Questions needing answers

[ka9q]

I was doing some searching for the batteries that the Apollo Hasselblad cameras used.  I couldn't find a direct article, but IIRC they were either Zinc or Silver nicades.  Is this correct ? If anyone has a link bookmarked, please provide.

I think every flight battery used in the Apollo program was silver-zinc. I know that to be true for all stages of the Saturn V, the LM, the CSM and the PLSS. So I assume it was true for the cameras as well.

Silver/zinc is more accurately described as silver oxide/zinc. The anode (negative plate) is zinc, just as in ordinary alkaline batteries. The cathode (positive plate) is silver oxide. It should be fairly obvious why this is not more widely used despite substantially outperforming the manganese dioxide in the cathodes of ordinary alkaline batteries.

A "nicad" is a completely different type of battery. It uses cadmium anodes and nickel oxy-hydroxide cathodes. It has lower energy density but works well as a secondary (rechargeable) battery.

Silver-zinc can be recharged, but with a very poor cycle life measured in the single digits. The only batteries recharged in Apollo were the entry batteries in the CM; all the others were primaries (non-rechargeables).

[bknight]

This was all I found and it doesn't speak of the batteries in the 60-70's models just the lithium Ion after 2002 H2D model.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasselblad

[Dalhousie]

I was doing some searching for the batteries that the Apollo Hasselblad cameras used.  I couldn't find a direct article, but IIRC they were either Zinc or Silver nicades.  Is this correct ? If anyone has a link bookmarked, please provide.

Did they even use batteries?

[bknight]

I was doing some searching for the batteries that the Apollo Hasselblad cameras used.  I couldn't find a direct article, but IIRC they were either Zinc or Silver nicades.  Is this correct ? If anyone has a link bookmarked, please provide.

Did they even use batteries?

Yes, the link says there is a 6.25 vdc Intervalometer
http://history.nasa.gov/ap16fj/02photoequip.htm

[BazBear]

I was doing some searching for the batteries that the Apollo Hasselblad cameras used.  I couldn't find a direct article, but IIRC they were either Zinc or Silver nicades.  Is this correct ? If anyone has a link bookmarked, please provide.

Did they even use batteries?

Yes, the link says there is a 6.25 vdc Intervalometer
http://history.NASA.gov/ap16fj/02photoequip.htm

According to that link, the Intervalometer was powered from the "electric camera battery pack", which I'm assuming means the integral motor drive/ battery unit.

ETA- This A14 photography report says that the motor drive batteries were NiCds.

[bknight]

I don't remember any cables from the camera in the pictures, so I guessed it was an internal battery. (Didn't read far enough, or a different type for the Apollo missions)

ETA: Image from A12, I don't see any cables or a battery box in this image, although his arms could be covering them.
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-48-7071HR.jpg

[BazBear]

I posted an edit to my last post before seeing you had replied, so I'll post it again. This A14 photography report says that the motor drive batteries were NiCds.

[bknight]

I posted an edit to my last post before seeing you had replied, so I'll post it again. This A14 photography report says that the motor drive batteries were NiCds.

Good to have the report, thanks

[ka9q]

If the report says NiCds, then it's probably correct. It's just surprising, since the batteries did not need to be recharged and they had lower energy density than silver-zinc. Maybe that's what the original design used, and there wasn't enough of a need to change them.

[Allan F]

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/photography/

Says it was 2 nickel-cadmium batteries.

[Rob260259]

Anybody seen Tradosaurus, lately...?

[AstroBrant]

1) Why does the earth look so small in the background of photographs on the moon.  The earth should be much larger.

No, it shouldn't.
I did a mathematical analysis of this on Photobucket:
 http://s813.photobucket.com/user/astrobrant2/library/Earth%20Size%20When%20Viewed%20from%20the%20Moon?sort=2&page=1

[Kiwi]

1) Why does the earth look so small in the background of photographs on the moon.  The earth should be much larger.

No, it shouldn't.

I did a mathematical analysis of this on Photobucket:
http://s813.photobucket.com/user/astrobrant2/library/Earth%20Size%20When%20Viewed%20from%20the%20Moon?sort=2&page=1

Nicely done, too, especially because you point out that Earth is actually a little bigger in the photo than it should be. But would die-hard hoax-believers actually learn anything from it?

There are two reasons why Earth could appear a little larger than calculated in AS17-134-20384HR:

1. Its location near the top of the picture. There is likely to be a little distortion at the edges of the picture due to the wide-angle lens, which tends to slightly enlarge objects progressively, depending on how far they are from the centre.

2. Earth is a out of focus, which might cause a small of amount "enlargement" due to the fuzziness surrounding it.

Isn't there a quicker way to measure angles in lunar surface photos due to the reticules (or crosshairs) than by counting pixels? I had an idea that that was their purpose, but don't recall the details.

JayUtah might know.

[ka9q]

2. Earth is a out of focus, which might cause a small of amount "enlargement" due to the fuzziness surrounding it.

If the earth is out of focus, that means the lens was focused closer than infinity, which means it was farther from the film and thus working with a slightly longer focal length, thus enlarging the image of the earth.

Usually this effect is too small to be noticeable, but it's substantial with macro lenses. The apparent focal length increases and the apparent speed of the lens decreases (the f-stop number increases).

[bobdude11]

1.  Strawman.  I've said before that it is my opinion that NASA has NAZI origins as the U.S. brought 1500 German scientists and engineers and Werhner Von Braun conceptualized the idea of space travel in the early 50's and within a few short years NASA was born.  I'm just connecting the dots.
2. If I am wrong on the tunnel dimension please show me the true dimensions of the tunnel entrance to the command module.  My shoulders are 24 inches from end to end and with a "space" suit on it would be much larger so hopefully your dimensions will be at least 42" or bigger.
3. Here is a picture of the Command module. Pay attention to the dimensions and then imagine the 3 parachutes with a lot of cord and all the other equipment plus 3 men fitting in this small space for 6 days of travel.  According to NASA, 3 crew members spent 3 days to the moon and 3 days back to earth IN THE CM.   One of the videos where Neil Armstrong manipulated the camera to show a "ball earth" it shows the astronauts with plenty of room.  They should have been in the CM.  Now look at the picture.  Can you imagine being strapped to the chair with 2 guys with no room to stand up?  Also the parachutes were stored in the top of the CM so how was it stored so that the astronauts still had room to make it thru the access tunnel?  I think NASA's Hollywood department should have done a better job. 

This was pointed out to you a few times, but you display a lazy behavior to investigate your claims.  Here is a link that will show you the docking tunnel hatch was 30"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Command/Service_Module

Also it has been pointed out to you the parachutes were packed around the docking tunnel, NOT in the living space.
If  you viewed any of the videos you should notice that without gravity the spacecraft was much roomier, although not as large as a bedroom.  How do you think two men rode Gemini 7 for 14 days with much less room to move around.  Now that was a cramped condition, much more than Apollo.

The astronauts were not strapped in their seats for the duration of the mission.  Get over it Apollo landed 12 men on the Moon.

Also, and please correct me if I am wrong, didn't the center seat fold up a bit to allow a bit more space to work in?