One very strange graphic

Jorge R. Frank wrote:

No, I'm thinking about the valve. The consensus is that the separation
event caused the valve to fail.

The primary set of explosive bolts to separate the orbital module from
descent module failed to fire.
When the back-up set fired it also caused the primary set to fire at the
same time causing a violent shock and the pressure valve to open.
At least that's the official story....but before this happened the
cosmonauts were having trouble sealing the descent module hatch, and a
indicator light was indicating it was not properly closed.
They asked mission control what to do, and were told to keep tightening
it up (it uses a wheel type crank to close it, like a watertight door)
till the light indicated it _was_ sealed, even though that was tighter
than you were supposed to torque it, and not worry about it.
Then when the modules separated the air leaked out.
So if the hatch still wasn't properly sealed, saying it was a pressure
equalization valve that opened got mission control off the hook for the
cosmonaut's death.

Pat

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:


Wow, I realized that the had jettisoned the orbital module, I didn't
realize how close they came to jettisoning the equipment module while
still in orbit.

The Russians claim the story was a gross exaggeration, so it's almost
certainly true. ;-)
On the other hand Leonov's story about being chased around by a werewolf
after Voskhod 2 landed might be a bit exaggerated.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...


Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:


Wow, I realized that the had jettisoned the orbital module, I didn't
realize how close they came to jettisoning the equipment module while
still in orbit.

The Russians claim the story was a gross exaggeration, so it's almost
certainly true. ;-)
On the other hand Leonov's story about being chased around by a werewolf
after Voskhod 2 landed might be a bit exaggerated.

Pat

Where wolf?


--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
A certain poster? The folks who point out the problems Soyuz has had,
and how it's flight record is barely different from that of the
Shuttle (and worse in some ways), are a distinct minority. Folks
don't like having their dogma (simple is always better!) disturbed by
facts.

Shuttle and Soyuz have both had their close calls. They've also had two
fatal flights each. Statistically speaking, it's hard to tell which one is
safer than the other because they're both absolutely awful when compared to
something like a passenger airliner.

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
A certain poster? The folks who point out the problems Soyuz has had,
and how it's flight record is barely different from that of the
Shuttle (and worse in some ways), are a distinct minority. Folks
don't like having their dogma (simple is always better!) disturbed by
facts.

Shuttle and Soyuz have both had their close calls. They've also had two
fatal flights each. Statistically speaking, it's hard to tell which one
is safer than the other because they're both absolutely awful when
compared to something like a passenger airliner.

Oh no argument there.



--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
dakotatelephone...


Jeff Findley wrote:
When you've got to go, you've got to go. At least there *is* a toilet.
US manned spacecraft didn't get a toilet until the space Shuttle. I'm
sure there was nothing like flying an Apollo lunar mission without a
toilet. But still, that's a small price to pay for a trip to the moon,
right?


There's some info on the current Soyuz toilet he
http://depletedcranium.com/?p=625
It's minimalist to put it mildly.
You can see the original design with the folding table he
http://history.nasa.gov/diagrams/astp/bp227.htm
(I assume the folding table is shown partly cut-away to reveal what's
under it.)
Surprisingly, there's even a little folding bunk in the orbital module on
this, the one used for Apollo-Soyuz.

At least the Soyuz toilet provides suction to get feces to settle into the
collection bag.

The NASA adhesive bags used on Gemini and Apollo had no suction. Reportedly
there was trouble getting the excrement to fully release and "drop" into the
bag. From what I remember, there was a place in the bag designed to fit
your finger (like a glove for a single digit) to help with this procedure.
Needless to say, this wasn't an easy task in microgravity.

Jeff
--
"Many things that were acceptable in 1958 are no longer acceptable today.
My own standards have changed too." -- Freeman Dyson

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

The Russians claim the story was a gross exaggeration, so it's almost
certainly true. ;-)
On the other hand Leonov's story about being chased around by a
werewolf after Voskhod 2 landed might be a bit exaggerated.

Pat

Where wolf?

There wolf... there Kremlin. ;-)
It's amazing to think that Brooks and Wilder managed to get both that
and Blazing Saddles out inside of one year.

Pat

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...


At least the Soyuz toilet provides suction to get feces to settle into the
collection bag.

The NASA adhesive bags used on Gemini and Apollo had no suction.
Reportedly there was trouble getting the excrement to fully release and
"drop" into the bag. From what I remember, there was a place in the bag
designed to fit your finger (like a glove for a single digit) to help with
this procedure. Needless to say, this wasn't an easy task in microgravity.

This always brings to mind a phrase I once read in a wilderness emergency
medicine book.

Digital Extraction of Fecal Impaction.



Jeff


--
Greg Moore
Ask me about lily, an RPI based CMC.

Jeff Findley wrote:
At least the Soyuz toilet provides suction to get feces to settle into the
collection bag.


Somewhere around here I've got a more detailed drawing of the early
Soyuz toilet, I just haven't been able to find it.
The country that was really forthcoming about a space toilet was China
regarding the one on Shenzhou.
They even put up a webpage giving the dimensions of the urine and feces
collector tubes the Taikonauts would use:
http://wallacewong.com/wp-content/up...ace-toilet.jpg
It also shows that Taikonauts have completly flat buttocks and either
very loose stools or ones that emerge like rabbit droppings as they
appear to have to go down a tube that a marble would have a hard time
fitting through.
This Japanese design is bound to make embarresing noises when in
operation:
http://www.geekologie.com/2009/01/ne...dy_to_drop.php

The NASA adhesive bags used on Gemini and Apollo had no suction. Reportedly
there was trouble getting the excrement to fully release and "drop" into the
bag. From what I remember, there was a place in the bag designed to fit
your finger (like a glove for a single digit) to help with this procedure.
Needless to say, this wasn't an easy task in microgravity.


Didn't we find some sort of storage box for disposable "scrapers" on a
photo of the ISS toilet a few years back?

Pat

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

This always brings to mind a phrase I once read in a wilderness
emergency medicine book.

Digital Extraction of Fecal Impaction.


My God, computers can do anything today, can't they?

Pat