SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Objectives include: a) Define major Command and Service Module (CSM) design considerations; b) List Command Module (CM) RCS failures and lessons learned; and c) List Service Module (SM) RCS failures and lessons learned.
Transporting of Spare Altitude Chamber from Lunar Module (LM) Site to Command Service Module (CSM) Site. The video is broken into three parts: - Part 1: Run time of 21 min., 21 sec.; color; no sound - Part 2: Run time of 17 min., 14 sec.; color; no sound - Part 3: Run time of 18 min., 41 sec.; color, no sound All videos are in the mp4 format.
The preparation of the analytical approach and of the related software used in the inversion of the differential and rotating Doppler data obtained from the ionospheric experiment of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) is discussed. These data were collected in space-to-space paths (between the ASTP Docking Module (DM) and the Apollo Command Service Module and in space-to-ground paths (between the DM and ground). The Doppler links operated at 162 and 324 MHz and have an accuracy better than 3 MHz over 10-sec integration time. The inversion approach was tested with dummy data obtained with a computer simulation. It was found that a measurement accuracy of 1 to 10% in the value of the horizontal electron density gradient at 221-km altitude can be achieved, in space-to-space paths. For space-to-ground paths near the orbital plane, possible effects of the horizontal gradients on the received differential Doppler shifts were identified. It was possible to reduce the gradient-associated errors in the inversion that leads to the columnar electron content by approximately one-half. Accuracies of 5 to 10% in columnar electron content are achievable, with this gradient-compensation technique.
Footage is shown of the crew of Apollo 11 (Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Aldrin Jr., and Command Module Pilot Michael Collins) inside the spacecraft as they fly from the Earth to the Moon. The Moon is seen in its entirety and in close detail. Aldrin gives a brief demonstration on how the astronauts eat in space.
Lunar Module rendezvous with Command and Service Modules in lunar orbit, discussing thrusting-maneuver schedule
Lunar module rendezvous with command and service module by coelliptic sequence establishing standard lighting and relative position and velocity for final approach
Lunar module rendezvous with command and service module by coelliptic sequence, establishing standard lighting and relative position and velocity for final approach
Analysis of Apollo 13 lunar module systems during emergency operation following command service module oxygen tank explosion
The development of the lunar module communications system is traced from the initial concept to the operational system used on manned lunar missions. The problems encountered during the development, the corrective actions taken, and recommendations for similar equipment in future programs are included. The system was designed to provide communications between the lunar module and the manned space flight network, between the lunar module and the command and service module, and between the lunar module and the extravehicular crewmen. The system provided the equipment necessary for voice, telemetry, and television communications; ranging information; and various communications links.
Development and implementation of a photogrammetric system was undertaken to provide accurate selenodetic positions and topographic mapping of all areas overflown by orbital spacecraft. The system was installed in the scientific instrument module (SIM) bay of the Apollo command service module (CSM). In theory, this system provided everything a photogrammetrist could want: the position of each exposure station would be obtained from Earth-based tracking; the orientation of each photograph could be computed from the synchronized stellar exposure and the lock-angles determined by preflight calibration; and the scale of each stereomodel would be obtained directly from the altimeter data. Operationally, the data acquisition was adequate, but less than optimum. Systematic errors are believed to be the result of the primitive orbit determination procedures in use at the time of the Apollo 15 mission, inadequate models of the lunar gravity field, and spacecraft oscillations induced by uncoupled thrusting and various activities of the astronauts.
Footage is shown of the crew of Apollo 11 (Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Aldrin Jr., and Command Module Pilot Michael Collins) inside the spacecraft as they fly from the Earth to the Moon. A scene shows the entire Earth as seen from Apollo.
Footage shows the crew of Apollo 11, Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Aldrin Jr., and Command Module Pilot Michael Collins, during various pre-mission activities. They are seen training for the extravehicular activity on the surface of the Moon, giving speeches in front of the White House, and during a parade in Houston.
The crewmembers of Apollo 11, Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Aldrin, Jr., and Command Module Pilot Michael Collins, are seen performing various on-orbit activities, including systems identification and Lunar Module checkout. The Earth is seen from space.
Apollo 11 Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Aldrin, Jr., and Command Module Pilot Michael Collins are seen during this post-mission conference, where they give details about the mission, concentrating on their activities on the Moon. They then answer questions from the audience. The second part of this conference is seen on 'Apollo 11 Facts: Post Flight Press Conference, Part 2 of 2' (internal ID 2001181396).
A continuation of 'Apollo 11 Facts: Post Flight Press Conference, Part 1 of 2' (internal ID 2001181405), this video shows Apollo 11 Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Aldrin, Jr., and Command Module Pilot Michael Collins during a post flight press conference, where they describe their experiences on the mission. The astronauts then answer questions from the audience.
This video shows the ceremony in the Astrodome to honor the Apollo 11 astronauts, Commander Neil Armstrong, Lunar Module Pilot Edwin Aldrin, Jr., and Command Module Pilot Michael Collins.
This slide presentation reviews the first part of the post-touchdown lunar surface and system checkout tasks. A stay/no stay decision for the lunar lander was made based on the questions: "Is the Lunar Module (LM) stable on the lunar surface?"; "Are there any time critical systems failures or trends indicating impending loss of capability to ascent and achieve a safe lunar orbit?"; and "Is there loss of capability in critical LM systems?" The sequence of these decisions is given as a time after touchdown on the surface of the moon. After the decision to stay is made the next task is to checkout status of the lunar module. While the status of the lunar module is checking out certain conditions, the Command Service Module was also engaged in certain checkout activities.
This Open Platform for Limit Protection guides the open design of maneuver limit protection systems in general, and manned, rotorcraft, aerospace applications in particular. The platform uses three stages of limit protection modules: limit cue creation, limit cue arbitration, and control system interface. A common set of limit cue modules provides commands that can include constraints, alerts, transfer functions, and friction. An arbitration module selects the "best" limit protection cues and distributes them to the most appropriate control path interface. This platform adopts a holistic approach to limit protection whereby it considers all potential interface points, including the pilot's visual, aural, and tactile displays; and automatic command restraint shaping for autonomous limit protection. For each functional module, this thesis guides the control system designer through the design choices and information interfaces among the modules. Limit cue module design choices include type of prediction, prediction mechanism, method of critical control calculation, and type of limit cue. Special consideration is given to the nature of the limit, particularly the level of knowledge about it, and the ramifications for limit protection design, especially with respect to intelligent control methods such as fuzzy inference systems and neural networks.