![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Structure looks pretty rugged, but "spaceglass" is just that. I
haven't seen a lot of info on the retractable window covers. They appear to be rather thick, (crushable by design? ) and I'm wondering as to reason for this?. I do not think that the covers are there for a pressure seal as well as the design does not look robust enough for this I haven't seen any protocol s on what needs to be done in case of a threat to the Cupola? Just imagine anogther Progress or coming Commercial vehicle impact. When Mir was hit I would imagine a lot of the energy was absorbed by the solar panel before it hit the pressure hull, hitting dead on is whole other storyh. Anybody know how fast the retraction and deploy cycles are?..............Doc |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 24, 2:02*pm, "Dr.Colon Oscopy"
wrote: Structure looks pretty rugged, but "spaceglass" is just that. *I haven't seen a lot of info on the retractable window covers. *They appear to be rather thick, (crushable by design? ) and I'm wondering as to reason for this?. * I do not think that the covers are there for a pressure seal as well as the design does not look robust enough for this * I haven't seen any protocol s on what needs to be done in case of a threat to the Cupola? The cupola can be sealed off from the rest of the node by shutting the hatch. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2/24/2010 11:02 AM, Dr.Colon Oscopy wrote:
Structure looks pretty rugged, but "spaceglass" is just that. I haven't seen a lot of info on the retractable window covers. They appear to be rather thick, (crushable by design? ) and I'm wondering as to reason for this?. Although they seem awfully thick to me also (a lot thicker than was shown on the NASA artwork of the cupola before the mission) they are supposed to fulfill the dual purposes of micrometeor/space debris protection and insulation from what I've read. The fact that their inner surfaces are hollowed out probably makes them look thicker than the really a http://cdn.physorg.com/newman/gfx/ne...la-cut_400.jpg I do not think that the covers are there for a pressure seal as well as the design does not look robust enough for this I haven't seen any protocol s on what needs to be done in case of a threat to the Cupola? Just imagine anogther Progress or coming Commercial vehicle impact. When Mir was hit I would imagine a lot of the energy was absorbed by the solar panel before it hit the pressure hull, hitting dead on is whole other storyh. Anybody know how fast the retraction and deploy cycles are? I imagine as fast as you can turn the little crank; that actually sounds like how it's done according to this: http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-10...0&tag=untagged Pat |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Questions about Cupola | John Doe | Space Station | 3 | February 21st 10 09:52 PM |
STS-130 cupola question | Pat Flannery | History | 12 | February 10th 10 12:52 PM |
Cupola Module | David | Space Shuttle | 2 | October 27th 04 03:19 PM |
Cupola update | Jim Kingdon | Space Station | 17 | October 15th 04 04:30 PM |