Conference 7.286::space

    Mike,
     
    I just finished reading both books and agree with your conclusions
    about NASA. My feeling is however that NASA didn't really learn
    all it could have from the Challanger disaster, if they had they
    would have had to do alot more redesigning of their management
    structure. They still rely on people being impressed with a Space
    Shuttle taking off to say that NASA is doing a good job, rather
    than making the difficult decisions to insure that Space travel
    is safe. I think a good indication of that would have been if Morton-T.
    hadn't been allowed to redsign the boosters. That would have sent
    a clear message to industry about NASA's concern for quality. 
    I guess NASA has become what everyone else thinks of it, just another
    bureaucracy.
    
    I've read most of the popular books on the Space program and I found
    "For all Mankind" had a few noticable errors in it. He said that
    the Saturn 5's main engines were hyperglolic which I think meant
    that they ran by two chemical's that exploded on contact with each
    other. I was under the understanding that Gemeni's Titan engines
    were that design but that the Saturn engines used kerosine and liquid
    oxygen.
    
    My favorite book was by Walter Cunningham "the All-American Boys's."
    Probably because he was and ex-Marine.
    
    FRED MUDGETT

    re .1:  Right, the Saturn V's first stage engines (F-1) were fueled by
    Kerosene and Liquid Oxygen.  The upper stages were Liquid Hydrogen and
    LOX.
    
    You are also right about the Titan.  Remember the exposion in the silo
    a few years ago and the "red" cloud it produced.
    
    Burns
    

    Thanks for the confirmation,
    
    While I've got your attention their was one other thing that I thought
    was incorrect about the Apollo program (according to that book).
    The author said that the third stage, (the one that was used to boost
    the Command Module into the trans luner tragectory) after it was
    used for all it was needed for, was put in a orbit around the Sun.
    I thought the 3rd stage was put in a tragectory that had it impact
    the moon. I seem to remember that one of the things the Apollo
    astronauts enjoyed watching was this stage impacting the moon.
    
    Fred Mudgett

I'm pretty sure the 3rd stage was (at least on the first flights) put into
a solar orbit...it was, of course, following the CM/LM in pretty much the
same trajectory, but I believe it was set up such that the moon's gravity
whipped it into a solar orbit.  That is certainly true of A8 if not the others.

You are probably thinking of the LM ascent stage, which is the later flights
was indeed smashed into the moon.  This gave them a chance to calibrate the
ALSEP instruments with a "known" quake energy.  This was not done of the
initial Apollos either, however.  One of the reasons that A13 got back ok was
that the earlier Apollos had let the LM "run dry" to measure it's redline
parameters.

Burns

    Both correct, I think.
    
    In some of the later Apollos, the S-IVB was directed to impact on the
    lunar surface, with the effects to be monitored by ALSEP. Presumably,
    the stage was slowed to ensure that impact occured after the C/SM had
    left lunar orbit. I'm not sure when the practice started (Apollo 15?),
    but I do remember the reports that the moon 'rung like a bell' when the
    stage impacted.
    
    Prior to that, I think it went into solar orbit, as Burns said.
    
    gary

    re:< Note 493.1 by GRANPA::FMUDGETT "Just how bad was it working?" >
                          -< I agree with you Mike! >-
    
    > I think a good indication of that would have been if Morton-T.
    >hadn't been allowed to redsign the boosters. That would have sent
    >a clear message to industry about NASA's concern for quality. 
     
    The only problem with this is, of course, that to start all over
    again with another company would have delayed the next launch even
    further.  I believe the problem is in management and internal
    communication, and that this problem cannot be addressed appropriately
    if NASA runs off to another contracter every time something goes
    wrong.  Just my opinion.
    
    			Steve

    The third stage (SPS for Service Propulsion System) was used to
    leave lunar orbit and had the capacity to be used for trans-earth
    course corrections. I don't recall, nor do I think it likely that
    the SPS would be looped back to the moon ( retro grade return would
    be nearly impossible ) to provide the ALSAP calibration.
    
    Could be wrong......but
    
    Jerry, who_was_working_at_Goddard_for_Apollo_9_to_15
     

    Massive confusion reigns...
    
    Saturn V stages are (in order) S-IC powered by 5 F-1 engines burning
    LOX/RP-1, S-II powered by 5 J-2 engines burning LOX/LH2 and SIVB
    powered by a single J-2. The first two stages carry the third stage
    (S-IVB) and spacecraft nearly to orbit. The S-IVB is fired once
    to establish a parking orbit and again for Trans Lunar Injection
    (much longer burn). After TLI the spacecraft seperates from the
    S-IVB and I think the S-IVB performs some kind of safe distancing
    manouver.
    
    The SPS is considered part of the spacecraft, not the launch vehicle.
    It is powered by hypergolic propellants (which ignite on contact,
    not explode). It was used to enter and leave lunar orbit, and for
    mid course corrections.
    
    gary

Hi Jerry,

As Gary implied, I don't think anyone was trying to say the SPS was crashed
into the moon.  In fact, the SM (containing the SPS) was always detached just
before reentry, since it contained the fuel cells which powered the CM; after
it detached, they were on batteries).  It was detached a bit early on A13,
and for a while there was an untested configuration:  the CM and the LM with
no SM.  

But I diverge:  What I was talking about crashing into the moon back a few
notes ago is the upper stage of the Lunar Module, that is everything but
the Descent stage, which stays on the Lunar surface.

I did notice something funny in .5, though.   I don't think the Saturn
third stage could be "slowed down" enough to impact the moon after the
CSM had left.  The S4B would still have to travel at least at Earth
escape velocity in order to get to the moon at all.  Since the CSM was
not travelling that much faster than escape velocity, the S4B could not
have been slowed down enough to impact several days later.

Another possibility would be that the S4B was inserted into a lunar orbit
which decayed at the right rate to hit the moon several days later.  Not
possible, since that would require (1) thrust to be applied on the back side
of the moon (possible, I suppose, but not likely...I would have known about
something that major and interesting) and (2) a lunar atmosphere to decay the
orbit or yet another thrust manuver.

I conclude that if any S4B hit the moon, it was before the LM landed (and they
listened with the ALSEP(s) from previous landings).

In any case, I will try to remember to check my reference materials when I
get home tonight.  I do know that A8's S4B went into Solar orbit (according
to COUNTDOWN, Frank Borman's autobiography).

Burns

    Hi Burns,
    
    Re .8 & .9  Of course! and pardon my cobwebs. I do recall very vividly
    watching the squiggles on the strip/chart recorder when the "moon
    rang like a bell". I may still have the recording stuffed in some
    box ... some where.
    
    Regards,
    Jerry
    

    The first time an SIVB was commanded to impact the moon was Apollo
    13.
    
    The timeline, in mission elapsed time, was roughly:
    	4h 1m LM extracted from SIVB
    	4h 18m SIVB ullage (??) thrusters fire for 8 seconds to move the
    stage away from the CSM/LM
    	4h 39m SIVB excess propellant vented
    	5h 48m SIVB SIVB attitude control thrusters fire for 217 seconds
    
    The book says ullage thrusters, but I think it should either be
    retros or the attitude control system. Ullage thrusters are inteneded
    to push the stage forward, to settle propellant prior to engine
    start.
    
    I didn't dig out the time of impact. From other mission reports,
    it appears that the SIVB impacts sometime soon after the CSM/LM
    comes out from behind the moon on it's first orbit.
    
    gary

My resources indicated the same thing:  They started with A13.  However, it
talks about using "Propulsive Venting" of the S-IVB fuel to do the manuvering.
That is presumably the event that you mention at 4h39m.  Having it crash just
as the CSM is coming out from behind the moon makes a lot more sense to me.

Burns