If the appollo spacecrafts were, in places, just the thickness of foil, then howcome the vacuum of space...?

Question

If the appollo spacecrafts were, in places, just the thickness of foil, then howcome the vacuum of space didn't pull them apart?

Answer 1

The foil on the outside of the space craft just acts as a heat shield against the sun. The foil is in no way a barrier to the pressure differences between the vacuum of space and the inside of the space-craft. The foil wouldn't be torn apart because the foil doesn 't have a large volume of higher pressure air trying to escape. I hope this helps you understand it better. Don't listen to everyone else...it's a good question I thought. Goodluck!

Answer 2

Firstly, there is no reason that the vacuum of space would pull it apart. A vacuum, despite the way it is portrayed on TV, is not an all powerful suction force. The important factor is the difference between inside and outside pressure. Outside pressure in space is obviously zero. The Apollo spacecraft and lunar module was pressurised to only 5psi (normal atmospheric pressure is 15psi). That is far far far less than, for example, the carbonated drink inside a cola can is pressurised to. The thin metal of a cola can can withstand pressures far greater than the lunar module had to. The Apollo spacecraft itself was of a sturdier design, with somewhat thicker walls.

Secondly, the LM was not constructed as a drinks can is. The pressure skin was supported around the outisde by a series of ribs and stringers providing structural rigidity to the vehicle. Then, on the inside were control panels, stwoage lockers, wiring cabinets, and all sorts of other things to prevent the astronauts from coming into direct contact with the pressure layer and potentially breaking it. Under those conditions a thin layer of metal makes a perfectly adequate pressure vessel.

Incidentally, what you see when you see pictures of the spacecraft is not the pressure vessel, which is inside it. The outer layers are purely thermal protection layers, with no structural function whatsoever. In fact, the unpressurised descent stage was simly a framework of metal struts covered in several layers of very thin mylar foil.

Answer 3

Most of the people who have written answers to this are confused in some way or another. Here is the correct answer:

The hulls of the crew module and the lunar module were made of 3/16 inch aluminum sheet with structural bracing. They were sturdy.

The Lunar Module was covered with reflective foil to help with temperature control. The lunar module had a pressurized cabin, but it was kept pressurized only while docked or docking to the crew module.

No part of the hulls were made of foil, one layer or several.

Answer 4

in some places, the skin of the Lunar Module was no more than just a few layers of tin foil. However, with the proper bracing & supports, that's enough to seal the atmosphere within.

The key factor of the landing vehicle was weight - they made it as light as they possibly could, so they could carry less fuel to land on (and take off from) the surface of the moon.

Answer 5

The lunar module had a foil skin not the Apollo CSM.

Answer 6

Parts of the LM were covered in a foil/mylar sheets, but several dozen layers thick.

Answer 7

Because, in places, there was a vacuum inside the foil as well. Equal pressure.

Answer 8

Because the foil was just a shield, and those surfaces were not air tight, so the pressure could easily equalize. The airtight sections were where the astronauts were, and those walls were much sturdier. Duh.

Answer 9

To most of the people answering this question: Stop assuming that just because you know things, anyone who doesn't know it are morons.

I personally thought it was a good question, (maybe i would have googled it before asking it) and maybe I am a moron but at least the person who asked this question was using their head and thinking :)

Answer 10

From what I understand, that lunar module didn't have a pressurized cabin, they were in suits the whole time, am I incorrect?