Apollo 7 added to my list!

[RDG]

Okay, it might not mean anything to many of you, but I got the
opportunity to visit Apollo 7 CM on display at Canada's National Museum
of Science and Transportation, in Ottawa, Ontario, this week. The
capsule is prominently displayed in the space exhibits area, protected
by a plexiglass and wood shield. The capsule is not covered with a cone
of plexiglass, as some of the capsules are, but the hatch is sealed with
plexiglass. Inside are mannikins of Schirra, Eisele, and Cunningham
(Eisele may be real*) in what appear to be training suits. The abort
and manuevering controls appear to be wooden mockups. It is easy to see
the lack of docking hatch, and the Commander's window is bubbled from
re-entry heat. The other interesting note was no lettering or US flag
on this capsule.
The capsule is clean, meaning free of dust and particulates. Obviously
the visitors appreciate the artifact.

Incidently, the musuem is first-class in many respects. Their Hall of
Steam Locomotives should be the envy of every technology museum in the
world.

(*sorry)

To date I've gotten to see and photograph:

All flown manned Mercury Capsules and three unmanned.
Gemini's 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 12.
Apollo's 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17
Skylab's 3 and 4.

Anyone seen Gemini 10?
Apollo 1 should be appropriately displayed as well (my opinion).

[Gordon Davie]

RDG wrote:
> Okay, it might not mean anything to many of you, but I got the
> opportunity to visit Apollo 7 CM on display at Canada's National
> Museum of Science and Transportation, in Ottawa, Ontario, this week.
> The capsule is prominently displayed in the space exhibits area,
> protected by a plexiglass and wood shield. The capsule is not
> covered with a cone of plexiglass, as some of the capsules are, but
> the hatch is sealed with plexiglass. Inside are mannikins of
> Schirra, Eisele, and Cunningham (Eisele may be real*)

Oh, you bad person!

> in what appear
> to be training suits. The abort and manuevering controls appear to
> be wooden mockups. It is easy to see the lack of docking hatch

Not quite sure what you mean by this. Apollo 7 and 8 were never intended to
dock with anything, so presumably didn't carry the docking probe, but surely
they would still have the forward hatch even if it was never used? The
alternative would be an unnecessary design change.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God"

[MasterShrink]

>> in what appear
>> to be training suits. The abort and manuevering controls appear to
>> be wooden mockups. It is easy to see the lack of docking hatch
>
>Not quite sure what you mean by this. Apollo 7 and 8 were never intended to
>dock with anything, so presumably didn't carry the docking probe, but surely
>they would still have the forward hatch even if it was never used? The
>alternative would be an unnecessary design change.

I thought all Block II CSM's were equipped for docking. This was the major
difference between the Block I and Block II. Even prior to the redesigns made
after the Apollo 1 fire, NASA knew that the CSM would have to be upgraded with
docking equipment and why only one Block I mission was planned at the time of
the fire. So, Apollo 7 probably carried the proper equipment for docking.

Besides, Apollo 8's mission profile changed so late in the game I am certain it
at least was equipped for docking. Remember, it was originally going to fly the
first mission with the LEM.

I just think some museums have removed the docking hatches...I seem to remember
at the KSC the unflown CSM at the Saturn V display there has no docking hatch.

-A.L.

[Doug...]

In article >,
says...
> >> in what appear
> >> to be training suits. The abort and manuevering controls appear to
> >> be wooden mockups. It is easy to see the lack of docking hatch
> >
> >Not quite sure what you mean by this. Apollo 7 and 8 were never intended to
> >dock with anything, so presumably didn't carry the docking probe, but surely
> >they would still have the forward hatch even if it was never used? The
> >alternative would be an unnecessary design change.
>
> I thought all Block II CSM's were equipped for docking. This was the major
> difference between the Block I and Block II. Even prior to the redesigns made
> after the Apollo 1 fire, NASA knew that the CSM would have to be upgraded with
> docking equipment and why only one Block I mission was planned at the time of
> the fire. So, Apollo 7 probably carried the proper equipment for docking.
>
> Besides, Apollo 8's mission profile changed so late in the game I am certain it
> at least was equipped for docking. Remember, it was originally going to fly the
> first mission with the LEM.
>
> I just think some museums have removed the docking hatches...I seem to remember
> at the KSC the unflown CSM at the Saturn V display there has no docking hatch.

Yes, *all* Block II CMs were equipped with a docking tunnel. I believe
that Apollos 7 and 8 flew without the probes, since they were not needed.

Even the Block I CM had a hatch in the apex, though. So did the Mercury
capsule. It was there to allow crew exit on the water in rough seas,
where opening the side hatch might swamp the spacecraft.

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for | Doug Van Dorn
thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup |

[Derek Lyons]

(Henry Spencer) wrote:

>In article >,
>Doug... > wrote:
>>Yes, *all* Block II CMs were equipped with a docking tunnel. I believe
>>that Apollos 7 and 8 flew without the probes, since they were not needed.
>
>Questionable assumption there: post-fire, Apollo tried very hard to fly
>only the final configuration of the hardware, to avoid having to do custom
>engineering for dead-end versions. The mere fact that the probe wasn't
>going to be used wouldn't have been reason enough to leave it off.

Since the probe was removeable in normal operations (it had to be in
order to clear the tunnel), then very little engineering would be
needed to leave it off.

Also, were not 7 & 8 'Block 1 & 1/2' anyhow? (That is, neither fish
nor fowl, as NASA was abandoning the I's but the II's were not fully
available.)

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

[Doug...]

In article >,
says...
> (Henry Spencer) wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> >Doug... > wrote:
> >>Yes, *all* Block II CMs were equipped with a docking tunnel. I believe
> >>that Apollos 7 and 8 flew without the probes, since they were not needed.
> >
> >Questionable assumption there: post-fire, Apollo tried very hard to fly
> >only the final configuration of the hardware, to avoid having to do custom
> >engineering for dead-end versions. The mere fact that the probe wasn't
> >going to be used wouldn't have been reason enough to leave it off.
>
> Since the probe was removeable in normal operations (it had to be in
> order to clear the tunnel), then very little engineering would be
> needed to leave it off.
>
> Also, were not 7 & 8 'Block 1 & 1/2' anyhow? (That is, neither fish
> nor fowl, as NASA was abandoning the I's but the II's were not fully
> available.)

CSMs 101 and 103 were fully Block II in basic engineering. There were
some cabin items, such as the couches, that were of the Block I
configuration. But the CSMs that flew Apollos 7 and 8 had undergone all
of the structural and main systems upgrades for Block II. Their SMs were
in the Block II configuration, they had the Block II CM thermal coating,
they had the Block II wiring and systems locations and configurations,
the Block II display panel configurations, etc.

The couches, though, were relatively simple to replace once the Block II
config became available. You just took out the Block I couches where
they attached to the attach points and attached the new couches.

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for | Doug Van Dorn
thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup |

[RDG]

>
> The couches, though, were relatively simple to replace once the Block II
> config became available. You just took out the Block I couches where
> they attached to the attach points and attached the new couches.

I noted this while studying Apollo 7 at the museum. These couches are entirely
different from those of the other Apollo CM's. For one, they are straight
seatbacks and black frames.