Why no lithium? #
Posted Thursday 20th March 2008 13:46 GMT
Why does lithium have to go?
Posted Thursday 20th March 2008 12:15 GMT
A quick search on the world's favourite data miner reveals e.g. http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=22762
Posted Thursday 20th March 2008 12:15 GMT
This is interesting why, exactly? Couldn't give a monkey's toss if astronauts took sheet music and a chamber orchestra with them.
Wait. Actually, no. The chamber orchestra would be far more interesting than some eagle-eyed sadsack spotting an iPod in a NASA photograph. Too much time on his hands, no doubt.
Posted Thursday 20th March 2008 13:46 GMT
What. Apple let them actually change the battery? !
Paris - cos she like's her ipod.
Posted Thursday 20th March 2008 14:09 GMT
So are the laptops used on space missions equipped with Li-Ion batteries, or are they running on alkalines as well?
--Paris icon because I'm sure she has many toys that take alkaline batteries.
Posted Thursday 20th March 2008 14:12 GMT
Essentially, because the Shuttle and ISS are VERY enclosed spaces, and the contents of a lithium-ion battery are toxic, corrosive, flammable and potentially explosive. The risks aren't worth the weight and size benefits.
Posted Thursday 20th March 2008 16:13 GMT
when they have an ipod that runs on a fuel cell...
looks more like a white zune to me ...
Posted Friday 21st March 2008 13:48 GMT
It really is f***ing Rocket Science to change the batteries on an iPod.
Spacesuit please.