Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,943   Posts: 1,557,615   Online: 1208
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    Ken N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Creston and Newton, Iowa.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    389
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Anon Ymous View Post
    And I assume that any camera wouldn't need any modifications if it won't be used outside the station (space walk). Am I right?
    As I understand it, most cameras and lenses undergo extensive modification and testing for at least the following items:

    1. Electromagnetic interference
    2. RF Interference
    3. Outgassing
    4. Screws that can loosen
    5. Lubricant migration and atomization
    6. Passage of all "clean room" requirements
    7. Vibration and shock resiliancy
    http://www.zone-10.com

    When you turn your camera on, does it return the favor?

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Fire is also a very big concern. (Think Apollo 1.)

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,322
    Quote Originally Posted by srs5694 View Post
    Fire is also a very big concern. (Think Apollo 1.)
    IIRC, Apollo 1 had pure oxygen atmosphere, so the spark from a short circuit became a fierce fire. After that incident, they started using nitrogen too.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    They spend billions of dollars keeping these things flying.
    So you bet your last dime that they don't want to run a chance that anything they take up goes wrong (not that a lot does not indeed go wrong in flight).
    So there is a thick book with requirements for even the silliest, tiniest thing that will fly.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Anon Ymous View Post
    IIRC, Apollo 1 had pure oxygen atmosphere, so the spark from a short circuit became a fierce fire. After that incident, they started using nitrogen too.
    The Apollo 1 fire did indeed occur under a pure-oxygen test condition. NASA made a lot of changes to address the fire conditions, though. One of those was minimizing the amount of flammable material in the cabin. I seem to recall seeing a documentary in which they revealed that NASA put limits on the amount of Velcro that could be in the cabin, since Velcro is flammable.

  6. #16
    Ken N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Creston and Newton, Iowa.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    389
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by srs5694 View Post
    The Apollo 1 fire did indeed occur under a pure-oxygen test condition. NASA made a lot of changes to address the fire conditions, though. One of those was minimizing the amount of flammable material in the cabin. I seem to recall seeing a documentary in which they revealed that NASA put limits on the amount of Velcro that could be in the cabin, since Velcro is flammable.
    Nearly the entire interior of that capsule was encased in Velcro. Not only was it a pure-oxygen test, but it was pressurized too. Unfortunately, it seems to always take a tragedy for us to understand and correct the errors of our ways.
    http://www.zone-10.com

    When you turn your camera on, does it return the favor?

  7. #17
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken N View Post
    Nearly the entire interior of that capsule was encased in Velcro.
    Such a `tapestry´ does not make sense.
    The issue with the accident was, that one realized that nylon webbings/nettings could lead(!) in those circumstances fire rather than form a hazard in itself.

  8. #18
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,781
    addendum cameras:

    -) Space Shuttle: Linhof 5" (Aero Technika 45)

  9. #19
    Rob Skeoch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Burlington, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    984
    I was shooting a ball game once for MLB and a shuttle astronaut was throwing out the first pitch. We chatted for a while to kill time before the game started and he mentioned that they flew the Nikon 400 F2.8 on the shuttle. He said it didn't seem to have any modifications from the one I was using.
    -Rob
    Rob Skeoch
    This is my blog http://thepicturedesk.blogspot.com/
    This my website for photo supplies...
    www.bigcameraworkshops.com
    This is my website for Rangfinder gear
    www.rangefinderstore.com

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Could be invisible ones, like a change of lubricants.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin