Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LUNAR LANDING MODULE”

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.

At least 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1970

Apollo 12

Apollo 12 Lunar Module high landing accuracy, discussing control actions, trajectory error sources and power descent

Conrad, C., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Further Analysis on the Mystery of the Surveyor III Dust Deposits

The Apollo 12 lunar module (LM) landing near the Surveyor III spacecraft at the end of 1969 has remained the primary experimental verification of the predicted physics of plume ejecta effects from a rocket engine interacting with the surface of the moon. This was made possible by the return of the Surveyor III camera housing by the Apollo 12 astronauts, allowing detailed analysis of the composition of dust deposited by the LM plume. It was soon realized after the initial analysis of the camera housing that the LM plume tended to remove more dust than it had deposited. In the present study, coupons from the camera housing have been reexamined. In addition, plume effects recorded in landing videos from each Apollo mission have been studied for possible clues.

Metzger, Philip↗
NASA NTRS1968

Excerpts from Test Films: Langley Impacting Structures Facility, Lunar Module

The film includes excerpts from three studies: (1) Landing characteristics of a dynamic model of the HL-10 manned lifting entry vehicle, conducted by Sandy M. Stubbs, in which the vehicle landed on water at horizontal velocities of 240- and 250-feet per second (ft/sec). (2) Dynamic model investigation of water pressures and accelerations encountered during landings of the Apollo spacecraft conducted by Sandy M. Stubbs, in which horizontal velocity was 50 ft/sec. and pitch attitude was -12 and -28 degrees. (3) Comparative landing impact tests of a 1/6-scale model as a free body under earth gravity and a tethered full-scale lunar module on the Lunar Gravity Simulator. Landing 8 is shown, with a vertical velocity of 10 ft/sec. and a horizontal velocity of 8 ft/sec. Motion pictures were taken at 400 and 64 pps.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

Apollo 10 - 11

This video gives overviews of the Apollo 10 and Apollo 11 missions to the moon, including footage from the launches and landings of the Command Module Columbia, which is used for both flights. The Apollo 10 crewmembers, Commander Thomas Stafford, Command Module Pilot John Young, and Lunar Module Pilot Eugene Cernan, are seen as they suit-up in preparation for launch and then as they experiment with the microgravity environment on their way to the moon. The moon's surface is seen in detail as the Command Module orbits at an altitude of 69 miles. The Apollo 11 crewmembers, Commander Neil Armstrong, Command Module Pilot Michael Collins, and Lunar Module Pilot Buzz Aldrin, are seen during various training activities, including simulated lunar gravity training, practicing collecting lunar material, and using the moonquake detector. Footage shows the approach and landing of the Lunar Module Eagle on the moon. Armstrong and Aldrin descend to the moon's surface, collect a sample of lunar dust, and erect the American flag. Eagle's liftoff from the moon is seen.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Reuse International Space Station (ISS) Modules as Lunar Habitat

NASA currently projects ending the ISS mission in approximately 2016, due primarily to the expense of re-boost and re-supply. Lunar outposts are expected to be in place in the same timeframe. In support of these mission goals, a scheme to reuse ISS modules on the moon has been identified. These modules could function as pressurized volumes for human habitation in a lunar vacuum as they have done in low-earth orbit. The ISS hull is structurally capable of withstanding a lunar landing because there is no atmospheric turbulence or friction. A compelling reason to send ISS modules to the moon is their large mass; a large portion of the ISS would survive re-entry if allowed to de-orbit to Earth. ISS debris could pose a serious risk to people or structures on Earth unless a controlled re-entry is performed. If a propulsive unit is devised to be attached to the ISS and control re-entry, a propulsion system could be used to propel the modules to the moon and land them there. ISS modules on the lunar surface would not require re-boost. Radiation protection can be attained by burying the module in lunar regolith. Power and a heat removal system would be required for the lunar modules which would need little support structure other than the lunar surface. With planetary mass surrounding the module, heat flux may be controlled by conductance. The remaining requirement is the re-supply of life-support expendables. There are raw materials on the moon to supplement these vital resources. The lunar maria is known to contain approximately 40% oxygen by mass in inorganic mineral compounds. Chemical conversion of moon rocks to release gaseous oxygen is known science. Recycling and cleaning of air and water are currently planned to be accomplished with ISS Environmental Control & Life Support Systems (ECLSS). By developing a Propulsion and Landing Module (PLM) to dock to the Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM), several identical PLMs could be produced to rescue and transfer the ISS modules to the lunar surface, one by one. The propulsion does not need to be as swift as Apollo, nor would the modules need to be manned during transportation to the moon. The trajectory from low-Earth to lunar orbit would avoid or quickly pass through the Van Allen belts to minimize radiation exposure to electronics onboard. A landing technology similar to Apollo's could be utilized to land an ISS module on the moon. Since the mission will be unmanned, system redundancy could be minimized to keep the cost down. If the mission failed and a module crashed landed on the moon, the risk of debris landing on Earth would be avoided and the raw materials could be used in future lunar missions.

Miernik, Janie↗
NASA NTRS1972

Where on the moon - An Apollo systems engineering problem.

Approaches used in the selection of lunar landing sites are discussed, giving attention to a survey of major constraints affecting site selection. The science objectives of lunar exploration are considered, taking into account exploration goals, the acquisition of required data, mission science planning, orbital science, lunar surface traverse capability, the mare basalts, lunar interior composition, regolith, breccias, lunar chronology, lunar surface processes, and the origin of the moon. Subjects examined in connection with Apollo system capabilities include the Apollo missions, development missions, lunar exploration missions, mission design requirements, navigation, launch vehicle considerations, methods of determining accessibility, lunar module descent considerations, landing site redesignation, and questions of landability.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1972

Blowing of lunar soil by Apollo 12: Surveyor3 evidence

It is shown that the discoloration pattern of the Surveyor 3 camera provides evidence that the camera surface was whitened by the impact of particles blown from the lunar surface by the exhaust of the lunar module as it landed. It also indicates the velocity and direction at which these particles were ejected.

Jaffe, L. D.↗