posted 07-30-2015 12:20 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rick Mulheirn:
...Dr. John McCarthy proposed at a House subcommittee hearing a theory that included Grissom's involuntary actions in the chain of events that may have triggered the fire

---

The review board ignored and a congressional committee later vehemently rejected the hypothesis of Dr. John McCarthy, NAA Division Director of Research, Engineering, and Test, that Grissom accidentally scuffed the insulation of a wire in moving about the spacecraft. (Investigation into Apollo 204 Accident, 1: 202, 263.) In the same congressional investigation, Col. Frank Borman, the first astronaut to enter the burnt-out spacecraft, testified: "We found no evidence to support the thesis that Gus, or any of the crew members kicked the wire that ignited the flammables." This theory that a scuffed wire caused the spark that led to the fire still has wide currency at Kennedy Space Center. Men differ, however, on the cause of the scuff.

posted 07-30-2015 12:29 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rick Mulheirn:
Under such questioning Rockwell's representatives "back peddled."

---

posted 07-30-2015 03:14 PM               

At the risk of coming across as a conspiracy theorist, the Review Board and the congressional committee would reject the hypothesis if they were intent on protecting the reputations of the crew and not attributing any kind of blame to them.

But the theory put forward by Dr McCarthy was based on evidence. The conclusions of the Review Board were not... which is why the board could not positively identify the cause of the fire.

If I may paraphrase that well known and highly respected forensic "expert".... Gil Grissom... "Follow the evidence"!

The Gas Chromatograph cable to the best of my knowledge was not damaged by Gus Grissom or anybody else. It was however still live during the test despite the device having been removed, the cable was in the area of the ECU and the seat of the fire. Post fire analysis did provide evidence that Grissom may have kicked or moved the cable in question; the cable was not in the same position in which it had been left by ground crew when the test began. Furthermore the cable was still providing telemetry that was consistent with it being moved and arcing seconds before the first call from the crew, at a time that Gus Grissom was moving around in that area.

posted 07-31-2015 12:40 AM               

The wiring was one of the problems that had received comment. It was poorly routed and secured in some locations and as a result had been stepped on by many people during construction, maintenance and during astronaut familiarisation and training. Engineers had voiced concern about it.

There had been reports of a hinged access panel that had been opened many times had been causing chafing where the panel contacted a wiring loom as it was opened/closed and required attention.

The source of ignition could not be positively identified but there were many possible locations. The fuel for the fire potentially was any item within the spacecraft in a pressurised oxygen rich environment.

Once ignited the fire was intense and spread rapidly.

posted 07-31-2015 05:12 AM               

We found no evidence to support the thesis that Gus, or any of the crew members kicked the wire that ignited the flammables.

posted 08-04-2015 06:30 AM               

A short circuit occurred during checkout of CSM 020 at North American, Downey, Calif. External power batteries in parallel with the reentry batteries had indicated low power and were replaced. During preparations to continue the test, arcing was reported and emergency shutdown procedures were applied. Investigation was under way to determine the cause of the arcing. Initial indications were that at least 100 amps were imposed on a small portion of the spacecraft wiring, causing some damage to the spacecraft batteries.

posted 08-06-2015 10:04 AM               

From the Apollo Chronology -

1969 Mar 12 - Status of a fire detection system for Apollo

George M. Low discussed the status of a fire detection system for Apollo in a memorandum to Martin L. Raines, reminding him that such a system had been under consideration since the accident in January 1967. Low said: "Yesterday, Dr. [Maxime A.] Faget, you, and I participated in a meeting to review the current status of a flight fire detection system. It became quite clear that our state of knowledge about the physics and chemistry of fire in zero gravity is insufficient to permit the design and development of a flightworthy fire detection system at this time. For this reason, we agreed that we would not be able to incorporate a fire detection system in any of the Apollo spacecraft.

posted 08-06-2015 11:11 AM            

The crew's positions in the spacecraft are important. Was Chaffee sitting on his couch at the start of the fire? Was Grissom down in the LEB?

I have read that the fire would have been visible from Chaffee's position and he was the first to report it from the spacecraft, does this mean he was probably the first to see it?

There has been movement reported almost immediately before the start of the fire and some have speculated that this was Grissom adjusting cobra cables. Was he actually down in the area of the arcing when the fire started? If Grissom was not in his couch why did he not see the fire starting?

posted 08-06-2015 02:37 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by robsouth:
A few more points and questions.

---

posted 08-07-2015 04:25 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronpur:
I think the question of rather or not Gus kicked, or disturbed a cable and caused the fire can not possibly be used to blame him.

---

Blame would be a misplaced emotional response to any such finding. Of course, Gus should have been able to move around inside the vehicle without fear of any consequence. Any such involvement would have been innocuous and quite innocent.

The point is... any investigation should and must be factual and devoid of emotion.

posted 08-07-2015 07:02 PM               

The report does indicate that there were locations and items of equipment that were destroyed by the fire, some of these were in locations that it is believed the fire initiated. This would indicate that any modern investigative techniques would not be able to provide new details because the evidence was destroyed originally by the fire.

The report enclosure 27 is a photograph of the socket wrench found insitu in a wiring loom. It is a poor quality photo but the socket can be made out.

posted 08-08-2015 02:30 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rick Mulheirn:
Blame would be a misplaced emotional response to any such finding.

---

posted 08-08-2015 07:03 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by schnappsicle:
The idea of a fire extinguisher sounds great on the surface, but would any of the crew members have had the time to unhook it and start spraying the fire considering how fast it spread once it started?

---

September 28 1967
MSC's Engineering and Development (E&D) Directorate recommended that the Apollo CM be provided with a foam fire extinguisher. E&D also recommended that the LM be provided with a water nozzle for extinguishing open fires and that cabin decompression be used to combat fires behind panels. An aqueous gel (foam) composition fire extinguisher was considered most appropriate for use in the CM because hydrogen in the available water supply could intensify the fire, water spray could not reach fires behind panels, and a shirt-sleeve environment was preferred. E&D further recommended that development of a condensation nuclei indicator be pursued as a flight fire detection system, but that it not be made a constraint on the Apollo program. ASPO Manager George M. Low concurred with the recommendations September 28 and MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth concurred October 7.

June 3 1968
Apollo Program Director Sam Phillips asked ASPO Manager George Low to investigate the value of using freon as a fire extinguishing agent inside the spacecraft.

Admittedly, Phillips said, MSC had considered using a freon extinguisher system shortly after the AS-204 accident, but it had been rejected, largely because of toxicity factors and because tests had shown the agent ineffective in extinguishing combustion of polyurethane in a pure oxygen atmosphere. A number of factors now dictated a reevaluation of such an extinguisher system, however:

• Additional testing of late had indicated a lower toxicity problem than earlier believed.
  
• The addition of oxygen masks to the spacecraft now afforded some protection against a toxic atmosphere.
  
• Because of post-accident changes inside the cabin, the flammability problem had been reduced to a few specific materials (quite different from polyurethane foam) sited in compartmentalized locations inside the cabin.
  
• The oxygen-nitrogen mixed gas had been selected as the prelaunch atmosphere inside the cabin.

In view of these changes, Phillips said, a freon extinguishing system might be better than the present jelled water extinguisher (quicker activation and reduced equipment damage). He asked that Low not overlook this potential improvement in crew safety, which could be of particular value during the high-risk period of launch, when the crew was essentially immobilized by the forces of acceleration.

posted 08-10-2015 05:33 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by oly:
The report does indicate that there were locations and items of equipment that were destroyed by the fire, some of these were in locations that it is believed the fire initiated. This would indicate that any modern investigative techniques would not be able to provide new details because the evidence was destroyed originally by the fire.

---

posted 08-10-2015 07:03 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by robsouth:
...determine if they were a cause of/or a result of a fire.

---

posted 08-10-2015 09:07 AM            

Earlier in the test, Grissom had complained about a "sour milk" odor which resulted in a delay in the test while the pad crew investigated without resolution. Grissom might be expected to be reluctant to raise the same issue until he found more justification. The AS-204 Review Board concluded that the "sour milk" incident was unrelated to the fire.

posted 08-11-2015 09:57 AM            

At some point he sees the fire, leaps up and back onto his couch, hitting his helmet on the instrument panel in the process, and then tries to activate the pressure release valve. Unable to make any headway with the valve, he lies down and helps White remove the centre headrest and assists in trying to open the hatch before seeking shelter under the couch.

Two things from this. From seeing the fire to seeking shelter under the couch was about 14 seconds, did Grissom have time to do all of the above?

posted 08-11-2015 04:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by robsouth:
Once the crew were plugged into their individual oxygen supply, how could they smell anything from the spacecraft environment?

---

The cabin was at a pressure of 15-17 psia. I assume the suits were as well. Were the suits at an even higher pressure?

We know that spacecraft 012 was not the most well constructed machine. I would not be surprised if the O2 systems had leakages.

posted 08-17-2015 11:23 AM            

I was monitoring the panel feeding oxygen through a flexible hose into the spacecraft through access port #14.

...I looked back to where I had been sitting. The chair, engulfed in flames, was reduced to a bare metal frame. The O2 panel was almost hidden in the heavy smoke and fire shooting out of access port #14."

...I was always curious why the fire continued on for several minutes until all the flammable material had burned out. There was still oxygen being fed to the spacecraft (90psi)through the oxygen system from bottles located outside the spacecraft and continued long after we removed the three hatches.

posted 08-18-2015 05:12 AM            

I was monitoring the panel feeding oxygen through a flexible hose into the spacecraft through access port #14.

...heavy smoke and fire shooting out of access port #14.

There was still oxygen being fed to the spacecraft

posted 08-18-2015 05:51 PM            

I am assuming that the O2 bottles were used to maintain CM pressure at 17 psia and for replacement of O2 leakage from the CM to the atmosphere. Presumably, there was also a pressure regulator as 90 psi gas would produce quite a jet.