Guest guest Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Steve, I've received an analysis of the UHMS preliminary report from the most trusted expert I know and apparently the Vickers chambers were built with pressure relief devices that instantaneously prevent the Vickers from exploding in the event of fire. These devices worked exactly as designed some 40+ years after the chambers were built and prevented the tragedy from being worse than it already was. In addition to relieving pressure, these devices are also engineered to dissipate the 100% oxygen environment, thus the minimal fire damage inside the chamber itself in comparison to the Apollo 1 fire. The fire did begin 20 minutes into treatment at 1.75 ATA. Despite the age of these chambers, I cannot help but admire the foresight of Dr Neubauer to utilize Vickers in his practice. The fire was contained and thus controlled as much as possible. Understanding the physics of this event becomes much clearer when the explainer doesn't lace his commentary with incendiary and insulting remarks. As for HBOtruth.com, most of the blog is in the form of probing questions asking for an explanation of the differences between the Neubauer, South African, and Apollo 1 fires/explosions. I don't read anything sinister, as the UHMS report obviously erred when compared to the video evidence. DF Freels http://www.davidfreels.com david@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2009 Report Share Posted August 1, 2009 , Apology accepted. BTW, all hyperbaric chambers built to conform to ASME code have relief valves. Glad you have a better understanding of the physics, but please be clear regarding the tone of responses: as ye sow, so shall ye reap. Civil attacks garner civil responses. Regards, Steve > > Steve, > > I've received an analysis of the UHMS preliminary report from the most trusted expert I know and apparently the Vickers chambers were built with pressure relief devices that instantaneously prevent the Vickers from exploding in the event of fire. These devices worked exactly as designed some 40+ years after the chambers were built and prevented the tragedy from being worse than it already was. In addition to relieving pressure, these devices are also engineered to dissipate the 100% oxygen environment, thus the minimal fire damage inside the chamber itself in comparison to the Apollo 1 fire. > > The fire did begin 20 minutes into treatment at 1.75 ATA. Despite the age of these chambers, I cannot help but admire the foresight of Dr Neubauer to utilize Vickers in his practice. The fire was contained and thus controlled as much as possible. > > Understanding the physics of this event becomes much clearer when the explainer doesn't lace his commentary with incendiary and insulting remarks. > > As for HBOtruth.com, most of the blog is in the form of probing questions asking for an explanation of the differences between the Neubauer, South African, and Apollo 1 fires/explosions. I don't read anything sinister, as the UHMS report obviously erred when compared to the video evidence. > > > DF > > Freels > http://www.davidfreels.com > david@... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.