Saturn V anecdote
Discussion
Halmyre said:
I suppose it would be churlish to point out that the reusable recovery system has killed more people than the one-shot method.
I'm mildly astonished to find that there have been only five fatal incidents (excluding training accidents and the like) in 60 years of space flight.
Don't forget that the total number of people who have made it into orbit since 1961 could fit in a single Airbus A380.I'm mildly astonished to find that there have been only five fatal incidents (excluding training accidents and the like) in 60 years of space flight.
Sorry for the slightly (?) OT question but didn’t wish to start a new thread.
The suits worn by the Apollo Commander and Lunar Module Pilot (ie those that flew the LEM and walked on the Moon) had a grey/silver patch on the back, whereas the suit of the Command Module Pilot didn’t.
What was the reason?
The suits worn by the Apollo Commander and Lunar Module Pilot (ie those that flew the LEM and walked on the Moon) had a grey/silver patch on the back, whereas the suit of the Command Module Pilot didn’t.
What was the reason?
V8LM said:
Sorry for the slightly (?) OT question but didn’t wish to start a new thread.
The suits worn by the Apollo Commander and Lunar Module Pilot (ie those that flew the LEM and walked on the Moon) had a grey/silver patch on the back, whereas the suit of the Command Module Pilot didn’t.
What was the reason?
Do you have any pics ?The suits worn by the Apollo Commander and Lunar Module Pilot (ie those that flew the LEM and walked on the Moon) had a grey/silver patch on the back, whereas the suit of the Command Module Pilot didn’t.
What was the reason?
Purely a guess, but maybe padding for the life support backpack which the CMP was never required to use ?
Yes, it's on the astronauts backs to provide abrasion protection from their PLSS life support backpacks.
They're patches of woven "Chromel-R", a material made of 20%,chrome & 80% nickel.
Since Collins (and other Command Module pilots) didn't need to have this, it was not added to their suits. His suit was also missing a second gas connector, a water cooling connector, a pressure relief valve in the sleeve and the tether mount for use on the lander.
Also deleted was the upper arm bearing that allowed the arm to rotate above the elbow. You can see that in the video of them entering the vehicle. It's definitely that little bit more awkward for Collins to lift his arm. It's probably why he's the only one of the 3 who didn't wave. He physically couldn't.
They're patches of woven "Chromel-R", a material made of 20%,chrome & 80% nickel.
Since Collins (and other Command Module pilots) didn't need to have this, it was not added to their suits. His suit was also missing a second gas connector, a water cooling connector, a pressure relief valve in the sleeve and the tether mount for use on the lander.
Also deleted was the upper arm bearing that allowed the arm to rotate above the elbow. You can see that in the video of them entering the vehicle. It's definitely that little bit more awkward for Collins to lift his arm. It's probably why he's the only one of the 3 who didn't wave. He physically couldn't.
Funilly enough, the topic of the differences between the suits worn by the Command Module Pilot and the other two crew members cropped up at one of my U3A Space and Astronomy Group meetings a few weeks ago. It was a subject I hadn't really thought about before so it's only in the past few weeks that I've looked at this in a bit more detail.
One thought did occur to me in relation to Apollos 15,16 and 17. On those missions, the Command Module Pilot (CMP) performed an EVA on the way back from the moon. The purpose of these EVAs was to retrieve film cannisters from a special instrument bay in the Service Module. On these EVAs, the CMP used an umbilical for oxygen supply rather than the full lunar back pack. However, they did carry the small "backup" backpack that normally sat on the full size back pack.
One thought did occur to me in relation to Apollos 15,16 and 17. On those missions, the Command Module Pilot (CMP) performed an EVA on the way back from the moon. The purpose of these EVAs was to retrieve film cannisters from a special instrument bay in the Service Module. On these EVAs, the CMP used an umbilical for oxygen supply rather than the full lunar back pack. However, they did carry the small "backup" backpack that normally sat on the full size back pack.
Here's a close look at the Saturn V's Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC) with one of the IBM guys who worked on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mMK6iSZsAs
This is at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mMK6iSZsAs
This is at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.
Shuttle anecdote from J Harvey LeBlanc
"The Drag Chute Problem.....
During landing, the Orbiter touches down on the runway at a speed of about 220 MPH. In the beginning of the Shuttle Program, we experienced severe tire and brake wear because of the very hard breaking required to get the Orbiter stopped on the available runway. In order to eliminate this problem a drag chute system, similar to those used to stop dragsters, was designed, developed and added to the Orbiter in 1992.
The drag chute is 40 ft. in diameter and is stowed in a compartment on the back end of the Orbiter. During launch and until landing, the drag chute system is protected by a door which seals off the compartment. During landing, a pyrotechnic mortar is used to deploy a smaller 9 ft. pilot chute away from the back of the Orbiter and to blow off the compartment door. The force produced by the inflated pilot chute applies tension to two cut-knives that sever the cords holding the 130 lb. main chute pack in the compartment. The inflated pilot chute also pulls out the main drag chute, which in turn is also inflated and slows down the Orbiter.
On February 2, 1962, astronaut John Glenn became the first American to Orbit the Earth. He was in a Mercury capsule called Friendship 7 for that very historic flight. After he retired from NASA he became an Ohio US senator and served in that capacity from 1974 until 1999. In 1998 he was selected to fly on the Space Shuttle. I can remember the extreme amount of national publicity that preceded Senator Glenn's flight on the Space Shuttle. The press and the nation were very excited since he was a US senator and the fact that he was 77 years old, meant that he was going to be the oldest person to fly in space. The national press came to our plant to interview people that were going to be involved with the flight and also people that knew Senator Glenn. I was very honored to be selected by Boeing to represent the company in this special national TV program along with former astronaut Buzz Aldrin, an old friend of Senator Glenn.
As Design Director of Propulsion and Mechanical Systems, I was requested to be in the Mission Support Room at our Downey, CA. plant for this launch. The countdown went well, except that during lift off something was seen falling from the back of the Orbiter. This was seen using one of the many video cameras installed around the launch pad. After reviewing the video in slow motion many times, we concluded that the falling object was probably the door which was used to cover the drag chute. We were able to confirm this several hours later when the door was found on the launch pad.
So, we now had an Orbiter in flight without a door to protect our drag chute. Not a good thing, since this area had been very close to the extreme heat and flames from the three main engines during the first 8 minutes of launch. This became an extremely uneasy situation because no one knew the condition of the now exposed main chute pack, retaining ties, or the temperature of the mortar pyrotechnic cartridge, and it suggested the chute might deploy at any time during the flight.
But, again, in true manned spacecraft fashion, many of us groundlings spent the next several days (and nights) thinking up all the horrible things that could happen if the chute inadvertently deployed----and of course, what to do about it. This is what we Rocket Scientist refer to as "what if games!" We considered such things as: if it deployed in space, flailed around, and became wrapped around the vertical tail---- would the rudder and speedbrakes still function? In such a case, would the chute burn away during reentry into the atmosphere, or hang around and cause approach and landing problems? Or what about this one----what if it deployed just as the Orbiter was about 40 ft. altitude during landing approach and causing the Orbiter to crash short of the runway at over 220 MPH?
This is the one that really gave us nightmares for the next few days!
There were suggestions made to deploy the drag chute on orbit and just get rid of it prior to reentry, since we knew the Orbiter could land without it, with just extra tire and brake wear. I shot this proposal down when I pointed out that the entire operation of the drag chute system was based on the chute filling with air, causing it to open----but there is no air in space so it would not work!!
The normal way of engineers solving a problem with a space vehicle is to conduct analysis to prove that something will work, then to go conduct tests to verify that your analysis is correct. In this case we conducted thermal analysis which indicated that the radiant heat from the main engines firing, that close to the drag chute pack, would not significantly damage the pack. However, we had no way of verifying by tests that our analysis was correct.
The day the Orbiter and crew were to land many of us were glued to the TVs waiting to see the approach and landing. To say that we were holding our breaths, would be an understatement! A decision was made to not use the drag chute for this landing and to just apply the hard braking required to bring the vehicle to a stop. Fortunately, none of the horrible things we had feared happened and the vehicle landed safely to the joy and cheers of many happy engineers. Post flight inspections showed signs of enough heat to melt some non-structural Nylon on the face of the pack, but otherwise the chute and compartment were in good shape. Our analysis had been correct! A specific cause for the anomaly was never duplicated in test, but tolerances and controls on rigging the door were tightened up and no further problems occurred. Edit: Analysis of the door breakaway retention pins determined that there was inconsistency with the pin diameters. No two were the same, but they were all inadequately too small in diameter. The vendor was notified and corrective actions taken. Also, the pin material was changed from aluminum to steel."
"The Drag Chute Problem.....
During landing, the Orbiter touches down on the runway at a speed of about 220 MPH. In the beginning of the Shuttle Program, we experienced severe tire and brake wear because of the very hard breaking required to get the Orbiter stopped on the available runway. In order to eliminate this problem a drag chute system, similar to those used to stop dragsters, was designed, developed and added to the Orbiter in 1992.
The drag chute is 40 ft. in diameter and is stowed in a compartment on the back end of the Orbiter. During launch and until landing, the drag chute system is protected by a door which seals off the compartment. During landing, a pyrotechnic mortar is used to deploy a smaller 9 ft. pilot chute away from the back of the Orbiter and to blow off the compartment door. The force produced by the inflated pilot chute applies tension to two cut-knives that sever the cords holding the 130 lb. main chute pack in the compartment. The inflated pilot chute also pulls out the main drag chute, which in turn is also inflated and slows down the Orbiter.
On February 2, 1962, astronaut John Glenn became the first American to Orbit the Earth. He was in a Mercury capsule called Friendship 7 for that very historic flight. After he retired from NASA he became an Ohio US senator and served in that capacity from 1974 until 1999. In 1998 he was selected to fly on the Space Shuttle. I can remember the extreme amount of national publicity that preceded Senator Glenn's flight on the Space Shuttle. The press and the nation were very excited since he was a US senator and the fact that he was 77 years old, meant that he was going to be the oldest person to fly in space. The national press came to our plant to interview people that were going to be involved with the flight and also people that knew Senator Glenn. I was very honored to be selected by Boeing to represent the company in this special national TV program along with former astronaut Buzz Aldrin, an old friend of Senator Glenn.
As Design Director of Propulsion and Mechanical Systems, I was requested to be in the Mission Support Room at our Downey, CA. plant for this launch. The countdown went well, except that during lift off something was seen falling from the back of the Orbiter. This was seen using one of the many video cameras installed around the launch pad. After reviewing the video in slow motion many times, we concluded that the falling object was probably the door which was used to cover the drag chute. We were able to confirm this several hours later when the door was found on the launch pad.
So, we now had an Orbiter in flight without a door to protect our drag chute. Not a good thing, since this area had been very close to the extreme heat and flames from the three main engines during the first 8 minutes of launch. This became an extremely uneasy situation because no one knew the condition of the now exposed main chute pack, retaining ties, or the temperature of the mortar pyrotechnic cartridge, and it suggested the chute might deploy at any time during the flight.
But, again, in true manned spacecraft fashion, many of us groundlings spent the next several days (and nights) thinking up all the horrible things that could happen if the chute inadvertently deployed----and of course, what to do about it. This is what we Rocket Scientist refer to as "what if games!" We considered such things as: if it deployed in space, flailed around, and became wrapped around the vertical tail---- would the rudder and speedbrakes still function? In such a case, would the chute burn away during reentry into the atmosphere, or hang around and cause approach and landing problems? Or what about this one----what if it deployed just as the Orbiter was about 40 ft. altitude during landing approach and causing the Orbiter to crash short of the runway at over 220 MPH?
This is the one that really gave us nightmares for the next few days!
There were suggestions made to deploy the drag chute on orbit and just get rid of it prior to reentry, since we knew the Orbiter could land without it, with just extra tire and brake wear. I shot this proposal down when I pointed out that the entire operation of the drag chute system was based on the chute filling with air, causing it to open----but there is no air in space so it would not work!!
The normal way of engineers solving a problem with a space vehicle is to conduct analysis to prove that something will work, then to go conduct tests to verify that your analysis is correct. In this case we conducted thermal analysis which indicated that the radiant heat from the main engines firing, that close to the drag chute pack, would not significantly damage the pack. However, we had no way of verifying by tests that our analysis was correct.
The day the Orbiter and crew were to land many of us were glued to the TVs waiting to see the approach and landing. To say that we were holding our breaths, would be an understatement! A decision was made to not use the drag chute for this landing and to just apply the hard braking required to bring the vehicle to a stop. Fortunately, none of the horrible things we had feared happened and the vehicle landed safely to the joy and cheers of many happy engineers. Post flight inspections showed signs of enough heat to melt some non-structural Nylon on the face of the pack, but otherwise the chute and compartment were in good shape. Our analysis had been correct! A specific cause for the anomaly was never duplicated in test, but tolerances and controls on rigging the door were tightened up and no further problems occurred. Edit: Analysis of the door breakaway retention pins determined that there was inconsistency with the pin diameters. No two were the same, but they were all inadequately too small in diameter. The vendor was notified and corrective actions taken. Also, the pin material was changed from aluminum to steel."
Apollo related...
From Michael Okuda ( American graphic designer best known for his work on Star Trek )
"Our friend, production designer Joseph Hodges was a set designer on Apollo 13. Before that, worked with us on ST:TNG and ST:DS9. He recently told us that during preproduction, Ron Howard and the actors made a field trip to fly on NASA’s KC-135 “Vomit Comet” airplane to experience zero gravity. At this point, the film had planned to fake all the “weightless” scenes using standard mechanical special effects: wire work and teeter-totters.
Joseph saw the video of their antics, and suggested that it might be possible to build sets inside the airplane so that they could film in actual zero gravity. His suggestion was met with disinterest. “[They] said I was crazy,” recalled Joseph. To be fair, no one had ever used the Vomit Comet for a movie, and it would be an expensive, difficult operation. Still, standard Hollywood tricks for simulating weightlessness simply don’t compare to the graceful freedom of real weightlessness.
The thing is: Joseph Hodges really doesn’t like to take “no” for an answer. “I called NASA to get the dimensions of the plane interior and did a [construction blueprint] drawing anyway.”
That Friday, there was a production meeting of the producers, director, and department heads. Recalls Joseph, “The production designer called me to say that he needed me to draw blueprints of the sets in the plane.” He needed them in a big hurry and had to be done by the following Monday. Said Joseph, “I told him they were already done, and I took them right over to the meeting.”
Turns out that, unbeknownst to Joseph, Steven Spielberg had just seen the video of Ron Howard and the actors cavorting in zero gravity and had made the same suggestion, and now everyone loved the idea. It seems that when a mere set designer has an idea, it’s one thing, but when a world-famous movie director has the same suggestion, it’s a MUCH better idea!"
From Michael Okuda ( American graphic designer best known for his work on Star Trek )
"Our friend, production designer Joseph Hodges was a set designer on Apollo 13. Before that, worked with us on ST:TNG and ST:DS9. He recently told us that during preproduction, Ron Howard and the actors made a field trip to fly on NASA’s KC-135 “Vomit Comet” airplane to experience zero gravity. At this point, the film had planned to fake all the “weightless” scenes using standard mechanical special effects: wire work and teeter-totters.
Joseph saw the video of their antics, and suggested that it might be possible to build sets inside the airplane so that they could film in actual zero gravity. His suggestion was met with disinterest. “[They] said I was crazy,” recalled Joseph. To be fair, no one had ever used the Vomit Comet for a movie, and it would be an expensive, difficult operation. Still, standard Hollywood tricks for simulating weightlessness simply don’t compare to the graceful freedom of real weightlessness.
The thing is: Joseph Hodges really doesn’t like to take “no” for an answer. “I called NASA to get the dimensions of the plane interior and did a [construction blueprint] drawing anyway.”
That Friday, there was a production meeting of the producers, director, and department heads. Recalls Joseph, “The production designer called me to say that he needed me to draw blueprints of the sets in the plane.” He needed them in a big hurry and had to be done by the following Monday. Said Joseph, “I told him they were already done, and I took them right over to the meeting.”
Turns out that, unbeknownst to Joseph, Steven Spielberg had just seen the video of Ron Howard and the actors cavorting in zero gravity and had made the same suggestion, and now everyone loved the idea. It seems that when a mere set designer has an idea, it’s one thing, but when a world-famous movie director has the same suggestion, it’s a MUCH better idea!"
MartG said:
Apollo related...
From Michael Okuda ( American graphic designer best known for his work on Star Trek )
"Our friend, production designer Joseph Hodges was a set designer on Apollo 13. Before that, worked with us on ST:TNG and ST:DS9. He recently told us that during preproduction, Ron Howard and the actors made a field trip to fly on NASA’s KC-135 “Vomit Comet” airplane to experience zero gravity. At this point, the film had planned to fake all the “weightless” scenes using standard mechanical special effects: wire work and teeter-totters.
Joseph saw the video of their antics, and suggested that it might be possible to build sets inside the airplane so that they could film in actual zero gravity. His suggestion was met with disinterest. “[They] said I was crazy,” recalled Joseph. To be fair, no one had ever used the Vomit Comet for a movie, and it would be an expensive, difficult operation. Still, standard Hollywood tricks for simulating weightlessness simply don’t compare to the graceful freedom of real weightlessness.
The thing is: Joseph Hodges really doesn’t like to take “no” for an answer. “I called NASA to get the dimensions of the plane interior and did a [construction blueprint] drawing anyway.”
That Friday, there was a production meeting of the producers, director, and department heads. Recalls Joseph, “The production designer called me to say that he needed me to draw blueprints of the sets in the plane.” He needed them in a big hurry and had to be done by the following Monday. Said Joseph, “I told him they were already done, and I took them right over to the meeting.”
Turns out that, unbeknownst to Joseph, Steven Spielberg had just seen the video of Ron Howard and the actors cavorting in zero gravity and had made the same suggestion, and now everyone loved the idea. It seems that when a mere set designer has an idea, it’s one thing, but when a world-famous movie director has the same suggestion, it’s a MUCH better idea!"
That's the way the world works :-) Similarly a woman can suggest an idea in a meeting and it's ignored... later in the same meeting a man suggests the same thing and suddenly it's a good idea.From Michael Okuda ( American graphic designer best known for his work on Star Trek )
"Our friend, production designer Joseph Hodges was a set designer on Apollo 13. Before that, worked with us on ST:TNG and ST:DS9. He recently told us that during preproduction, Ron Howard and the actors made a field trip to fly on NASA’s KC-135 “Vomit Comet” airplane to experience zero gravity. At this point, the film had planned to fake all the “weightless” scenes using standard mechanical special effects: wire work and teeter-totters.
Joseph saw the video of their antics, and suggested that it might be possible to build sets inside the airplane so that they could film in actual zero gravity. His suggestion was met with disinterest. “[They] said I was crazy,” recalled Joseph. To be fair, no one had ever used the Vomit Comet for a movie, and it would be an expensive, difficult operation. Still, standard Hollywood tricks for simulating weightlessness simply don’t compare to the graceful freedom of real weightlessness.
The thing is: Joseph Hodges really doesn’t like to take “no” for an answer. “I called NASA to get the dimensions of the plane interior and did a [construction blueprint] drawing anyway.”
That Friday, there was a production meeting of the producers, director, and department heads. Recalls Joseph, “The production designer called me to say that he needed me to draw blueprints of the sets in the plane.” He needed them in a big hurry and had to be done by the following Monday. Said Joseph, “I told him they were already done, and I took them right over to the meeting.”
Turns out that, unbeknownst to Joseph, Steven Spielberg had just seen the video of Ron Howard and the actors cavorting in zero gravity and had made the same suggestion, and now everyone loved the idea. It seems that when a mere set designer has an idea, it’s one thing, but when a world-famous movie director has the same suggestion, it’s a MUCH better idea!"
MartG said:
Analysis of the door breakaway retention pins determined that there was inconsistency with the pin diameters. No two were the same, but they were all inadequately too small in diameter. The vendor was notified and corrective actions taken. Also, the pin material was changed from aluminum to steel."
How does stuff like this get past quality control?Was it considered an issue when the door pins were being designed? Was there any assumption that they NEEDED to be of higher quality?
I think the issue here is that throughout the history of the Shuttle, from STS 1 right through to STS135, there was a very unclear understanding of the dynamics of the first ten minutes of flight and the variable and formidable forces acting on "the stack". Many Shuttles were damaged during launch over the 135 flights - fatally so on STS103.
I think the issue here is that throughout the history of the Shuttle, from STS 1 right through to STS135, there was a very unclear understanding of the dynamics of the first ten minutes of flight and the variable and formidable forces acting on "the stack". Many Shuttles were damaged during launch over the 135 flights - fatally so on STS103.
Heres a nice short doco, some guy buys 2 tons of ex nasa junk in the 70s and gets a lunar lander guidance computer in there, now they fix and power it up..
https://youtu.be/g0PIXvjTasI
https://youtu.be/g0PIXvjTasI
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff