points for Extra Vehicular Activities.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/NASA-tries-to-get-a-handle-on-relic-auction-3051835.php

One interesting bit of trivia, is that the EVA handles had a radioactive disk of promethium 147  which would glow so that they could still be able to see the grab handles if they had to do an EVA  in darkness.

The location of the handles varied slightly depending on the mission plan,   but I'd expect the two immediately below the main hatch would be common to multiple missions.

As to why there are pictures with the handles missing,  I'd only be guessing,   maybe they hadn't got round to putting them back?   There was a disposal protocol for radio active materials,  so it's likely the flight handles were removed because of the small amount of radio active material,  and replaced with new handles for display purposes.

I'm going to agree partly with Humble_Scientist,  and suggest that it's quite possible those particular handles have never been in space.  But the rest certainly has.

Good work boffin , never thought of that.

Although it looks as if they formulated a stainless steel, tollerent to temp changes too. but I think you are correct; The radioactive handles were replaced with show versions.

This might help re-inforce the replacement handle theory.



The one without handles is Apollo 13,  the one with handles is Apollo 14,   Judging by the look of the fresh surface under where the handles used to be,  it's clear that the handles were removed post flight.

Dear Rayzor,

Do you mean that the handles survived the atmospheric entry and then were removed? Why?

Or that only some parts of the apparatus claimed to be in space were actually in space?
 

Or that some parts of the apparatus they say was in space - actually never were in space?
 

Do you mean that the handles survived the atmospheric entry and then were removed? Why?

Or that only some parts of the apparatus claimed to be in space were actually in space?

Or that some parts of the apparatus they say was in space - actually never were in space?

Do you mean that the handles survived the atmospheric entry and then were removed? Why?

To ensure astronauts could see the handle if they had to work outside the command module while on the dark far side of the moon, NASA made it fluorescent. It did so by placing small, dime-size radioactive disks within it. The radioactivity came from an isotope called promethium 147.

The radioactivity played a key role in diverting the EVA handle from one of two possible fates - either the Air & Space Museum or a nuclear waste dump supervised by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - and toward Butterfields.