How did NASA protect the Apollo Astronauts?

[Patricinus_Scriblerus]

I am not one for conspiracy theories but a couple of questions never hurt. How did NASA protect the Astronauts from the extreme levels of radiation from the Sun ??
which leads me to the second question… and I know there are a lot of theories out there but is there anything conclusive that shows that NASA faked the moon landing ?

[Chas.E]

Oh boy here we go again.
There was no antiradiation shielding used in the Apollo craft. The radiation dosage the astronauts received was significant and risky, but not anything near fatal doses. Some Apollo astronauts have died of cancer, but the sample population is so small there is no way to tell if the increased radiation dose is linked to a statistically significant increase in cancer.
No, there is no conclusive evidence that NASA faked the moon landings, because they didn’t fake them. There is, however, a huge amount of incontrovertible evidence that they did actually land on the moon.

[Futile_Gesture]

*Originally posted by Patricinus Scriblerus *
How did NASA protect the Astronauts from the extreme levels of radiation from the Sun ??

They didn’t.

**but is there anything conclusive that shows that NASA faked the moon landing ? **

No, because they didn’t fake them.

This one’s been done to death on Straight Dope and I’m sure everyone’s sick of it. Do a search for the other threads or check out my web site: http://www.redzero.co.uk/moonhoax

HTH.

[carnivorousplant]

The Apollo capsule rotated to spread thermal gain over the total surface of the craft. Would that “average” other solar radiation and keep you from sitting in a hot spot, or just ensure that you were evenly toasted?

[Chas.E]

Evenly toasted. They called it “The Rotisserie.”

[Mangetout]

Oh come now, foolinsh dopers, we know the moon landing was faked (at least those of us who were priveleged to have been taught by Seethruart.

Anyway, it all boild down to one set of very obviously faked photographs which you can see here.

The evidence speaks for itself.

[Kamandi]

Okay: radiation

:: cracks knuckles ::

I’m not a radiologist, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night
Some data (kind of old now, but current at the time of Apollo):

Estimated whole-body dose to an unshielded man (near-earth orbit - sorry, no lunar data) from primary cosmic radiations: less than 100 millirems (< 0.1 rems) per day.

Probable effect of radiation:

0.001 rem/day   Natural background radiation
0.01 rem/day    Permissible dose range, 1957
0.1 rem/day     Permissible dose range, 1930-50
1 rem/day       Debilitation in 3 to 6 months, death in 3 to 6 years
                (projected from animal data)
10 rem/day      Debilitation in 3 to 6 weeks, death in 3 to 6 months
                (projected from animal data)

100 rem in one day   }Survivable emergency exposure dose but
150 rem in one week  }permitting no further radiation exposure
300 rem in one month }for life

[sub][sup](Source: NASA SP-3006 - 1964 Bioastronautics Data Book Paul M Webb, M.D., editor)[/sup][/sub]

Take from that what you will. The dose outside of Earth’s protective Van Allen belts will obviously be higher than 0.1 rem/day, but I don’t know by how much. Even if the dose that the Apollo astronauts got was ten times that (1 rem/day), their total dose would have been less than 20 rem.

[Keeve]

Apollo flights lasted only a week or two. Does anyone have any info on radiation shielding for the Space Station folks who are up there for a year or more?

[Trucido]

Keeve, the International Space Station is in a pretty low orbit. Might there still be some earthly protection from radiation levels? Enough, perhaps, to make a one or two year stint acceptable risk.

[Mojo_the_Monkey]

*Originally posted by Trucido *
**Keeve, the International Space Station is in a pretty low orbit. Might there still be some earthly protection from radiation levels? Enough, perhaps, to make a one or two year stint acceptable risk. **

Correct. The ISS orbits well below the Van Allen belts.

[GIGObuster]

To answer your first question:

I almost did not believe it at first, but one of the best sources of info on the radiation issue is coming from the lunar anomalies web site:

http://www.lunaranomalies.com/rad.htm

As early as 1962, six years before the first circumlunar flight of Apollo 8, several symposia were called: to address the issue of protection against radiations in space, including specific planning for the Apollo Missions. Both NASA and the Atomic Energy Commission held two symposia, the first in Gatlinburg, Tennessee in 1962 – sponsored by NASA, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the American Nuclear Society.

By 1964, more information on the radiation hazard had been gathered and analyzed. Meeting again at Gatlinburg, those concerned with the upcoming manned missions defined radiation problems encountered in deeper space, the radiobiological effects, and radiation effects on materials and components including shielding requirements. To refrain from writing a book on what was covered as a result of this extensive study, refer to the October 1964, NASA SP-71 Publication, Second Symposium on Protection Against Radiations in Space. By examining the contents of the '64 Symposium, you will see the laboriously considered and investigated areas early in our space program’s history that are directly relevant to Apollo and the radiation issue. The fact that it was studied six years prior to any Apollo Moon launch indicates that it had been the primary concern on their agenda. And from looking at contents of the 1964 Symposium, it’s blatantly obvious that the Apollo-hoaxers never even thought to address m any of the specific early radiation topics that are seen there. Why? Because they would rather browse through uninformative websites or hear opinions from uninformed sources to arrive at their general silly opinions. Why would such extensive studies have been done if there were no contemplated preparations to avoid such hazards during the upcoming manned space missions being planned … namely Apollo?
……
we knew precisely what the Van Allen belt profiles were, well before Apollo ever left the ground. The notion that the people who had done these studies would have deliberately placed the Apollo astronauts in mortal danger is absurd. And as you will see, the solution to the “Van Allen Belt Problem” was not to “fake” the Moon missions … but to properly manage the threat.
……
In addition, critical LM panels had a coating of special radio-luminescent paint and a thin coating of acrylic plastic was applied over the paint as a “radiation sealer.” This reduced the soft x-ray dose from an initial value of 13 rads/hr at a distance of 2 inches from the panel, to an acceptable value of less than 0.3 rad/hr. It wasn’t hazardous to the astronauts during missions because their suits (worn while in the LM) provided more than enough additional shielding to protect them.

One element moon landing doubters many times forget is the space suits:

The outer armor-layer consisted of 13 separate fabrics and materials (like beta cloth) designed to protect the two inner garments from the lunar elements (micrometeorites and radiation) and space itself (the vacuum). There were systems with backup systems for about every application. On top of this, each astronaut had a literal wardrobe of suits designed for the different phases of Apollo … training, lunar EVA, and flight. They all (obviously!) worked – but only after literally decades of development, with the radiation and other space hazards firmly in the minds of the designers.

The page has more information in the graphics also, so check it out.

They believe that the landings were real; however, they think that NASA is hiding evidence of possible alien structures on the Moon and elsewhere, please disregard their last paragraph on their web site.

---

To answer your second question:

NO.

[Kamandi]

The ISS would be subject to the radiation levels I posted above: less than 0.1 rem per day.

If I’m not mistaken, I believe the ISS is shielded somewhat. I think at least one of the modules (I believe it’s the Russian re-entry capsule) is more heavily shielded than the rest, because I recall something about it being used as a shelter during solar storms.

Sorry about the hearsay. I just don’t remember where this stuff came from. Maybe out of my ass…

[Mirage]

Thank you Mangetout, your link made me explode my drink all over my keyboard (I’ll be sending you the bill). Of course when I showed it to my friends afterwards they didn’t think it was as funny as I made it seem. Oh well, screw them.

[kpm]

OJ was in a movie about a faked Mars landing - it was called Capricorn One. Some nuts were saying that OJ was framed for murder because that movie gave away the idea that the moon landings were fake. Of course it took the government about 18 years to finally frame him!!

[Bob_Scene]

I think it’s really hilarious that anyone still believes in the moon landings. I was involved personally in faking the still shots of the astronauts standing around on the soundstage that was supposed to look like the moon. There was this one guy, I don’t know whose nephew he was, but he wandered onto the soundstage and showed up in several shots wearing a black ski cap, a parka and a backpack, and I had to PhotoShop his stupid ass out of a LOT of pictures! And it wasn’t until after the pictures were released to the press that I realized that when I took Mr. Parka out and re-did the background, I forgot to put in the stars! Doh! Luckily, it was years before anyone noticed and we came up with some scientific-sounding explanation.

[AndrewL]

Wow, didn’t know they had Photoshop back in the sixties. Must have run real slow.