I realize that Scott is long gone, but I's still like to respond to the James Collier article in the opening post.
Van Allen's conclusion was delivered in a speech to the Academy of Science in 1959. He warned future space travelers they would have to race through these two zones on their way to outer planets.
And racing through these two zones was exactly what Apollo did.
"All manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts has been developed" he said.
And that is exactly what happened, they steered clear of the belts until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts had been developed. Furthermore, Dr. Van Allen's quote is taken out of context. He was not referring to a rapid transit through the radiation belts. Dr. Van Allen was specifically discussing two missions (Vanguard I and Sputnik III) that each spend two years orbiting through this region of space. His warning was in reference to the integrated radiation exposure from these long duration missions. Nothing in his statements preclude the possibility of an Apollo-style mission.
Moreover, Van Allen advised they would have to be shielded with some extra layers of protection beyond that of the spacecraft itself.
Dr. Van Allen's writings cite exposure levels behind shielding meeting "minimum structural considerations for space vehicles." Apollo was shielded well beyond the minimum structural considerations to which Dr. Allen was referring.
National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA), which is part of the Department of Defense and the CIA
False.
It was their job to build a spacecraft that would meet Van Allen's scientific requirements of safety through the radiation belts. Van Allen stated that the ship's skin, made of aluminum, would not be enough protection for the astronauts.
Yes, Apollo's aluminum skin would not be enough.
Extra shielding of lead or another substance that would absorb the radiation would be needed.
To my knowledge, neither Dr. Van Allen nor anyone else proposed the use of lead. The extra shielding was provided by the spacecraft's thermal protection system. This consisted off a stainless steel structural hull, to which was adhered an ablative phenolic resin. Although the primary function of this material was to protect the spacecraft and astronauts against reentry heat, it also doubled as radiation shielding. Between the aluminum hull, the stainless steel hull, and the ablative heat shield, it was found that enough radiation shielding was present that nothing more had to be added.
That, of course, posed the problem of weight. More weight created a booster problem. In other words, they would need a bigger rocket to carry a ship that was properly lined against radiation penetration.
But not an insurmountable problem. The final weight of the shielded spacecraft was within the launch capacity of the Saturn V booster.
One of the most interesting of Van Allen's findings was that once protons and electrons hit the aluminum skin of the spacecraft, they would turn into x-rays.
Actually, the overwhelming majority of protons and electrons were be stopped by the ablative heat shield, with most of the remainder being stopped by the stainless steel hull. The aluminum hull provided a good shield for the x-rays that were produced in the outer layers of the hull.
The kind the average dentist protects patients against with two inch lead vests.
First, not the kind that the average dentist protects against. Medical x-rays are of higher energy and are more penetrating than the x-rays produced in the spacecraft hull. Second, two inches? Seriously? A dental x-ray apron has the standard protection of 0.3 mm lead equivalency. Furthermore, the lead apron that a dentist uses is as much about covering the dentist's arse as it is about covering the patient. Since the dentist does not know what other x-rays or radiation exposure the patient made have recently had, the vest is a safeguard against accumulative exposure.
Those rays would naturally penetrate the astronaut's bodies and create anything from nausea and vomiting to eventual death, depending on the length of the exposure.
No, the secondary x-rays produced were predominately soft x-rays, which would not penetrate deeply and cause the type of illness described. More importantly, the multi-layered hull provided enough shielding that an insignificant number of x-rays would even penetrate it.
All of this scientific data presented a big problem for NASA. How could they build a spacecraft that would meet radiation standards and yet get off the ground?
Just look at Apollo and you have your answer.
However, where the critical dosage on earth might be 5 rems of radiation in a year, the astronauts would receive that amount within minutes passing through the lower zone of the radiation belt.
Nope. For all but one mission, the astronauts received less than 1 rem for the entirety of a mission.
NASA announced that a simple aluminum skin on the command module was enough to protect astronauts from lethal doses of radiation.
Nope. The complete spacecraft hull was enough to protect the astronauts from lethal doses of radiation. The aluminum skin is only one small component of a thick multi-layered construction.
They verified that the craft was not protected by any additional shielding.
It wasn't protected by any specialized radiation shielding beyond the hull, but it was most definitely protected well beyond just the aluminum skin that formed part of the inner pressure hull.
It was at this point in our research that we realized the Van Allen Report had been seriously compromised by NASA.
That's your perception because you are an uninformed ignoramus. All the safeguards employed by NASA were completely consistent with the recommendations made by Dr. Van Allen.
One of his most important tenets was that even if you raced quickly through the 65,000 mile belt, which starts 400 miles above the earth's surface (thus allowing for inner space travel) you would still need considerable additional shielding. Were his findings now bogus?
Dr. Van Allen's finding were not at all bogus. The spacecraft was adequately shielded as Dr. Van Allen said it would have to be.
If you believe we went to the moon, then you have to disregard Van Allen's years of research and published findings.
Nope. NASA's solutions to the radiation problem were entirely consistent with Dr. Van Allen's research and published findings.
You would also have to believe that aluminum, and not lead, is adequate protection against radiation in the very heart of the Belt.
You're right about the lead part, that is not a proper material to shield against particle radiation. As for what is adequate protection, a multi-layered construction consisting of an aluminum honeycomb bonded between two aluminum face sheets, a stainless steel honeycomb bonded between two stainless steel face sheets, and a layer of phenolic epoxy resin ranging from 1/2" and 2 1/2" thick would do the job. Furthermore, Apollo didn't get anywhere near "the very heart of the Belt." The radiation exposure along the trajectories flown by Apollo were <5% of what they would be had they flown through the heart of the belts.
