Change in Color of Apollo SM

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:10:34 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

Early mock-ups of the CSM showed both parts of the spacecraft as white
in color, so that's probably why the pre-Apollo 7 ones were colored that
way.
Besides weight, the natural metal exterior in the final design probably
had a lot to do with the desired reflectivity of the module, to keep it
in the proper temperature range in the intense sunlight and shadow of
space, as it did its slow "barbecue roll" on the way to and from the Moon.

....That's pretty much the reason. The white didn't reflect enough
heat, and removing the paint helped with the weight issues a smidge
since every ounce counted. One thing I did come across a while back on
this was that had the Block I's not been prone to their own
barbeque(*) modes the outside paint jobs on the hull of the CM would
have been replaced with the chromium mylar/kapton tape striping that
all the Block II CMs sported shortly after Apollo 1 splashed down.

(*) Damn Yankees. Can't make good BBQ because they can't spel it
write!

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:25:49 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:


Block I vs Block II capsules?

Wasn't Apollo 7 a Block II?

With many Block I attributes because not everything for Block II was
ready in time. For example, the couches were Block I design.

Brian

OM wrote:
...A7 - the "Phoenix" - was a Block II capsule with only one major
Block I component retained: the couches, which were modified to
eliminate flammability, but scored poorly in tests where the CM landed
on hard ground after an abort.


Didn't all the seats come in bad in that regard in both versions?
As in: "Well, you will probably survive...but don't count on running the
Boston Marathon again."
I still like Soyuz 5, where the landing impact broke off the roots of
the cosmonaut's teeth inside of his jaws.
Oh, that can't be fun.
You've got to admire the Soviets... they managed to build a spacecraft
tougher than the cosmonauts that were flying in it.

A wild time this afternoon as the apartment building was buzzed by a
MiG-15, MiG-17, and North American "Fury" Navy fighter...showing up for
tomorrow's airshow.
You want to see an ideal Sidewinder missile target, watch a MiG-17 light
off its horribly inefficient afterburner as it goes into a vertical climb.
Even in full sunlight, that looks like a kerosene-fueled blowtorch
flying around.
The plane looks like it's rocket powered.
Rocket powered with pre-V-2 type technology.
That ranks right up there with the F-94 afterburner as one of the worst
thrust improvement ideas ever done.
"We can give you 30% more thrust at the cost of 400% greater fuel
consumption! It's a miracle, I tell ya!" :-D

Pat

On Jun 27, 10:21 am, are wrote:
Reviewing the panel photos of Saturn IB launches (en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Saturn_IB) and of Saturn V launches (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Image:Saturn_V_launches.jpg), I note that service modules flown
through Apollo 7 appear to be white, while later service modules
appear to be metallic with patches of white.

Why the change?

It's extremely hot while operating between Earth and our Selene/moon.
The Earth-moon L1 is actually a fairly roasted to death hot spot that
would demand having an artificial shade in addition to a polished
aluminum outer hull.

You have for the most part 3 sources of IR to deal with, plus internal
systems and body heat to get rid of.

The only cold time is while briefly in the shadow of Earth or while
isolated by the shade of Selene.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

On Jun 27, 10:21 am, are wrote:
Reviewing the panel photos of Saturn IB launches (en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Saturn_IB) and of Saturn V launches (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Image:Saturn_V_launches.jpg), I note that service modules flown
through Apollo 7 appear to be white, while later service modules
appear to be metallic with patches of white.

Why the change?

One or more of those landers was either painted or anodized as flat
black.

Go figure, with a nearly dark as coal terrain of highly IR reflective
and secondary/recoil worthy surface, plus 1.4 kw/m2 incoming from our
sun and even a little bit of IR from Earth, why black?

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

On Jun 27, 6:29 pm, OM wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 23:57:30 +0000 (UTC), Rick Jones

wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
Jorge R. Frank wrote:

Wasn't Apollo 7 a Block II?

I think all of our manned missions were on Block II's.

Some dimm memory of a show on cable has me wondering if there were
some hybrids where Block I couches were in a Block II capsule?

...A7 - the "Phoenix" - was a Block II capsule with only one major
Block I component retained: the couches, which were modified to
eliminate flammability, but scored poorly in tests where the CM landed
on hard ground after an abort. This led to the first major "****ing
fight" between Wally Schirra and the NASA brass over a "mission rule"
concerning high winds at launch. All subsequent CMs had the Block II
couches, which IIRC were not delivered until just before Thanksgiving
1968(*)

(*) Someone verify that date for me, as I can't find the online source
I used at NASA a couple of years back. The PAO History site link is no
longer good, and a site search didn't turn up anything.

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog -http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

W Schirra's biography "Schirra's Space has some extensive accounts of
the launch wind controversy.

On Jun 28, 1:21*am, are wrote:
Reviewing the panel photos of Saturn IB launches (en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Saturn_IB) and of Saturn V launches (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Image:Saturn_V_launches.jpg), I note that service modules flown
through Apollo 7 appear to be white, while later service modules
appear to be metallic with patches of white.

Why the change?

I assume it has nothing to do with the SMs used on the Skylab
programme (launched on S-IBs) being specially fitted for their long-
duration missions, having to withstand much longer periods of hot and
cold? I understand that the ASTM SM was of the Skylab type too.

On Jun 29, 4:09 am, Neil Gerace wrote:
On Jun 28, 1:21 am, are wrote:

Reviewing the panel photos of Saturn IB launches (en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Saturn_IB) and of Saturn V launches (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Image:Saturn_V_launches.jpg), I note that service modules flown
through Apollo 7 appear to be white, while later service modules
appear to be metallic with patches of white.

Why the change?

I assume it has nothing to do with the SMs used on the Skylab
programme (launched on S-IBs) being specially fitted for their long-
duration missions, having to withstand much longer periods of hot and
cold? I understand that the ASTM SM was of the Skylab type too.

The Apollo moon missions were simply too solar and secondary/recoil IR
exposed for the likes of Skylab. Getting rid of their surplus heat
was and still is a big technological problem that's not fully
resolved, and most certainly wasn't resolved as of nearly a half
century ago, not to mention their hocus-pocus notions of human DNA
surviving the moon's gamma and those unavoidable secondary/recoil X-
rays.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

"BradGuth" wrote:

On Jun 27, 10:21 am, are wrote:
Reviewing the panel photos of Saturn IB launches (en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Saturn_IB) and of Saturn V launches (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Image:Saturn_V_launches.jpg), I note that service modules flown
through Apollo 7 appear to be white, while later service modules
appear to be metallic with patches of white.

Why the change?

One or more of those landers was either painted or anodized as flat
black.

Go figure, with a nearly dark as coal terrain of highly IR reflective
and secondary/recoil worthy surface, plus 1.4 kw/m2 incoming from our
sun and even a little bit of IR from Earth, why black?

No Apollo Service Module or "lander" (Luner Module? or what?) was ever
painted "black" or any sort of anodized "blackish" color.

All flight SM's were basically dull polished inconel/titanium "silvery"
metal with the radiators as well as a couple panels painted white. The
panel patterns differed a bit on Apollo 7 and the Skylab missions between
that of the "regular" Apollo lunar flights. The only thing that could
possibly lead to confusion about the SM color is whatever it's reflecting
and the light source - in orbit around the Earth or Moon or sitting on a
launch pad or indoors at Rockwell or KSC.

T.B.

"Jorge R. Frank" wrote in message
...
Derek Lyons wrote:
are wrote:

Reviewing the panel photos of Saturn IB launches (en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Saturn_IB) and of Saturn V launches (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Image:Saturn_V_launches.jpg), I note that service modules flown
through Apollo 7 appear to be white, while later service modules
appear to be metallic with patches of white.

Why the change?

Block I vs Block II capsules?

Wasn't Apollo 7 a Block II?

Yes, and No.

Remember that Wally complained about usage of the Block I couches in the
Apollo 7 CM, because the Block II couches would not be ready in time for
their late summer 1968 launch.

gb