Could life support be re-established on "Snoopy" ascent stage?

[szputnyik]

During Apollo 10, when the crew piloting the LM returned to the command module in Lunar orbit, the ascent stage engines of the LM "Snoopy" were remotely fired in such a way to bring it into a Solar orbit.

Let's say that in 10-20 years, there will be a long-term manned mission to near-Earth Solar orbit, and an Apollo-compatible docking port is included on the spacecraft in case the crew runs across Snoopy.

By sheer luck, the crew does find the lost LM. If the crew were to dock with it, could the life support systems in the LM be restarted by either the LM's own remaining power or by transferring power from the crew's spacecraft? Would it still be operational after roasting in unending sunlight for almost half a century now?

[SargeRho]

Yes, but it wouldn't be very healthy. It contains so much metal, it's probably very radioactive by now.

[magnemoe]

Yes, but it wouldn't be very healthy. It contains so much metal, it's probably very radioactive by now.

Why should it be radioactive? Because it contains metal?

I guess not for another reason, the LM interior was not designed to withstand extreme heat and cold, none of the parts was designed to last for years in space conditions. I guess lost of materials are much weaker and brittle. any lubricant is gone, rubber gaskets are dried out and so on, trying run this parts would be dangerous.

[briansun1]

why would they want to do that in the first place?

[sal_vager]

It would not be risked, the age of the hardware would make it's safety and status unknown, plus you'd have to specifically try to rendezvous with it, there'd be no accidental meet-up with the LM.

[Tex_NL]

It wouldn't surprise me if at least some systems could be brought back to life. But as magnemoe already stated many parts will have deteriorated beyond repair due to the extreme conditions. The only scientific reason I can think of to capture it is to study the long term effects of outer space. Knowing how certain materials age differently out there than on earth might give a new insight in future spaceship design.

[SargeRho]

Why should it be radioactive? Because it contains metal?

Secondary radiation from decades of being exposed to energetic protons and cosmic rays.

[Mr Shifty]

I'd venture to say it's not decades of being exposed, but continuous exposure. Most industrial metals that can be activated have radioactive isotopes with relatively short half-lives (hours to months), so it doesn't take long for those metals to quiet down to background once they're removed from the radioactive environment.

[lajoswinkler]

If the window seals were made out of flexible polymers, and I think they should've been because you want your windows to remain unbroken under thermal and dynamic stress, they've probably degraded by now. Very brittle from the thermal stress (the thing probably experiences few tumbles a day, each tumble is around 200 kelvin of difference), ionizing radiation and UV.

The interior is now probably vacuum and even though there is oxygen in the tanks, I sincerely doubt it could be pressurized efficiently. The leak would be significant.

Snoopy's batteries are dead, of course.

Secondary radiation from decades of being exposed to energetic protons and cosmic rays.

No, that would not happen or would be extremely weak. The radiation flux in space is very weak compared to the fluxes we produce in reactors using neutrons, something you won't find in space because neutron t_1/2 is ~15min.

The effect would not be cumulative because an equilibrium would be established shortly - decay halftimes of radioisotopes of metals used to make the ascent stage are very short.

[TADBTD]

If the window seals were made out of flexible polymers, and I think they should've been because you want your windows to remain unbroken under thermal and dynamic stress, they've probably degraded by now. Very brittle from the thermal stress (the thing probably experiences few tumbles a day, each tumble is around 200 kelvin of difference), ionizing radiation and UV.

The interior is now probably vacuum and even though there is oxygen in the tanks, I sincerely doubt it could be pressurized efficiently. The leak would be significant.

Snoopy's batteries are dead, of course.

No, that would not happen or would be extremely weak. The radiation flux in space is very weak compared to the fluxes we produce in reactors using neutrons, something you won't find in space because neutron t_1/2 is ~15min.

The effect would not be cumulative because an equilibrium would be established shortly - decay halftimes of radioisotopes of metals used to make the ascent stage are very short.

Um...did you noticed that they've been there for about 43 years now?

[Mr Shifty]

Um...did you noticed that they've been there for about 43 years now?

Not sure what you're trying to say here.

[lajoswinkler]

Um...did you noticed that they've been there for about 43 years now?

Actually it's almost 44.5 years.

I don't understand what's the point of your question.

[Brotoro]

Metal floating around in solar orbit is not going to become radioactive...otherwise metallic meteorites would be radioactive, and they aren't (any more than they would be from containing small amounts of radioisotopes, as you also find in Earth rocks).

[Brotoro]

The Lunar Module used evaporative cooling to keep its electronics from overheating. If its systems were left running, the electronics would have overheated after the coolant was all expended, so I don't think you're going to be able to use the electronics even if you feed power to the LM.

[softweir]

To add to the suggestions regarding window seals and electronics, I'd like to suggest the possibility of metal fatigue caused by thermal stress. If that sucker's rolling then components will alternately be heated and then chilled: not good for high-performance, low-weight alloys. After that time, I wouldn't want to risk pressurising the cabin!

Edited October 15, 2013 by softweir
Typo