Conference 7.286::space

Newsgroups: sci.space
Path: decwrl!ucbvax!AMELIA.NAS.NASA.GOV!eugene
Subject: added frequently asked questions (1 time)
Posted: 11 Oct 88 00:59:54 GMT
Organization: The Internet
 
    Q. What were Apollos 2 and 3?
 
    A. They never existed.  Rationally, the Grissom/White/Chaffee
mission should have been Apollo 4, because it was preceded by three
unmanned tests, but the crew were calling it Apollo 1 and NASA HQ had
not made an official pronouncement on the subject; its only official
name was Apollo 204, a mission code analogous to "51L".  The unmanned
tests flown after the fire had official names starting with Apollo 4.
Apollo 204 was retroactively named Apollo 1 to honor the dead crew's
wishes.  This left the three early unmanned tests in limbo, with no
easy way of retrofitting them into the numbering.  NASA officially
decided not to try, so they never had names other than their mission
codes, and there never was an "Apollo 2" or "Apollo 3". 
 

Newsgroups: sci.space
Path: decwrl!labrea!rutgers!mailrus!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff
Subject: Re: U.S. - Soviet cooperation in space
Posted: 24 Oct 88 06:29:35 GMT
Organization: Independent Users Guild
  
    In article <10648@reed.UUCP>, reeder@reed.UUCP (P Douglas Reeder) asked:

>Recent talk on the net of U.S. Soviet cooperation led me to wonder:
>Did anything useful come out of the Apollo Soyuz Test Project?
 
    ...and there were several fairly off-the-cuff responses over the
next week, including one from me.  I took the time to look into the
question a little deeper this weekend and would like to post some 
information. 
 
    First off, in case any net.readers are unaware, Apollo-Soyuz Test
Project (ASTP) was a joint US-Soviet orbital mission which flew July
15-24, 1975. The Soyuz 19 component was launched from Baikonur
carrying cosmonauts Alexei Leonov and Valeriy Kubasov (the first
manned Soviet launch ever to be carried live on TV); a few hours later
an Apollo 18 Command-Service Module (CSM) crewed by Tom Stafford,
Vance Brand and Deke Slayton (one of the original Mercury 7, who had
however been grounded for years by sporadic heart problems) lifted off
atop a Saturn IB (the last Saturn V was used to launch Skylab).  The
Apollo stack also carried a special Docking Module (DM) in the adapter
bay where LM landers had been carried on moon missions.  The DM was
about 10 feet long and pressurized, with its own GN2 and GOX supply to
enable it to match atmospheres alternately with Soyuz (N2/O2 at 2/3
sea level pressure) and Apollo (pure O2 at 1/3 sea level pressure).
[Note to trivia buffs: Yes, the Soviets normally use full pressure,
but they agreed to operate at 2/3 for ASTP to avoid decompression
delays during crew transfer.] 
 
    Anyway, CSM hard docked with the DM then conducted a series of
burns to match orbits with Soyuz.  (Apollo did all the maneuvering in
ASTP, as Soyuz didn't have enough propellant for such things.)  At 52
hours after Soyuz launch, Stafford guided the CSM/DM combo into hard
dock with Soyuz.  Three hours later Stafford and Leonov shook hands in
an historic meeting, with TV cameras rolling.  Over the next two days
crew members visited back and forth between vessels, with many
ceremonial speeches, press conferences, meals and so forth.  The
ground rules were that one astronaut would be in the CSM and one
cosomonaut in Soyuz at all times. This might seem like cold war
paranoia and perhaps it was in part, but also practical: it took quite
a while to cycle through the DM airlock with atmosphere swap etc., so
if something went wrong in one vessel or another it would be pretty
bad if the guys trained to handle it were all on the wrong side of the DM! 
 
    After all the "visiting" Apollo undocked and moved back in so
Soyuz could "dock."  Since they had little maneuvering capability for
docking, the Soviets simply extended their adapter into "active"
position while Apollo retracted the adapter on the DM to "passive"
position and then flew in.  Slayton did this one, there were some
problems but eventually the second dock succeeded.  Apollo then
undocked for the last time and actually "looped" around Soyuz several
times while the crews performed a light-beam experiment designed to
detect atomic N and O at orbital altitudes. 
 
    After one more day of science and checkout, Soyuz hard landed in
the desert (again carried live).  Apollo stayed up two more days
performing science experiments, before splashing down 500km W of Honolulu. 
 
    In all there were 28 experiments carried on board the CSM and an
unspecified further number on Soyuz.  Of the 28, 21 were US
experiments, 5 were joint US-Soviet and 2 were West German.  Three
occupied Service Module bays and the rest were in the CM or DM.  I
wish I had the exact manifest, all I know for sure is the numbers. 
Some things included materials processing (a Skylab-style furnace in
the DM), a special Doppler effect experiment using the CM-DM distance
(after separation) to measure mascons, the usual Earth photography, a
science training film on the effects of weightlessness, a body size
check to help design Shuttle seats (consider that the pilot is several
inches taller the day he lands the Orbiter than he is the day it's
launched!). There was also an electrophoresis experiment.  (Is it just me 
or have we really been doing the same experiments for the past 15 years?) 
 
    There was also the experimental design of the Russian docking
adapter itself, a radical "androgynous" setup that apparently really
worked great.  Our side of the DM was the usual probe/drogue pair
(actually the hardware from Apollo 14!). 
 
    NASA and the US public learned an unprecedented amount about how
the Soviet program worked as a result of ASTP.  One result of the
technical safety discussions, for instance, was that we found out how
Soyuz 11 failed -- and how the Soviets intended to prevent a repeat. 
 
    In the last analysis, though, the biggest benefit was the sight of
astronauts and cosmonauts shaking hands in space.  For sheer symbolism
this is second only to Neil A. bouncing onto the lunar surface.  (I
think Pinky Nelson manhandling Solar Max comes in third!) 
 
    Now let me address some of the things said so far.  This will be brief.
 
    First, in article <1743@eos.UUCP>, eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya) offered:

>The best quote I've heard: "We got some low quality pictures
>of our craft" from Slayton. One of those pictures was in a hallway I
>used to work in.  The colors were slight off, but it was a unique view.
>They also got some caviar.  I hope we do more joint missions in the future.
 
    Could Slayton simply be bitter?  I note the following time table:
 
	Stafford in Soyuz	7:10
	Slayton in Soyuz	1:35 -> hate to eat&run but...!
	Brand in Soyuz		6:30 
	Leonov in Apollo	5:43
	Kubasov in Apollo	4:57
 
    Something a little fishy there.  Also there was the messy
re-entry. Brand forgot to arm the apex cover for auto ejection, so
Stafford had to do it manually in a hurry when he noticed the drogue
wasn't deploying. Manual eject didn't shut off the RCS thrusters like
auto eject did though, so the thrusters were firing to fight the
drogue sway!  Those were shut off, but they leaked fuel all over the
capsule and thence into the pressure equalization air inlet. Within
moments all three astronauts had a snootful of hypergolics! Stafford
deployed the mains manually (and a little bit early) just in case they
lost consciousness.  One main collapsed.  The remaining two were
sufficient but you came down faster. On impact the CM flipped upside
down.  All three astronauts hung from their straps and coughed their
lungs out!  Brand and Slayton were KO'd from nausea. Stafford
unbuckled, slapped O2 masks on everyone, righted the CM with flotation
bags and opened the hatch himself to let in fresh air.  (Nice to have
a veteran commander, huh?!) 
 
    As if that wasn't enough, Houston made Deke give his headset to
Alexei Leonov for President Ford's congratulation call -- all those
years waiting to get into space, and he didn't even get to hear the
President! No wonder he's grumpy. :-) 
  
    Then in article <7242@ihlpl.ATT.COM>, from knudsen@ihlpl.ATT.COM
(Mike Knudsen): 

>I've always wondered how much the Russians learned from us.  Seems that 
>during our Apollo missions, the Soviets still didn't trust themselves to 
>rendezvous two vehicles in space. Now they do it automatically.
 
    Open disclosure was in NASA's charter from day 1.  The Soviets or
anyone else can always find out about our program.  We learned a lot
more about the Soviet program than they did from us, I am sure. 
 
>Some of our astronauts learned to speak Russian (both crews had to be
>bi-lingual, sort of), which may help them get space jobs in the future...
 
    I don't know about jobs, but astronaut-cosmonaut friendships were
(as you might expect) born in ASTP.  There were a bunch of people at
NASA more or less cheering Yuri Romanenko (ASTP backup crew) on when
he broke the endurance record last year.  (That record will fall very
soon if it hasn't already.) 
 
    In article <24316@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) weighs in:

>In article <10648@reed.UUCP> reeder@reed.UUCP (P Douglas Reeder) writes:
>>Did anything useful come out of the Apollo Soyuz Test Project?
>
>In a word, no.
 
    Too harsh.  I hope this long posting goes some of the distance
towards a rebuttal, Henry. 
 
>The money and hardware would have been much more usefully employed in
>sending up a fourth Skylab crew.
 
    Yes, and the money for a fourth Skylab crew would have been more
usefully employed on a seventh Moon landing; and so on.  You can argue
those till the cows come home.  The more I review it the more I begin
to think ASTP was a *really important* project.  And, like Eugene, I
think we should do some more. 
 
    How about it -- SHUTTLE-MIR TEST PROJECT in '92!
 
    PS - I researched this in several places but the one source that
never lets me down is David Baker's giant HISTORY OF MANNED SPACE
FLIGHT.  Look for it on remainder tables at Waldens etc... you will
never be sorry you shelled out the $15-20 for it.  A gold mine. 

Tom Neff			UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff
	"None of your toys	CIS: 76556,2536	       MCI: TNEFF
	 will function..."	GEnie: TOMNEFF	       BIX: t.neff (no kidding)

    	Twenty years ago today, APOLLO 8 was launched from Cape Canaveral
    in Florida to the Moon, where its three-man crew became the first
    human beings to orbit a celestial body beyond Earth.
                                                  
    	Larry
    

From: C476721@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU ("Bill Ball")
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Moon landing nostalgia
Date: 17 Jun 89 23:25:06 GMT
Organization: The Internet
 
    Comments on three items celebrating the 20 anniversary of the
Apollo 11 landing which I have come across recently: 
 
    Astronomy Magazine - July 1989 issue.

    A special issue devoted to the APOLLO missions.  One interesting
part were the photos of the areas where the missions landed on the
Moon as seen through Earth-based telescopes. 

    Air & Space magazine June/July 1989.
 
    A publication of the Smithsonian. The (almost) entire issue is
devoted to a variety of articles on the topic, most of them quite good
(although none quite as entertaining as the story of Howard Hughes'
first flight in the Lockheed Constellation found in the back of the
issue). There is more criticism of NASA than one might expect. 
 
    Man In Space A Time Television Special (60 min.)
 
    Superb. The first 40 min. is a spellbinding review of the trip to
the moon with heavy (and IMHO entirely correct) emphasis on the story
of human endeavor rather than technological accomplishment. It, like
the Air & Space issue, brings home what a fluke the Apollo program
was--having more to due with the Bay of Pigs than with the exploration
of space. The last part of Man in Space somehow manages to cover every
argument about our continuing role in space which has been discussed
on this list in the past year including controversies over the
shuttle, the space station, a trip to Mars, and a manned vs. an
unmanned program. How did they do all this in an hour? I don't know
but it was *very* impressive. A must see even if you don't spring for
the commemorative coins they are pushing in the commercials. 
 
    Bill Ball
    Dept. Political Science
    U. of Missouri - Columbia
    C476721@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU

    Flying magazine has an Apollo retrospective in its current issue. In
    one of the articles, a writer describes how he contacted the NASA press
    office at JSC asking for information about Armstrong, Aldrin, and
    Collins, only to be asked, "Who are they?"  When the writer was put
    through to the press rep's supervisor, and asked the same question, he
    received the same response.  He eventually gave up.    

    In the Boston area - the Man in Space program will be on WBZ Channel
    4 this Friday at 8:00 PM EDT.
    
    FYI,
    Joe
    

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Apollo program benefits (Forwarded)
Date: 26 Jun 89 23:36:54 GMT
Reply-To: yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
 
                                                   June 1989
  
                     APOLLO PROGRAM BENEFITS
  
     "We have taken to the Moon the wealth of this nation, the vision
of its political leaders, the intelligence of its scientists, the
dedication of its engineers, the careful craftsmanship of its workers
and the enthusiastic support of its people. 
 
     "We have brought back rocks, and I think its a fair trade.  For
just as the Rosetta Stone revealed the language of ancient Egypt, so
may these rocks unlock the mystery of the origin of the Moon and
indeed, even of our Earth and Solar System." 
 
                   Michael Collins
                   Address to a joint session of Congress
                   Sept. 16, 1969
 
     Any discussion of the benefits of the Apollo program must be
considered a progress report to be continued in the 21st century. That
is true because the fullest application of scientific research and
technological development usually takes decades to accomplish. 
Nevertheless, in the 16 1/2 years since American astronauts last
walked on the Moon, Apollo's legacy already has been profound.  That
legacy includes both tangible and intangible benefits for the United
States and for all mankind.  Some of the major areas of benefits are: 
 
    Environmental Consciousness
 
     The first photos of Earth from hundreds of thousands of miles
away [By a manned space mission - LK] were taken by the crew of Apollo
8, the first humans to orbit the Moon.  Those photos depicted Earth as
a bright blue and white ball floating in a sea of darkness.  They
reminded people the world over of the fragility of planet Earth and of
the need to preserve and protect its resources. 
 
    Increased Technological Capability for the United States 
 
     The "within the decade" goal of Apollo forced the advance of
technology at a more rapid rate than normal, some estimate at twice
the normal rate.  The new level of technological capability resulted
in a vast library of technological knowledge and know- how, and rapid
advances in electronic miniaturization,advanced computers, remote
sensing and other technologies.  The visible spin-offs of Apollo
technology already have already found application in literally
thousands of products, processes and devices.  Indeed, new technology
arising from the space program has helped the United States maintain a
lead in the world market for aeronautic, computer, medical, electronic
and other products. 
 
    Scientific Benefits
 
     The Apollo program increased our knowledge of the Moon beyond
expectation.  We now know the Moon's age, its gross structure, its
internal temperature and a good bit about its composition.  Apollo
provided new knowledge and techniques for study of both Earth and the
sun.  It produced a rich harvest of knowledge in geology, astronomy,
physics, biology and other scientific fields and has taught us much
about the evolution of our own planet Earth. 
 
    National Self Confidence 
 
     Apollo was a response to the Soviet challenge.  The success of
Apollo was viewed worldwide as the success of a democratic free
enterprise system over that of a society with a centrally directed
economic system and a tightly controlled population.  It also
demonstrated the inherent superiority of American technology.  Thus,
Apollo contributed significantly to restoring American confidence and
willingness to accept difficult challenges. 
 
    International Relations
 
     Apollo continues to contribute greatly to international
cooperation and understanding.  The samples and data returned from the
moon have been shared with many nations and are still being studied by
scientists around the world.  The Apollo 11 landing on the moon had a
tremendous psychological impact on humanity.  It is estimated that
billions of people watched by satellite-relayed television.  This
shared experienced, if only for a relatively brief moment in time,
provoked a feeling of "oneness" of the human race and is a unique
achievement of the Apollo program.  In addition, people in emerging
countries, where forms of government were evolving, saw the American
model of government in a different light - one that could send people
to the Moon while simultaneously providing a good life for its
ordinary citizens. 
 
    Economic Benefits
 
     Econometric studies estimate that Apollo returned five to seven
dollars to the United States' economy for every dollar invested in it.
These returns came in the form of new industries, new products, new
processes and new jobs. 
 
    Conclusion
 
     Apollo did more than reach for the future.  It refreshed our
spirits and heightened the awareness of mankind of the human potential
and of our options as a species. 
 
     For the United States, Apollo provided renewed confidence that
given the resolve, resources and commitment of a free people the
United States can lead mankind in the great human adventure of space
exploration. 

     "From the moment the first flint was flaked, this landing was merely 
   a matter of time." - W. H. Auden, "Moon Landing", 1969

               <<< LDP::LDP$16:[NOTES$LIBRARY]ASTRONOMY.NOTE;4 >>>
                         -< Astronomical Discussions >-
================================================================================
Note 661.0              Moonwalk 20th Anniversay TV show              No replies
THOM::LANGLOIS "DT Data Networks"                    13 lines  29-JUN-1989 13:10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 19th at 9 PM (EDT) there will be a television show on channel
    2 in Boston (WGBH, the PBS station in Boston) where 8 of the 12
    astronauts who walked on the moon will be interviewed. The name
    of the show is The Other Side of the Moon. I was listening to one of 
    the producers talk about it today on the radio. It's not a rah-rah
    NASA show but deals with what each of them is doing now and what has 
    happened in their lives since their moonwalks and how/if their lives 
    were changed by going into Space. Should be interesting from what I 
    heard on the radio. The producers wanted to do something different for 
    the 20th anniversary of the first moonwalk (7/20/69 as anybody in this 
    conference should know).
        					

        There will be a two-hour CBS News Special on Thursday, July 13 
    at 9 p.m. E.D.T. entitled "The Moon Above, The Earth Below".  It is 
    a twentieth anniversary tribute to the APOLLO 11 mission to Earth's 
    Moon in 1969.  Dan Rather will host the program, Walter Cronkite will 
    discuss the mission aspects, and Charles Kuralt will show what was 
    happening on Earth while Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins were exploring 
    the Moon.

        Larry

The Arts and Entertainment (A&E) Cable Network is rebroadcasting the original
NBC coverage of Apollo 11.  The dates and times are:

		"Liftoff"	7/16, 9:20AM-11AM
		"Moonwalk"	7/20, 10:30PM-2AM
		"Splashdown"	7/24, 1:30PM-3PM

"Moonwalk" will be repeated on 7/23, 2:30PM-6PM.

							Mike

    I watched "Wings of Mercury" and if the same format is used it should
    be a fair take..Les

From: noe@s.cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: APOLLO 11 mission events.
Date: 10 Jul 89 15:26:00 GMT
 
    Out of curiosity I looked up dates and times of some of the events
surrounding the APOLLO 11 mission.  I think most everyone realizes the
20th anniversary of that mission is nearly upon us.  (Digression - I
find it a strange feeling to think that there is an entire generation
out there who have never, not once in their entire lives, looked up at
the Moon and wondered if people will ever walk up there.  But then it
occurs to me that I wonder myself when people will ever walk up there
*again* and know that this youngest generation still has an opportunity 
to find this sense of wonder I felt more than 20 years ago.) 
 
    Anyway, I picked up David Baker's HISTORY OF MANNED SPACE FLIGHT
and determined the following dates and times of the listed events. 
Times are given as central daylight time (CDT), 5 hours behind UT,
because that's the time Mission Control in Houston was on and more
importantly because that's the time I was on.  The launch of course
was in EDT (UT-4) at Cape *Kennedy* and I think the splashdown was in
Hawaiian standard time zone, UT-10 hours, but I'm not certain.  As
long as it's clear I've converted them all to CDT. 
 
    69/07/16  08:32:00    Liftoff from Pad 39-A
    69/07/16  08:43:49.3  Earth orbit insertion
    69/07/16  11:22:13.5  Trans-lunar injection
    69/07/18  22:11:55    Equigravisphere
    69/07/20  12:44:00    CSM/LM undocking in lunar orbit
    69/07/20  15:17:39.9  LM touchdown on lunar surface
    69/07/20  21:56:15    Neil Armstrong's "one small step for [a] man"
    69/07/21  00:30       Lunar surface excursion ended (time approximate)
    69/07/21  12:54:00.8  LM ascent stage liftoff (They knocked over the flag!)
    69/07/21  16:35       CSM/LM ascent stage docking
    69/07/21  18:42       LM ascent stage jettisoned
    69/07/21  23:55:42    Trans-Earth injection
    69/07/24  11:21:19    CM/SM separation
    69/07/24  11:50:35    CM splashdown in Pacific Ocean
    69/07/24  12:53       Crew recovered (on U.S.S. HORNET)
    69/07/24  14:57       CM recovered
 
    CM: Command Module
    SM: Service Module
    CSM: Command-Service Modules
    LM: Lunar Module

Roger Noe                            noe@cs.uiuc.edu OR roger-noe@uiuc.edu
University of Illinois               40:06:39 N.  88:13:41 W.
Urbana, IL  61801  USA               (217) 333-3496

    The "Arts & Entertainment" cable network is replaying the original
    (?NBC?) TV coverage of the Apollo 11 mission at the same time it
    was originally broadcast 20 years ago (e.g., moon walks in the
    middle of the night - remember staying up almost all night when I
    was 13!).  They'll also repeat a few broadcasts at odd times during
    the day.
    
    If you have A&E on your cable, this sounds like the show to watch.
    Remember Walter Cronkite using a model train model to illustrate
    the CSM&LEM orbiting Earth, then heading toward the moon, then
    entering lunar orbit?  (But he was CBS, right?)

    Does anyone know how long the cameras on the moon buggys operated
    after being left on the moon ?
    
    Chris

I saw that CBS special last night.  I don't know if I can face watching another
one of these.  It's kind of like studying the ancient greeks (except that I was
alive for this one):  "Gee, they sure were smart back then, weren't they?".

Back when it happened, I was a teenager.  I wasn't that awful impressed, because
they'd been saying that it was going to happen for most of my life, and I had
seen all those bad science fiction shows, etc.  I knew they could do it, and I
knew they were going to do it.

Now, I'm impressed.  Not necessarily because I have a better understanding for
how difficult such an undertaking is, although this is certainly a part of it.
I'm impressed because I know that due to all the political and managerial issues
NASA has to work around, we probably wouldn't be able to do this again before 
the end of the century, even if we wanted to.

I'm depressed.

    I learned some interesting stuff on that CBS special, like:
    
    The budget for Apollo was "buried in a secret military account"
    
    The booster's forward speed was 6300 mph AFTER second-stage separation,
    and escape velocity was 17,400 mph
    
    NASA sacrificed safety for schedule goals (I'm sure that 21-month
    standdown after the Apollo 1 fire was just for effect)
    
    That was just in the first 30 minutes of the broadcast.  I taped the
    rest, and I can't wait to watch it, just to see what other little
    nuggets of information Danny Rather handed out. Poor Dan: so rich, and
    yet so senile. 
    
    Intercutting the Apollo footage with that frightening sequence of the
    little girl experiencing a seizure was bizarre and disconcerting, to
    say the least.
        
    The best part of the special was the IBM commercial at the beginning.

A&E is running some of the coverage the sunday after 2:30 to 6pm (I believe)

    	If you read back a few Notes in this Topic, you'll find the
    entire A&E Network APOLLO 11 coverage special there.
    

    Sounds like I missed another gem of network reporting.
    
    re .16
    What was the bit about the seizure?
    
    
    One could argue that NASA sacrificed some of its safety goals when they
    made the decision to send Apollo 8 around the moon without the LM
    (there was originally a requirement that the LM be present for possible
    use as a 'lifeboat', as it was for Apollo 13).
    
    gary

re .19

The CBS special was an intermingling of the Apollo flight and scenes from
across America on those days.  Apparently CBS sent some teams out to film
"slices of life" to show later.  Charles Kuralt narrated this portion of
the show (he was on one of the teams).  Dan Rather, who should get better
researchers or start verifying things himself, narrated the Apollo footage.
The footage was very good (what I saw of it) but some of the facts were
mangled (see previous reply).  I was taping it because I couldn't see all
of it.  Unfortunately my VCR (otherwise known as that "piece of*&)&^")
decided to crap out.  I got jiggly recordings of this and the launch
segment from A&E.

Oh, I never quite answered Gary's question.  The scene they showed during
launch was that of a little girl who was taken to the emergency room with
a fever and went into convulsions.  It turned out okay.

							Mike

PS. If someone got a good VHS of the CBS special and the A&E launch
segment and would be willing to let me copy them, let me know.  Thanks
in advance.

Well, I have some comments about the CBS special, and most of them are not
good.  Oh, give us back Uncle Walter and take away this idiot who claims to
be a network anchor!

I spotted at least one GLARING fakery, at least one factual blunder and
lots of incorrect shadings of meaning.  It makes me doubt the whole thing.

The glaring fake is the LM takeoff sequence.  That was not Apollo XI.  It
must have been XVI or XVII.  There was no camera left on the lunar surface
by XI capable of broadcasting directly to Earth (or to the CSM for that
matter).  Everything was relayed through the LM.  There were no liftoff
pictures.  (Remember that no one is quite sure whether the flag is still
standing at the site?  We would not for sure if the camera was there).

The flights which carried lunar rovers did have autonomous cameras aboard
the rover which could be commanded from the ground.  I believe these were
15, 16, and 17.  However, 15's camera's pitch mechanism was a bit flakey,
and they did not want to pan the camera to follow the LM taking off since
if they could not get it back, it would render the cam useless for any
subsequent work.  Thus, the pix they showed must have been 16 or 17.  Bah.
This is really shoddy journalism.  I don't mind them using another flights
pix to illustrate, but they should have said so.

I believe they made a number of factual blunders about the landing including
when the 1201 and 1202 alarms happened, but I need to review the tape to
check that.  Also lots of other odd things.

I, too, thought the Charles Kuralt stuff was weird and distracting.  The one
that disturbed me was the Newport Jazz festival where people did not want
to be told about the landing.

Anyway, bah. Humbug.  Foo to Dan Rather.

Burns

P.S.  Does the requester of the tape work/live in Nashua, by chance?  I
would loan you mine if it can be done sort of quickly.  I did miss the
first few minutes, and I edited out the IBM and other commercials.

    Well, I watched the A&E replay of NBC's coverage. I guess network news
    has always been bad. At least I now know what Huntley and Brinkley look
    like :-).
    
    It WAS nice to watch the 'live' coverage of the launch with the abort
    mode callouts etc. I don't recall ever seeing launch coverage in
    Australia and NASA tend edit those sort of things out of their
    documentaries. The little editorials that the commentators added were
    tedious and in slightly bad taste, IMO.
    
    Best part was the interview with the Apollo 10 astronauts explaining
    the callouts and what the astronauts would see, hear amd feel and how
    it compared to Gemini.
    
    NASA did a 4 part special called 'Moonwalk'. I've only seen part 1 so
    far, but it looks like being the best of the '20 years ago today'
    bunch.
    
    gary

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Apollo-era technology spinoffs continue to enhance human life 
Date: 15 Jul 89 06:47:57 GMT
Reply-To: yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA

Jim Ball
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                     July 13, 1989
  
RELEASE:  89-117
 
    APOLLO-ERA TECHNOLOGY SPINOFFS CONTINUE TO ENHANCE HUMAN LIFE
  
     Twenty years after the triumph of America's first lunar landing,
the technologies developed to enable manned spaceflights and
exploration of the Moon continue to enhance human life here on Earth
through technology spinoffs to the fields of health, safety, comfort
and enjoyment of life. 
 
     The achievement of the national commitment to land U.S.
astronauts on the Moon and return them safely to Earth spurred major
advances in emerging technologies, such as computers, which became
smaller, lighter, and more efficient to meet the requirements for
manned spacecraft. 
 
     Some specific examples of everyday products that employ
technology from the Apollo program: 
 
     * The lunar roving vehicle, developed for use by the Apollo
astronauts to venture several miles away from their landing base, was
the source of a unistix controller now used by severely handicapped
people to accelerate, brake and steer a typical passenger vehicle on
the highway.  The vehicle's rubber tires, which had to have low
temperature pliability, were developed for NASA by Goodyear, which
used the technology to produce an all- weather winter radial tire for
use on automobiles. 
 
     * Scratch resistant sunglass lenses were derived from a highly
abrasion-resistant coating developed to protect, from harsh
environments, the plastic surfaces of aerospace equipment like the
helmet visors worn by Moon-walking astronauts. 
 
     * A collection of cordless tools -- such as drills and dust
vacuums -- were derived from tools developed for the astronauts to use
on the Moon while collecting surface and subsurface lunar soil samples. 
 
     * Patient monitoring equipment, commonly used today at nurses
stations to monitor the heart rate and other physiological signs of
hospital patients, employs the same technology that was developed to
monitor astronaut vital signs during spaceflight. 
 
     * A special fabric developed for Apollo spacesuits, with the
qualities of being thin, light, flexible, yet durable and non-
combustible, provided the technology basis for heavier material used
for constructing fabric roofs on structures like Michigan's silverdome. 
 
     * For Moonwalking safety and comfort, the Apollo astronauts wore
lunar boots which featured a three-dimensional "spacer " material for
cushioning and ventilation.  The material has been modified for use
today in a popular line of athletic shoes designed for improved shock
absorption and reduced foot fatigue. 
 
     * Hundreds of lives have been saved through a widely used
commercial raft that will not capsize in heavy seas.  The raft employs
a NASA-patented water ballast stabilization system used in rafts
developed for the returning Apollo astronauts after their splashdown. 
 
     * An electrical power controller, developed for use on the Saturn
rocket to conserve energy, has been widely used to reduce energy
consumption in electrical motors. 
 
     * A 3M-designed, meal-heating unit developed for Apollo
spacecraft crews served as the basis for an electronic food warming
system used in hospitals. 
 
     * The inorganic coatings developed to provide corrosion
protection to the seaside launch gantries used for Apollo-Saturn
missions have seen widespread industrial use on coastal and ocean
structures such as bridges, pipelines, ships and oil rigs. 
 
     * Insulation technology developed for the Saturn V booster fuel
tanks by Rockwell International provided an improved insulation for
the wells holding fresh-caught fish on tuna boats. 
 
     These are but a few of the spinoffs, estimated to number in the
thousands, which can be traced directly to the technology that
launched and landed Americans on the Moon in July 1969. 

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Apollo-11 lunar experiment still useful after 20 years (Forwarded)
Date: 17 Jul 89 21:45:09 GMT
Reply-To: yee@trident.arc.nasa.gov (Peter E. Yee)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
 
Paula Cleggett-Haleim
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.                      July 17, 1989
 
Mary A. Hardin
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
  
RELEASE:  89-119
 
    APOLLO-11 LUNAR EXPERIMENT STILL USEFUL AFTER 20 YEARS 
 
     An experiment placed on the lunar surface 20 years ago by the
Apollo 11 astronauts continues to be used to study the Earth-moon
system by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., and
other scientific centers around the world. 
 
     Scientists, who analyzed the data from the Laser Ranging
Retro-reflector Experiment, have observed, among other things, that
the Moon is moving away from Earth, tectonic plates on Earth are
slowly drifting and the length of a day varies. 
 
     The Laser Ranging Retro-reflector was designed to reflect pulses
of laser light fired from Earth.  The idea was to determine the
round-trip travel time of a laser pulse from Earth to the Moon and
back again, thereby calculating the distance between the two bodies to
unprecedented accuracy. Unlike the other scientific experiments left
on the Moon, this reflector requires no power and is still functioning
perfectly after 20 years. 
 
     The laser reflector consists of 100 fused silica half cubes,
called corner cubes, mounted in an 18-inch square aluminum panel. 
Each corner cube is 1.5 inches in diameter.  Corner cubes reflect a
beam of light directly back toward the point of origin.  It is this
fact that makes them so useful in Earth surveying. 
 
     The McDonald Observatory, Ft. Davis, Texas; the Lure Observatory
atop the extinct Haleakala volcano on the island of Maui, Hawaii; and
a third observatory in southern France near Grasse, regularly send a
laser beam through an optical telescope and try to hit one of the 
reflectors. 
 
     The reflectors are too small to be seen from Earth, so even when
the beam is correctly aligned in the telescope, actually hitting a
lunar reflector is quite challenging.  At the Moon's surface, the beam
is roughly a mile wide, and scientists liken the task of properly
aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime 2 miles away. 
 
     Once the laser beam hits a reflector, scientists at the
observatories use sensitive filtering and amplification equipment to
detect the return signal.  The reflected light is too weak to be seen
with the human eye, but under good conditions, one photon - the
fundamental particle of light - will be received every few seconds. 
 
     Three more reflectors have since been left on the Moon, including
two by later Apollo missions and one by the unmanned Soviet Lunakhod 2
lander/rover, which arrived there in 1972.  Each of the reflectors
rest on the lunar surface in such a way that its flat face points
toward Earth. 
 
     Continuing improvements in lasers and electronics over the years
have led to measurements accurate to approximately 1 inch.  Scientists
know the average distance between the centers of Earth and the Moon is
239,000 miles, implying that the modern lunar ranges have relative
accuracies of better than one part in 10 billion.  This level of
accuracy represents one of the most precise distance measurements ever
made and is equivalent to determining the distance between Los Angeles
and New York to one fiftieth of an inch. 
 
     During the last 20 years, scientists have used the orbit of the
Moon and the lunar ranging sites to study events on Earth.  Lunar
ranging has contributed to several scientific advances: 
          
     *  Lunar ranging has helped determine the precise positions of
the observatories that send the laser beams.  Using these positions,
scientists can tell that the tectonic plates of Earth's crust are
slowly drifting, and the observatory on Maui is seen to be moving away
from the one in Texas. 
     
     *  The atmosphere, tides and the core of Earth cause changes in
the length of an Earth day - the variations are about one thousandth
of a second over the course of a year. 
     
     *  The familiar ocean tides raised on Earth by the Moon have a
direct influence on the Moon's orbit.  Laser ranging has shown that
the Moon is receding from Earth at about 1.5 inches every year. 
 
     *  Lunar ranging, together with laser ranging to artificial Earth
satellites, has revealed a small but constant change in the shape of
Earth.  The land masses are gradually changing after being compressed
by the great weight of the glaciers in the last Ice Age. 
 
     *  Predictions of Einstein's Theory of Relativity have been
confirmed using laser ranging. 
     
     *  Small-scale variations in the Moon's rotation have been measured.  
They result from irregularities in the lunar gravity field, from changes 
in the Moon's shape due to tides raised in the Moon's solid body by Earth 
and possibly from the effects of a fluid lunar core. 
     
     *  The combined mass of Earth and Moon has been determined to
one part in 100 million. 
 
     *  Lunar ranging has yielded an enormous improvement in knowledge
of the Moon's orbit, enough to permit accurate analyses of solar
eclipses as far back as 1400 B.C. 
 
     The usefulness of continued improvements in range determinations
to further advance understanding of the Earth-Moon system and the need
for monitoring details of Earth's rotation will keep the lunar
reflectors in service for years to come. 
     
     Lunar ranging analysis at JPL is undertaken by Drs. Jean Dickey,
James G. Williams and X X Newhall and is sponsored by the Geodynamics
Branch of NASA's Office of Space Science and Applications.  Additional 
analysis is accomplished at the Harvard/Smithsonian Center for 
Astrophysics and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, both in 
Cambridge, Mass.; at the University of Texas, Austin; and in France
and China. 

    Re:.14
    	I checked through all my sources to find out how long the LRV
    (Lunar Rover Vehicle) camera operated after the LM lifted off.
    Unfortunately I was not able to find a diffinitive answer but I
    did find an indication at least for the LRV carried by Apollo 15.
    	According to my sources, the camera was being used after the
    astronauts had returned to the CM and had been through two sleep
    periods in lunar orbit. The camera was being used to see what the
    Apollo 15 landing site looked like at high sun angles (since the
    Apollo LM typically landed when the sun was still at a low angle
    to increase the visibility of small features during landing). In
    addition, the LRV was described as having very limited power left
    at this point.
    	From this information, the camera seems to have been still
    operating 40-some hours after LM lift off. If this was typical,
    the LRV camera would probably operate up to about two days after
    LM lift off.
    
    				Drew
    

From: wjc@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Bill Chiarchiaro)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Apollo Ascent Modules
Summary: LM Status from NASA
Date: 19 Jul 89 16:40:05 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Lexington, MA
  
    I checked the NASA Satellite Situation Report, Vol. 28, No. 4,
Dec. 31, 1988 for non-booster Apollo items still in orbit.  Here's
what I found:  
 
Int'l Desig.	Catalog #	Name		Orbit		Mission
 
1969 043C	3948		LM/DESCENT	Selenocentric	Apollo 10
1969 043D	3949		LM/ASCENT	Heliocentric	Apollo 10
 
1969 059C	4041		LUNAR MODULE	Selenocentric	Apollo 11
 
1971 063D	5377		SUBSATELLITE	Selenocentric	Apollo 15
 
1972 031C	6005		LUNAR MODULE	Selenocentric	Apollo 16
  
    The LMs from Apollos 5 (unmanned, Earth-orbit test of LM-1), 9,
12, 14, 15, and 17 were all listed as decayed (actually, only the
ascent stages were mentioned for 12, 14, 15, and 17). 
 
    Glaringly absent, however, was any listing of the Apollo 13 LM.
According to one text I have, that LM was never staged (the ascent and
descent stages were kept together) and was jettisoned 18,000 km from Earth. 
  
    Notes on Apollo 9 and Apollo 10:
 
    As has recently been stated, Apollo 10 was the mission that was
essentially a lunar dry-run of the Apollo 11 landing.  We must be
careful, though, in saying that its LM "descended" to within some
distance of the lunar surface.  Early in the mission planning, an
abort from powered descent was considered, but was passed up in favor
of a mission that emulated a landing in every regard except for
powered descent and subsequent takeoff from the lunar surface.  With
Young in the CSM (Charlie Brown), Cernan and Stafford in the LM
(Snoopy) performed a DOI (descent orbit insertion).  This orbit had a
perilune of about 15 km above the mean lunar surface -- this was their
closest approach to the surface.  It was from such an orbit that later
LMs began their powered descents.  The ascent and descent staging
occured, but I don't remember at which point.  Also, I believe the
descent engine as well as the ascent engine was used for orbital
manuevers.  Cernan and Stafford spent 8 hours in the LM.  Later, upon
ground command, the ascent stage expended all its fuel and was put
into a heliocentric orbit. 
 
    One of the other "forgotten" Apollo missions was 9 - the Earth-orbit 
test of the LM.  Scott stayed with the CSM (Gumdrop) and McDivitt and 
Schweickart spent 6 hr 20 min in the LM (Spider).  They achieved a maximum 
separation of 185 km and did perform ascent/descent staging. 
  
    Bill Chiarchiaro
    N1CPK
    wjc@xn.ll.mit.edu

    "Let both sides invoke the wonders of science instead of the terrors." 

                       - U.S. President John F. Kennedy

Very interesting.  I sort of thought that I had caught NBC in an error
when they said the A 11 LM crashed, but I was not sure.

But a few things:

Of course there is no mention of the A13 LM.  They used it to get home
and it burned up on reentry.

I wonder why they did not crash the A16 LM to get a Lunar Quake?

It's very interesting that the A10 descent module is still there.  As
this guy mentions, its perilune was really quite close to the surface.  I'm
relatively sure that they staged in that orbit and came back to the CM
with the ascent engine.  Thus, the A10 descent module was left in that low
orbit.  Over the years, tidal effects, masscons, solar winds etc might well
have dragged it down, but it apparently kept going!

And finally, somehow it feels good to know that there is ANOTHER piece of
Apollo 11 still up there.  Maybe someday some of us will get to see it.

Burns

Oh yeah, the other thing is that the other LMs did not really "decay".  They
were intentionally crashed.

    Re:.27
    	The Apollo 16  LM ascent stage was suppose to crash into the
    Moon like the others but a switch was left in the wrong position
    and it was not discovered until after the ascent stage was jettisoned.
    The  deorbit burn could not be performed and the ascent stage was
    stranded in orbit.  
    
    				Drew
    

I really should buy a few of these books on Apollo so I can avoid asking
dumb questions like this...

In .26 they mentioned that (I believe) Apollo 10 put the ascent module into
a heliocentric orbit by expending the remaining fuel in the ascent stage.

I always thought that the ascent engine was a solid fuel motor, and therefore
couldn't be throttled or restarted.

Am I off the mark here, or did they pop it out of orbit with the RCS motors?

- dave

VNS TECHNOLOGY WATCH:                           [Mike Taylor, VNS Correspondent]
=====================                           [Nashua, NH, USA               ]

                           The Apollo 11 Mission

    Armstrong and Aldrin collected and brought back 48 lbs of Moon rocks 
    and soil. The task was so important that it was one the first things 
    Armstrong did after stepping on the lunar surface. After testing his 
    "Moon legs", he scooped up a small bagful of lunar soil and stored
    it in a pocket of his spacesuit. 

    The astronauts left behind a number of items, the largest being the
    descent stage of the lunar lander with a commemorative plaque
    attached to one of its legs. A silicon disk about the size of a half 
    dollar, etched microscopically with goodwill messages from the leaders
    of 73 countries, and a gold olive branch symbolizing peace were also 
    left amidst tracks of human footprints.

        {AW&ST July 17, 1989}

                         The Apollo 11 Astronauts

    Neil A. Armstrong, commander of Apollo 11, the first man to set foot
    on the Moon, was born in Wapakoneta, Ohio, August 5, 1930.  Armstrong 
    was the only civilian member of the Apollo 11 crew.  He was selected
    as an astronaut in 1962 and served in Gemini 8 before being assigned 
    as commander of the Apollo 11 mission.  Armstrong is now Chairman of 
    Computer Technologies for Aviation, Inc., Lebanon Ohio.

    Edwin "Buzz" E. Aldrin Jr., lunar module Eagle pilot, was the second 
    man to walk on the Moon.  He was born Jan 20, 1930 in Montclair New
    Jersey, and is a graduate of West Point.  An Air Force Colonel at
    the time of Apollo 11, Aldrin was named as an astronaut in 1963 and
    served as a backup pilot for the Gemini 9 mission and prime pilot
    for Gemini 12. 

    Michael Collins, command module Columbia pilot. During Apollo 11,
    Collins orbited the moon in the command module. Collins was born in
    Rome, Italy on Oct 31, 1930. He is a West Point graduate and was a
    Lieutenant Colonel at the time of Apollo 11. He was the backup pilot
    in Gemini 7 and a pilot in the Gemini 10 mission. 

        {AW&ST July 17, 1989}

  <><><><><><><>   VNS Edition : 1863    Thursday 20-Jul-1989   <><><><><><><>

    Re:.30
    	Both stages of the Apollo LM were liquid fueled not solid. In
    fact, the only manned spacecraft to rely on solid motors (except
    for things like launch escape systems, etc.) was the Space Shuttle.
    The propellants used on the LM were Aerozine 50 for fuel and nitrogen
    tetraoxide as the oxidizer (as I remember).
    
    				Drew
    

    Yup, both were powered by hypergolic liquid propellants, as .32
    mentioned. For a while the LM Descent Engine design was used as the
    second stage of Delta 2000 and 3000 series ELVs.
    
    The LM engines HAD to work, so TRW designed them with the KISS concept
    in mind. In some ways, they are the ancestors of some of todays Big
    Dumb Booster concepts. I recall something about TRW designing a scaled
    up LMDE and having it built in a shipyard as a proof of concept (it
    worked).
    
    gary

The hypergolic engines make sense.  I knew that the main goal of the
ascent engine was to "light up" when told.  Somehow I translated this to
a solid fuel engine - no moving parts (sort of) - but the hypergolic
engines make sense for this as well.

Thanks,

- dave

From: ray@basser.oz (Raymond Lister)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Quick and Dirty Won the Race
Date: 27 Jul 89 07:58:31 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Science, Uni of Sydney, Australia
 
    I thought readers might be interested in the following newspaper
article. It's from the Sydney Morning Herald, July 21st 1989 (Armstrong
stepped onto the lunar surface on July 21, Australian time). The story
ran under the title "Quick and Dirty Won the Race":
                                                   
    While NASA celebrates the twentieth anniversary of man's first
step on the Moon, all true space cadets should wear black armbands. 
The Apollo project was an expensive political gimmick which set back
the exploration and colonisation of space by more than a decade. 
 
    There are two ways to travel into space.  The first way is to ride
in a capsule on a ballistic rocket; it's a bit like flying in a cannon
ball.  The second is to use a rocket with wings.  And there are two
ways to get back down from space;  either in a capsule with a heat
shield  (it's a bit like a cannon ball with a parachute) or by gliding
down like an aeroplane. 
 
    The cannon ball was the preferred means during the space race.  It
was the quick and dirty approach.  The necessary technology had
already been mastered by both the Americans and the Russians for
transporting their weapons of mass destruction.  However, a new
vehicle is required for every flight, so the cost is high. 
 
    In the long term, reusable winged craft are more economical for
routine access to space.  But during the sixties, long term economics
stood little chance against the short term political need to win the
race to the Moon. 
 
    The United States worked on rocket planes long before the space
race. In 1947, Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier in a winged rocket
called the X-1. NASA is still developing X series research aircraft. 
The most famous is the X-15.  On July 19, 1963, the X-15 flew over 100
kilometres above sea level, making pilot Joseph Walker the first man
to travel into space on wings. 
 
    In 1981, journalists hailed the space shuttle Columbia as the
first craft to fly twice into space.  In fact, the X-15 achieved this
in August 1963. However, the X-15 was never designed to travel fast
enough to reach orbit. Its successor, the X-20, was intended to do that. 
 
    The US Air Force was so committed to rocket planes that it started
work on the X-20 in 1957, almost two years before the X-15's first
flight. The X-20 was known as "Dyna-Soar", an abbreviation for
"dynamic soaring". It was to be boosted into orbit on a ballistic
missile, but it was to glide back Earth like an aeroplane. 
 
    But events had overtaken the rocket planes. The naive engineers of
the X-15 project could not understand the panic among the public when,
on October 1957, Russia launched Sputnik I. As millions listened to
its radio bleeps, they saw a future with orbiting nuclear weapons,
ready to fall and destroy the free world. 
 
    The public was shocked again in 1961 when Yuri Gagarin became the
first human cannon ball into orbit.  To the politicians, the press,
and the public, the Russians seemed to be far ahead.  In fact the
Russians had pursued the ballistic missile approach because winged
space craft were far beyond their capacity.  The United States was a
long way ahead, but the technology was too subtle. 
 
    When President Kennedy committed the United States to reaching the
Moon before 1970, it was impossible for rocket planes to meet the
challenge.  The Moon race killed off further development of winged
space craft throughout the 60s.  In 1963, the X-20 project suffered
death by a thousand cuts.  The name "Dyna-Soar" had been prophetic. 
 
    The X-15 made its final flight in 1968.  It was still a useful
research vehicle, but NASA retired it for political reasons.  It was
felt that Congress would not fund the next generation hypersonic
vehicle until the X-15 was no more.  Congress didn't fund it anyway. 
Today, the most successful research aircraft ever flown hangs from the
ceiling of the Smithsonian Air and Space museum in Washington. 
 
    The US achieved the dubious honour of being first to the Moon by
constructing the largest rocket that would ever fly.  The Saturn V
stood 110 metres high on the launch pad. 
 
    All that remained by the end of the Apollo 11 mission was a
command module the size of a Volkswagon. 
 
    Even before Armstrong had taken his "small step", NASA knew it
needed to return to winged vehicles. NASA planned to build a space
station and a fully reusable vehicle was required to shuttle between
it and the Kennedy Space Center. 
 
    But Congress had other plans.  After Apollo 11, America  had more
important places to spend its money.  The war in Vietnam was expensive.  
Later, the OPEC oil prices left little slack in the national budget. 
 
    NASA reasoned that it would take several years to build the
shuttle, and it would face a battle every Budget.  If the shuttle's
only rationale was to ferry materials to a space station that would
not be built until after the shuttle was operational, how tempting it
would be for Congress to cancel the whole project.  An interim role
for the shuttle seemed a prudent political ploy. 
 
    NASA hit upon the idea of orbiting satellites from the shuttle.
Since the reusable shuttle would be cheaper to launch than the old
expendable rockets, NASA argued that there was no need for other
rockets.  The shuttle would become America's sole launch vehicle for
both civilian and military satellites. 
 
    The assumption that the shuttle would be cheap to operate depended
on the idea of a completely reusable vehicle.  However, increasingly
tight development budgets forced NASA to look at a semi-reusable
compromise. 
 
    The original shuttle design concept had two winged vehicles. The
larger one was called the booster, and was to carry the smaller
orbiter on its back. The booster would take off vertically, and fly to
about 80km above sea level. The orbiter would then fire its own
engines and continue up to orbit.  Meanwhile, the booster would fall
back into the lower atmosphere, where it would start turbofan engines
and fly back to base, like a conventional aeroplane. 
 
    The anticipated development budget for this design was only half
the cost of the entire Apollo project, but the US government would not
fund it.  So NASA simplified the design, introducing semi-reusable
rockets. 
 
    NASA had successfully reduced the cost of developing the shuttle
to a price Congress was willing to accept, but the cost of operating
the shuttle went up. 
 
    NASA's ploy to use the shuttle to launch all American satellites
meant contending with the demands of the Pentagon.  The thought of an
emergency shuttle landing in a communist country, while carrying a
military satellite, was more than any general could bear.  The
military insisted that the shuttle be highly manoeuvrable, so that it
could always land in a friendly country. This requirement led to the
large, heavy delta wings on the shuttle, and the need for the heat
resistant tiles.  Just as the politicians had hijacked NASA in the
sixties, the military hijacked the shuttle in the seventies. 
 
    When development problems arose during the Moon race, money was
available to fix it.  However, Congress had capped NASA's shuttle
budget. If more money was needed to solve a problem, then NASA had to
wait until it was available in the following year's budget.  So, while
the shuttle's development budget stayed low within any one year, delay
after delay fashioned the cumulative budget into NASA's only skyrocket. 
 
    Today, America's shuttle fleet achieves nothing like the launch
economies that NASA had originally hoped for. 
 
    The space shuttle is no cheaper than expendable rockets for
launching satellites.  It may even be too expensive for servicing
NASA's planned space station. 
 
    NASA has to try to run a costly long term research project, when
its budget is subject to annual political review.  With the benefit of
hindsight NASA should never have attempted to build the compromise
semi-reusable shuttle; it should have stuck with expendable rockets. 
This would have left enough money for a modest but useful semi-permanent 
space station. In short, NASA should have opted for the sort of space 
program the Russians run. 
 
    Believers in the one true winged path into space convinced
President Reagan to fund the X-30 National Aerospace Plane.  It will
be completely reusable; it won't require booster rockets; it will
scoop up air to burn its hydrogen slush fuel, resorting to rockets
only for the last small push into space. 
 
    But America now faces its greatest budgetary problems in history.
Congress looks set to kill the X-30, like the X-20 twenty six years
ago.  Until winged travel into space becomes a reality, we will not
return to the Moon. 
 
    Raymond Lister
    Basser Department of Computer Science
    University of Sydney
    NSW  2006
    AUSTRALIA
 
    ray@basser.cs.su.oz.au@uunet.uu.net

  I remember back in the early 70's, someone pointed out that there
were 50 years from the time man 1st reached the south pole until we
returned there to set up a perminent base. Who ever pointed this out
predected that the same would be true for a lunar base. That would
result in the 1st lunar base being built somewhere around 2020.

  Seeing as how several nations are planning fully reusable shuttles
for the turn of the centry, and allowing for some test time and for
building the reusable equipment to go from low earth orbit to the moon,
the prediction seems about right.

  George

Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: More on ALSEP shutdown.
Date: 17 Aug 89 20:56:00 GMT
Reply-To: "PAT REIFF" <reiff@spacvax.rice.edu>
Organization: The Internet
 
    As I promised, I asked my engineer friends at JSC about the whys
and wherefores of the ALSEP shutdown (i.e. why was it turned OFF and
not STANDBY), and here is the reply I got, from two of the engineers
who were working on ALSEP at Mission Control (Herb Zook, confirmed by
Jim Bates): 
 
    "As best I can remember, ALSEP was shut down for monetary reasons
primarily.   Money was a key issue (for staffing remote sites to
receive lunar data, the JSC control room personnel, as well as for
data analysis), power was in pretty bad shape at some of the stations,
so that only a year or two more could have been obtained, and airwave
pollution with microwaves was a concern (with the FCC?).  The power
output from the nuclear generators had been continuously decreasing
with time (mostly due to corrosion of the thermoelectric elements, I
think) and required near the end continuous management of the heaters.
I think that even some experiments had to be turned off to allow
power to be applied to others. However my dim recollection is that if
one powered the seismic packages alone, one could have operated for
another two years or so. 

    "Your question was, if it was only money why didn't we just quit
listening instead of turning them off?  I wasn't in on this decision,
as I had left the ALSEP group several years before they were turned
off. However I dimly remember one concern -- and that was that with
lack of thermal management, ALSEP would deteriorate even faster, with
one failure mode being that the receivers would fail leaving the
transmitters on. They would then continue to transmit, unnecessarily
polluting the airways, as no useful data would likely be transmitted
(remember, commands had to be sent to each ALSEP package at terminator
crossing time to relevel the seismometers --or they wouldn't work). 
As it was thought that the power wouldn't last more than another year
or two for the seismometers (which were still working well, I
believe), one couldn't just stop listening without possibly losing
control entirely. 

    "Personally, I think that it would have been very worthwhile to
listen to the seismometers for another couple of years.  Unfortunately
NASA seemed to be very poor in those days which did not always permit
wise decisions. 

    "By the way, Oberst and Nakamura (JGR, 92, pp. E769-773, 1987)
have done some very nice work on the seismic data; it is of the type
that I wish they had more data to work with." - Herb Zook
  
    From the First Space Science Department in the World:
                                                   :      _^ ^_    ____
     Patricia H. Reiff                             :     / O O \   |GO \
     Department of Space Physics and Astronomy     :     \  V  /   |OWLS\
     Rice University, Houston, TX 77251-1892       :    / ""R"" \__/
     internet:  reiff@spacvax.rice.edu             :    \ ""U"" /
     SPAN:      RICE::REIFF                        :    _/|\ /|\_
     telemail:  [preiff/kosmos] telemail/usa       :
 
    "Why does man want to go to the Moon?  Why does Rice play Texas?"

          - U.S. President John F. Kennedy, Rice Stadium, 1962

RE:           <<< Note 459.23 by RENOIR::KLAES "N = R*fgfpneflfifaL" >>>

>     * The lunar roving vehicle....
>The vehicle's rubber tires, which had to have low
>temperature pliability, were developed for NASA by Goodyear, which
>used the technology to produce an all- weather winter radial tire for
>use on automobiles. 

The LRV did not have rubber tires.  They were titanium.  The outer cover was
screening (you could see through it) with thin sheet chevron strips affixed
for the tread.  Inside that was a second metal piece that formed a sort of
inner-tube spaced way inside (about halfway from the rim to the tread) as a
shock absorber I believe.
						-- Tom

From: edstrom@UNCAEDU.BITNET
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: A time capsule on the APOLLO program from 1964.
Date: 24 Aug 89 02:47:26 GMT
Organization: The Internet
 
    I was going through a back issue of science and noticed the letter
from the editor while looking for the table of contents. I'm sending
it to SPACE because reminds me of some of the discussions I've read
here from time to time. 
 
    FROM: Science August 7, 1964 volume 145
 
 ------------------------------------------------------
                    AAAS Space Poll
 
    Polling a cross section of AAAS with respect to the space program
(Science, 24 July) was an interesting experience. At a time when many
people are on vaction, the response was more than 56 percent,
virtually by return mail. Answers to a question concerning the highest
academic degree of the respondent reminded us of the excellent
educational background of AAAS members. Nearly half are Ph.D.'s and
another tenth are M.D.'s. Science reaches  a substanttial fraction of
the leaders of academic and industrial research- for example, half of
the members of the Chemistry and Physics section of the National
Academy of Sciences. Thus the poll samples a cross section of a
substantial fraction of the best minds of this nation. The resultant
data are important, but what do they mean? 
 
    The group, while having reservations, endorses the objectives of a
manned lunar landing. Only 7 percent thought there should never be a
manned lunar landing. The reservations concern the priority of the
program, the costs involved, and the benefits to be derived. Only 31
percent thought a high priority should be given to landing a man on
the moon by 1970. Indeed only one-fifth considered a landing by 1970 a
reasonable objective. An overwhelming majority felt the present level
of support of space activities is too high. Currently w.about 40
percent of federal research and development funds are devoted to
space. A clear majority (61 percent) believed that space should
receive one-fifth or less of the R&D budget. 
 
    The respondents indicated reservations as to the benefits of
exploring the moon. When asked to choose "the most important
justification for manned exploration of the moon," a majority chose
"scientific." Yet when asked to rank fields in order of their
"potentiality for producing important new knowledge," respondents 
gave lunar exploration a low rating. 
 
    The question concerning potentialities of various fields made some
respondents unhappy and evoked the most comment. A few felt that the
question was unanswerable. Obviously, responses must represent
guesses. But these are the kinds of guesses that scientists must
continually make. There was a considerable write-in vote for the
behavioral sciences. If the questionnaire had included this item as
one of the formal choices, it probably would have ranked high. 
 
    Some respondents made comments which they signed. Among these was
one from a former president of the American Chemical Society. He may
have enunciated the view of many when he said: 
 
        "If we were struggling to maintain a high living standard we could
        not afford the luxury of space travel, but we have an affluent
        society and can spare the effort. It is an innocent, harmless
        project which appeals to the public spirit of adventure....
        All the money is spent within the country ans spurs the economy.
        It is vastly better to stimulate the economy and arouse the
        enthusiasim of the public in this way than to have it done by war."
 
    At present scientists go along with the space program but without
enthusiasm. There is little doubt that manned space exploration will
be carried out, but the program will be subject to continuing
re-examination and controversy. 
 
               Philip H. Abelson
 ---------------------------------------
 
    Besides being an interesting look at what was on scientists' minds
at that time, this letter made me curious about a few things:
 
    1) Is there an account anywhere about how the space project was
received by other scientists who were not involved in the project
itself? It sounds like an interesting project in sociology; how did
objective, i.e. non-involved, scientists rate or grade the project. 
 
    2) What about the behavioral science? Did they benefit a lot or
even at all? 
 
    3) The figure of 40% of R&D seems large to me. Was that figure
true? What is it now? What was its peak? When space funding was at its
peak was there any pressure from non-space scientists to curb it? Were
expansions of the space budget always added on tothe R&D budget or
were funds diverted from other budgets? 
 
    4) Do you think attitudes have changed much since then? Now that
we know something about what is up there would scientists respond the
same way to the questions? 
 
    John

From: willner@cfashap.harvard.edu (Steve Willner)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Just Desserts (maybe)
Keywords: Apollo CBS error
Date: 4 Oct 89 21:12:23 GMT
 
    [Excerpt from AP story by Jay Sharbutt in Boston Globe 1989 Sept. 28]
 
    This summer, a CBS source said, [producer Perry] Wolff was
suspended by CBS News after the disclosure that a July special on
man's first walk on the Moon identifies footage taken in 1972 as
having occurred during the first moon walk in 1969.  [They are
referring to the takeoff of the Lunar Module from the lunar surface,
which was filmed by the APOLLO 15 through 17 crews from the camera 
on the Lunar Rover.  No such capability existed for APOLLO 11.] 
 
    Wolff called it "an honest mistake" and blamed a mislabeled tape. 
Both he and CBS News spokesmen have refused to confirm or deny that he
was suspended. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Willner            Phone 617-495-7123         Bitnet:   willner@cfa
60 Garden St.            FTS:      830-7123           UUCP:   willner@cfa
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA                 Internet: willner@cfa.harvard.edu

Date: 2 Feb 90 17:49:15 GMT
From: crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen@uunet.uu.net  (Wm E Davidsen Jr)
Subject: Former head of Apollo program dies
  
    Air Force General Samuel Phillips, who headed NASA's Apollo program 
when the United States put the first man on the Moon, died Jan. 31 of 
heart failure.  He was 68. 
 
    Phillips, who retired as an four-star Air Force general in 1975,
headed the Apollo Lunar Landing Program of NASA from 1964 to 1969.
 
    He returned to NASA in 1986 to conduct a management review and
recommend changes in the wake of the Challenger disaster.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
 

    Also noted that Apollo 15 CMP Ron Evans died of a heart attack this
    past weekend.  He was 56 (I think).
    
    He has the distinction of being the last person to take a deep space
    EVA.
    
    Joe

    Quick correction to last note he was Apollo 17 CMP....(Fingers!)
    Joe

A commemorative first day cover of the Apollo 11 moonlanding.

A US 10c stamp franked with first day of issue stamp dated 9/9/69 *AND* the
historic moonlanding stamp dated 20/7/69 made with the die that was flown to the
moon and back on the Apollo 11 mission.

The stamp is framed on a card approx 15" x 10" (I haven't measured it exactly)
with a photograph of 'The Good Earth' with an inset picture of Neil Armstrong
standing on the surface of the moon.

The card bears the signatures (stylographs ?) of Richard Nixon, US President
and Winton M Blount, Postmaster General.


Del.

From: cobbhs@AFSC-SSD.AF.MIL ("1st Lt. Henry S. Cobb")
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Where is everything? (Apollo 10)
Date: 31 May 90 19:11:00 GMT
Organization: The Internet
 
    The Space Age is now some thirty years old, and enough has happened 
and been forgotten that history is becoming important.  I have a historical 
question: 
 
    Where is everything?
 
    Most of the stuff that humans have launched went into Earth orbit
and re-entered.  It's history.  A lot of the rest is still in Eart
orbit, and NORAD tracks it.  Presumably the Soviets do, too.  But
radars can't see GEO very well, and certainly can't see much farther
out, and there's enough stuff further out to be interesting.  I'll
give as an example something that I was/am interested in. 
 
    Apollo 10 did a rehersal for the Moon landing in lunar orbit in
1969.  The LEM separated from the CSM, did a partial descent burn,
came back up, and rendezvoused.  The astronauts transferred back to
the CSM, undocked, and went home.  Houston then commanded the LEM to
burn both its engines "to depletion", which was too dangerous to do on
anything other than a dying vehicle.  They thought the engines might
explode as they ran out of fuel, but they didn't, and the delta-V sent
the LEM into a heliocentric orbit. Houston tracked the receding LEM
until its batteries died. 
 
    I was told this story by someone who was a GNC flight controller
for the LEM during that mission.  According to him, the tracking folks
calculated at the time that the burnt-out LEM ascent stage would pass
the Earth again "in about twenty years."  Folks, it's been twenty years. 
 
    I was working at JSC at the time, and I spent some time searching
for the tracking data.  I was interested in just WHEN Apollo 10 would
return.  I discovered that the data is not in any library at JSC. 
Public Affairs didn't have the info, or any idea where to find it.  I
found a few tracking types left from Apollo who had vague memories of
the event ("Oh yeeaah ... How about that.  Hmm ...") but no data and
no pointers. 
 
    I never did find the data.  I suspect that there's a computer tape
somewhere at JSC with the information on it, but you'll need to find
both the tape and a 1960s tape drive to read it.  Neither is a
trivial exercise.  I suspect it would take something on the scale of a
Congressional inquiry to unearth this information.  I'm still curious.
 
    Apollo 10 is just one example (although, as far as I can tell,
it's the only piece of Apollo left in any orbit).  Where are all the
Surveyors, Rangers, Lunar Orbiters, and Mars probes?  Especially the
ones that crashed.  Is anyone keeping track of this stuff? 
 
    A side note of historical interest:  Due to the mascons in the
Moon, lunar orbits are unstable over periods of a few months. 
Anything left in lunar orbit for more than a year without
stationkeeping has crashed.  This includes all the other LEM ascent
stages (except 13, of course).  My LEM GNC friend indicated that the
LEMs, at least, may have had some help in crashing.  He didn't come
right out and say it, but he mentioned that "the flight directors
didn't want any leftovers cluttering up the orbit for the next
mission." (Not a precise quote.)  If this is true, the locations of
the other LEMs may be known a bit more precisely.  ;-) 
 
    Where is everything?  (Enquiring minds want to know!  ;-)
 
    Stewart Cobb
    COBBHS @ afsc-ssd.af.mil

I thought the ascent stages were fired back down into the moon to create 
seismic activity for the sensors left behind. Sort of like the earth bound 
"Well logging" info used to map the strata here.

    Re. .45
    
    Where are the lunar (and planetary) probes?
    
    (Feel free to correct and errors in this list, folks.)   :^)
    
    The Ranger probes were designed to send television pictures back
    as they crashed into the lunar surface.  Ranger 1,2 and 3 never
    left earth orbit; Ranger 4,5 and 6 impacted the moon but failed
    to send back pictures; Ranger 7,8 and 9 were completely successful.
    I think we can assume that the low earth orbits of the first three
    have long since decayed, so all the Rangers are accounted for.
    
    The seven Surveyors were designed to soft-land.  One crashed; the
    others worked fine.  One of them (Surveyor 3?) landed in the Ocean
    of Storms and was visited a few years after by the Apollo 12 team
    who removed a few parts for return to earth and study. (Kind of
    a pre-LDEF experiment!)
    
    The five Lunar Orbiters were to photomap the lunar surface extensively;
    as I recall, when each orbiter finished its task, it was commanded
    to fire its braking rocket to crash into the lunar surface.
    
    The planetary probes that did flybys (various Mariners, Pioneers
    and Voyagers) are presumably still in solar orbit.
    
    						--Eric--

    Two Pioneers and two Voyagers have left the solar system, on orbits
    that will not bring them back.  Thus they would have to be classified
    as "extra-solar" or "galactic".
        John Sauter

    > The Ranger probes were designed to send television pictures back
    > as they crashed into the lunar surface.  Ranger 1,2 and 3 never
    > left earth orbit; Ranger 4,5 and 6 impacted the moon but failed
    > to send back pictures; Ranger 7,8 and 9 were completely successful.
    > I think we can assume that the low Earth orbits of the first three
    > have long since decayed, so all the Rangers are accounted for.

        The first two RANGERs were Earth orbit tests of the spacecraft. 
    Both failed to reach their eccentric orbits and later burned up upon 
    re-entry into Earth's atmosphere.  RANGERs 3-5 were designed to hard-
    land a capsule on the Moon to take seismic measurements.  RANGER 3 
    and 5 missed the Moon and went into solar orbit.  RANGER 4 crashed 
    on the lunar farside (the first U.S. probe impact on the Moon), but 
    returned no data. 

        RANGERs 6-9 were designed only to send back images of the lunar 
    surface as they headed to an impact.  RANGER 6 did reach the Moon,
    but its cameras failed to function.  The last three RANGERs were
    complete successes, and were the first U.S. craft to take close-up
    photographs the Moon.
    
    > The seven Surveyors were designed to soft-land.  One crashed; the
    > others worked fine.  One of them (Surveyor 3?) landed in the Ocean
    > of Storms and was visited a few years after by the Apollo 12 team
    > who removed a few parts for return to Earth and study. (Kind of
    > a pre-LDEF experiment!)
    
        SURVEYORs 1, 3, 5-7 were successful soft landers.  SURVEYOR 4
    ceased communications just before touchdown, but the lander may 
    have touched down on the lunar surface intact.  SURVEYOR 2 did 
    crash on the Moon when a retrorocket failed to function properly.
    SURVEYOR 3 was the lander which was visited by the APOLLO 12 crew
    in November of 1969.

        For more details on lunar, solar, and planetary probes, see
    SPACE Topic 550.

        Larry

  Here's one that should provoke some head scratching.

  What became of the Centuar upper stages that boosted Pioneers 10 and 11
and the two Voyagers toward Juptiter? Where would they be about now?

  Did they leave the solar system or did they miss the boost at Jupiter
and go into some sort of orbit around the sun?

  George

    Re:.50
    	Pioneers 10 and 11 were boosted into their Jupiter bound
    trajectories by a Centaur upper and a solid kick rocket (the exact
    model number escapes me at the present). The Centaurs did not have
    enough energy on their own to reach the orbit of Jupiter. I don't know
    their exact orbits but I'd geuss that they range from about the orbit
    of Earth to probably no further than the inner asteriod belt (I can
    probably do some digging to get more exact numbers).
    	The solid rockets used to give the Pioneers their final boost to Jupiter
    are likely still in a very elongated solar orbits, for now at least. The
    Pioneers were able to escape the solar system because of their close
    flyby of Jupiter. The solid rocket motors likely missed Jupiter by
    millions of miles and therefore would not have received a boost big enough
    to escape. They are presently likely to be in a elongated solar orbits
    ranging from about Earth's orbit to somewhere beyond Jupiter (once
    again, I'll have to do some more checking to get exact numbers). It is
    likely, however, that in the coming decades or centuries, these rocket
    motors will have their orbits perturbed by Jupiter and eventually
    escape the solar system (a less likely possibility is that they would
    be peturbed into an orbit that will cause them to crash into the sun).
    	And before you ask, the same fate applies to the Voyager's Centaur
    upper stages and their solid rocket motors.
    
    				Drew
    
                                                                          

    re .51
    >Pioneers 10 and 11 were boosted into their Jupiter bound
    >trajectories by a Centaur upper and a solid kick rocket (the exact
                                                       
    TE-M-364-4, the ancestor of the Star 48 motor in the PAM-D. It was also
    used as the final stage on a Titan IIIE/Centaur stack for Helios and
    Voyager. The TE-364 was originally developed as the Surveyor
    retrorocket, completing the trivia circle. It was service in various
    mods as the upper stage(s) on Delta and Atlas ELVs.
    
    gary

    And how about the Soviets?  There were a couple of Venus probes
    and at least one Lunar sample and return mission with rover, yes?
    
    Mike H

I should think it would be more likely that the continued perturbations of Jupiter on
the upper stage solids would eventually tweak them into some sort of stability.  Or
else they would add a few atoms of heavy metals to the atmosphere of Jupiter.

Burns

    	How about we continue the planetary probe conversation in Topic
    550, where those who might need such info in the future will be able
    to find it easier. 
    
    	Thanks.
    

From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Saturn Rockets
Date: 21 Jun 90 04:24:25 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
    In article <1062@peyote.cactus.org> mosley@peyote.cactus.org (Bob
Mosley III) writes: 

>1) We've seen the results of the Saturn program, but what about the progress
>on the followup, the Nova series? I remember seeing photos of Werner Von Braun
>standing beside small models of proposed Nova boosters, but these were from
>1964 or so.
>How far did development go on the Novas, and when did they officially get the
>axe?
 
    The primary mission for Nova was direct flight to the Moon, and it
died when that mission approach did, late in 1962.  In fact, Nova
really died 7 Sept 1961, when the Michoud plant was chosen as NASA's
heavy assembly facility, because a cluster of more than five F-1s
wouldn't fit under the Michoud roof with the stage on its side.  From
that point on, Nova rapidly receded into the dim post-Saturn future. 
Von Braun and his crew at Marshall had more or less written Nova off
as an Apollo booster a bit earlier, which is why they didn't object to
the choice of Michoud. 
 
    At that point, Nova was still a generic term for a wide range of
big-booster concepts, and nobody had really settled on anything
specific.  The closest anybody came to a detailed post-Saturn-V design
was the Saturn C-8, with eight F-1s in the first stage, which was either 
an enlarged Saturn or a junior Nova, depending on your point of view. 
-- 
As a user I'll take speed over|     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
features any day. -A.Tanenbaum| uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu

    APn 07/15 2306 Apollo-Soyuz Reunion
 
    By LUIS CABRERA
    Associated Press Writer

   SEATTLE (AP) -- The cosmonauts and astronauts whose Apollo and Soyuz
spacecrafts were linked in space 15 years ago predicted Sunday that a
U.S.-Soviet mission to Mars within the next 20 years.

   Retired Air Force Lt.  Gen.  Thomas Stafford said the July 15, 1975
mission, in which the Apollo docked with the Soyuz and the crews moved
freely between the two spacecraft, cleared the way for further
cooperation in space between the superpowers.

   "The two most notable times in relations between these two countries
were World War II and the Apollo-Soyuz mission," said Stafford, 59.

   Donald Slayton, 66, who served as docking-module pilot for the
three-member Apollo crew, said the members of the mission had expected
the hook-up to lead quickly to greater U.S.-Soviet cooperation, but that
has not occurred.

   "I would have hoped we'd see some changes happening sooner than this.
But it's very positive now," Slayton said.

   They spoke at a ceremony marking one of the more auspicious
anniversaries of the docking, in terms of future U.S.-Soviet cooperation.

   Slayton said a U.S.-Soviet Mars mission is "inevitable.  It's just a
matter of when.  We're probably 15 or 20 years away from that because of
resources.  But it will be a major international venture."

   Stafford and Soviet mission commander Alexei Leonov, 56, said
sometimes cool relations between the two countries have prevented full
space cooperation over the last 15 years.

   The men are members of the Association of Space Explorers, formed to
foster international good will.

   "If America will do Mars alone it will be very expensive," Leonov
said.  "If the Soviet Union will do it alone also.  We are going to work
together because the Soviet Union and America have very good results."

   Leonov said one of the existing Soviet space stations could be used as
a way station on the voyage from Earth to Mars.

   "In a way it's a very simple thing that we commemorate today.  Very
simply, hands from the East and hands from the West clasping in
friendship," said Howard Lovering, a local flight museum director.

   After an air show of Soviet and American fighters, the four mission
members shook hands with each other and with children in the audience.

   Slayton said the Soviet and American crew members have met many times
since the 1975 hook-up.  The American crew were guests of the Soviets for
a few weeks after the initial mission, and Leonov and fellow crewman
Valeriy Kubasov, 55, are currently touring the United States with Slayton
and Stafford.

   Leonov told the magazine Soviet Life after the 1975 mission:  "I
believe our flight will be considered the beginning of broad cooperation
between our countries.  In the future humanity will settle space, and our
flight will be a reminder of how it all began."

   Reminded of those words on Sunday, Leonov said Soviet-American
cooperation, after overcoming setbacks during the invasion of Afghanistan
and generally cool times in the 1980s, seems to be reflecting the
optimism he knew at the time of Apollo-Soyuz.

   The third Apollo mission member, command-module pilot Vance Brand, 59,
was unable to attend the ceremony, as he was preparing to command the
space shuttle Columbia's upcoming mission.
 

    UPn 07/17 0009 Apollo-Soyuz flight remembered
 
    By WILLIAM HARWOOD
    UPI Science Writer

   CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla.  (UPI) -- Three American astronauts in a leftover
Apollo Moon capsule linked up with two Soviet cosmonauts 15 years ago
Tuesday in an unprecedented show of international good will that
highlighted the era of detente.

   In the years since, superpower space relations waxed and waned, but
the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project still stands as the only joint space flight
ever conducted by two spacefaring nations.

   The symbolic high point of the flight came at 3:19 p.m.  EDT on July
17, 1975, when astronaut Thomas Stafford and cosmonaut Alexei Leonov
shook hands in an U.S.-built airlock connecting an Apollo capsule and the
Russian Soyuz.  The handshake climaxed more than three years of work on
two continents.

   Looking on that day in orbit were Vance Brand, now a space shuttle
commander in training for his fourth flight, Donald "Deke" Slayton, one
of the original Mercury astronauts, and Russian cosmonaut Valery Kubasov.

   Millions looked on from below via television and listened in as
President Gerald Ford and Communist Party Secretary Leonid Brezhnev
congratulated the five spacemen.

   "Since the time of the launch of the first Sputnik and the first
flight of man into space, space has become an arena of international
cooperation," Brezhnev said in a statement.  "Detente, positive movement
ahead in Soviet-American relations, has created the proper conditions for
the first international space flight."

   Leonov, Kubasov, Slayton and Stafford were to attend several
ceremonies marking the 15th anniversary of the only joint U.S.-Soviet
space flight and all four will hold a news conference July 26 at the
Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

   Brand, now in training to command the grounded shuttle Columbia, said
in an interview he would be unable to participate because of work to
prepare for his fourth space mission.

   In an earlier interview, Brand said the work leading up to the
Apollo-Soyuz flight helped American scientists and engineers get to know
their Soviet counterparts in ways that would not have been otherwise
possible.

   "I think from our point of view, one of the biggest benefits was that
we got to know these people and understand a little bit what their
capabilities are and how they think," Brand said.

   "I think we sort of, at that time, got a crack in the door through the
Iron Curtain which had been closed for so long, to get a better
understanding of how they approach things in this technical, scientific
world we live in."

   The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project grew out of a 1972 agreement that called
for the United States and the Soviet Union to develop a common space
"docking" system that would allow American and Soviet spacecraft to link
up in space, primarily for emergencies.

   In reality, NASA's Apollo program was over, the space agency was
gearing up for the shuttle program and the Apollo-Soyuz flight was a
one-shot, high-profile demonstration of detente on the high frontier, not
a serious effort to develop common space hardware.

   Still, the joint project established communications and good will
between NASA and their Soviet counterparts that paid off in improved
relations and joint unmanned space endeavors.

   The mission began when Leonov and Kubasov blasted off at 8:20 a.m.
EDT on July 15, 1975, from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Soviet Central
Asia.  Stafford, Brand and Slayton took off aboard a Saturn 1B rocket
later that day at 3:50 p.m.

   With the Soyuz serving as a target, the American astronauts completed
a rendezvous two days later, docking their Apollo capsule with the Soviet
Soyuz at 12:09 p.m.  on July 17.  The historic "handshake in space"
occurred three hours and 10 minutes later.

   After two days of joint operations, the two craft separated and the
Soyuz carrying Leonov and Kubasov landed in the Soviet Union July 21.
The last Apollo moonship splashed down in the Pacific Ocean at 5:19 p.m.
July 25, 270 miles west of Hawaii.

   It was the last U.S. manned spaceflight until the first shuttle
launch in 1981 and the end of an era of single-use throw-away spacecraft.
 

Date: 23 Jul 90 15:10:35 GMT
From: spock!grayt@uunet.uu.net  (Tom Gray)
Subject: Whatever happened to the Moon Walkers?
  
    Whatever happened to the Moon Walkers?
 
    The following information was taken from a newspaper article
celebrating the 21st anniversary of the first Moon walk, APOLLO 11 in
1969.  If you've ever wondered about the current status of all of the
Moon walkers, your curiosity will hopefully be sated. 
 
    Neil Armstrong - 59

      First man on Moon.  Executive with a computer services company.
 
    Edwin Aldrin - 60

      Second man on Moon.  Sold Cadillacs in Beverly Hills, now science 
      consultant and professor at the University of North Dakota.
 
    Charles Conrad - 60

      Vice President of McDonnell Douglas.
 
    Alan Bean - 58

      Formerly in charge of astronaut training, now retired and full 
      time artist.
 
    Alan Shepard - 67

     Oldest man on the Moon (APOLLO 14).  Formerly had a beer 
     distributorship in Houston, Texas, now a real estate developer.
 
    Edgar Mitchell - 59

     Established a forum to investigate ESP, the Institute of Noetic 
     Sciences.
 
    David Scott - 58

     Engineering services executive.  President of Scott Science 
     and Technolgy.
 
    James Irwin - 60

     Preacher, founder of evangelical organization High Flight.
 
    John Young - 60

     Was astronaut office chief, piloted maiden flight of shuttle 
     Columbia in 1981.
 
    Charles Duke - 55

     Youngest man on the Moon.  President of Southwest Wilderness 
     Art Inc., and Duke Investments.
 
    Harrison Schmidt - 55

     Was a US senator, now a consultant.
 
    Eugene Cernan - 56
    
     Last man on the Moon.  Was an oil executive, now owns a consulting 
     firm, works with DEC.
 

Article        31320
From: SNOMCB@mvs.sas.com (Mike Bishop)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re:  SPACE Digest V13 #556
Date: 26 May 91 07:50:00 GMT
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
  
    Special session of Congress
 
     May 25, 1961
  
        "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving
    the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the
    Moon and returning him safely to Earth."
 
            - U.S. President John F. Kennedy 

-------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Bishop              "If you're on the right track, you'll
<SNOMCB@MVS.SAS.COM>      get run over if you just sit there."
SAS Institute Inc.
Cary, NC                       - Will Rogers
--------------------------------------------------------------
                                   

Article         1603
From: clarinews@clarinet.com
Newsgroups: clari.tw.space,clari.news.aviation,clari.news.religion
Subject: Moonwalker James Benson Irwin dead at 61
Date: 9 Aug 91 20:49:45 GMT 
 
	GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Colo. (UPI) -- Former astronaut James Benson
Irwin, who felt ``God's presence'' while walking on the Moon in 1971
and became an ordained Baptist minister and seeker of Noah's Ark after
leaving NASA, has died of a heart attack, officials said Friday.  He
was 61. 

	Irwin, who had suffered several cardiac arrests in recent
years, died at 5:50 MDT Thursday at Valley View Hospital, the High
Flight Foundation, which he founded to spread the Word of God, said. 

	Irwin -- who died almost exactly 20 years to the day after his
return from the Moon -- had been on a mountain bike ride near Marble,
Colorado, when he was stricken, the foundation said. 

	Irwin is the only one of 12 men who walked on the Moon to pass away.

	``I think it's a tragedy.  He was a good person, he was a good
man,'' his Apollo 15 crewmate, Alfred Worden, said.  ``He was a
good-natured person with a lot of physical problems.  Jim's (heart)
just couldn't keep up with the rest of him.'' 

	Alan Bean, who walked on the Moon in 1969, said: ``He was
religious, but not so much until he went to the Moon.  When he got
back, he said that he felt God's presence on the Moon and that as a
result of this, he felt he should leave the space program and witness
these feelings throughout the world. 

	``He felt people looked up to him as a role model and since he
felt religion was so important, it was important for him to share his
beliefs.'' 

	Legendary flight controller Christopher Kraft said Irwin
``probably had a greater impact on both the young and the old in the
world since his (space) travels because of his strong beliefs in God
and his religion.'' 

	``I think he certainly gave his whole life to that and had a
great deal of influence on more people, perhaps, than as an astronaut,'' 
Kraft said. 

	Irwin, Worden, and David Scott went into space in an Apollo 15
capsule, named Endeavor, on July 26, 1971.  Irwin's only spaceflight
lasted 12 days, 7 hours 11 minutes and 53 seconds. 

	Worden orbited overhead while lunar module pilot Scott took
the Apollo Falcon lander through a steep 26-degree descent over the
Appenine Mountains on the Moon to make a pinpoint touchdown near the
rim of Hadley Rille, a giant canyon snaking across the lunar highlands. 

	Irwin and Scott spent three days and 56 minutes on the Moon's
surface and Irwin completed three Moon walks totaling 17 hours and 11
minutes. 

	``The thing that really moved me was I felt God's presence
while I was on the Moon,'' Irwin said in an interview after the
flight. ``It just seemed that God was so close.'' 

	Irwin and Scott also drove about the Moon's surface in the
first lunar roving vehicle, an electric go-cart-like machine that
allowed them to cover wide areas to collect a diverse assortment of
lunar rocks and samples. 

	Falcon's liftoff from the Moon was televised by a camera
mounted on the rover, thrilling millions of spectators on Earth. 

	Kraft said Irwin suffered an irregular heart beat during his
lunar mission, a harbinger of problems to come later. 

	``When he got back into the spacecraft after he'd been on the
surface .... he was feeling very, very weak,'' Kraft said. ``He
immediately attached himself to the telemetry so we could look at his
EKG.  I happened to be standing next to (flight surgeon) Chuck Berry
when it happened, and here is this double heartbeat.  I was shocked by
looking at it. 

	``I remember Berry saying if he was on the Earth, he'd be in
intensive care immediately.  But he said where he is, in a pure oxygen
environment at zero gravity, he couldn't be in a better place.'' 

	Apollo 15 flight director Eugene Kranz, now a top manager at
the Johnson Space Center, said Irwin was profoundly affected by his
trip to the Moon. 

	``I did have a strong feeling...that something had changed
him and changed him in a dramatic fashion,'' Kranz said. ``I think he
was visibly and profoundly impressed, shaken.  During the...post-mission 
party it struck then that he was much more reserved, more introspective, 
than I had known him before.'' 

	After the flight, Irwin said he would use his fame as an
astronaut as a witness for God and consult with evangelist Billy
Graham and Baptist leaders on his role. 

	``The result of making that flight was a change in my life,''
he said. ``We were exposed to so much, the thrill of going to the
Moon, seeing the beauty of the Universe. 

	``We viewed the Earth as a very fragile, beautiful planet and
saw the need to protect it, the need for all men to work together to
protect this beautiful thing we have here. 

	``The only way I see for man to effectively work together is
if they all share a common faith or belief.'' 

	During the flight back to Earth, Worden completed a spacewalk,
the first ever conducted outside of Earth orbit.  In another first, the
Apollo 15 crew launched an 80-pound satellite to study the Moon's magnetic 
field, thus becoming the first space crew to launch a satellite. 

	The flight's only anxious moment came at splashdown when one
of the Apollo capsule's three main parachutes failed to open, but the
astronauts were unhurt by their jarring landing. 

	After the mission, NASA reprimanded Irwin and his crewmates
for poor judgment for taking souvenir stamped envelopes to the Moon
and offering them for sale when they returned. 

	``I think it is a tragedy that people would use this very
unfortunate incident to destroy an image of people who have dedicated
their lives to the exploration of space,'' Irwin said after resigning
from NASA in 1972. 

	Born in Pittsburgh on March 17, 1930, Irwin graduated from
East High School in Salt Lake City and earned a degree from the Naval
Academy in 1951.  He earned a master's degree in aeronautical
engineering and instrumentation engineering from the University of
Michigan in 1957. 

	Irwin founded High Flight after his return to Earth to spread
the word of God.  He became an ordained Baptist minister in 1985. 

	Since 1982, Irwin has made annual expeditions to Turkey's
Mount Ararat in search of Noah's Ark. 

	Irwin was an avid handball, racquetball, and squash player.

	He had five children, four by his marriage to the former Mary
Ellen Monroe of Corvalis, Ore.: Joy, 31; Jill, 30; James B., 28; and
Jan, 26.  He had another child by a second marriage. 

	A memorial service was scheduled for Tuesday at the Radiant
Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado.  Irwin will be buried at the
Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia on August 15. 

Article: 36410
From: ddj@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Doug Josephson)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Neil Armstrong on Letterman
Date: 9 Oct 91 14:58:35 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
 
Neil Armstrong is supposedly going to be on Letterman tonight (10/9). 
I wonder if he is promoting something - maybe his 'First Flight'
series on A&E or a book?  Could be interesting. 
 
Doug Josephson  ddj@hpfcso.fc.hp.com  Fort Collins, CO

He wasn't on last night - 9-Oct, but Dave made a comment that he would be
on tonight (10-Oct).  [I, of course, wasn't sure if he was joking or not
about the whole thing.   Neil isn't really Mr. Personality, so the interview
should be, well, interesting.]

- dave

    While reading through the book "Chariots For Apollo" (the story of the
    making of the lunar modules.) I came across a paragraph that stirred a
    few memories.  If anyone can help me fill in the blanks, please do!
    
    After the conclusion of the Apollo 13 flight - in which the Grumman-
    built lunar module served as a lifeboat for the crippled North American
    /Rockwell-built CSM - someone at Grumman decided in jest to send
    Rockwell a "towing bill".  The "Chariots" book described in some 
    detail how the bill was devised - how the secretary who typed it up was
    amused enough to make a "few copies" - and how it eventually ended up
    on Walter Kronkite's desk, to be amusedly read over national
    television.  I had audio-taped that news broadcast (OH, so long ago...
    ;^).....) and have long since lost that tape.
    
    Can someone in this notesfile please post for me the text of the famous
    Grumman "Towing Charges" bill?  
    
    						--Eric--
    
    P.S.  I vaguely recall that Rockwell replied with a humorous "counter-
    bill" of their own.  500 quatloos for anyone who can post the text of
    THAT one.....

    	For those of you with cable television, National Geographic
    Explorer is presenting the film FOR ALL MANKIND on TBS on Sunday,
    July 19 at 9 p.m. ET.  It is a film showing the APOLLO manned 
    lunar missions.  I have not seen it yet, but I have read that it
    is an incredible film.
    
    	Larry
    

    
    I got to see the terrific film 'For All Mankind', a couple weeks ago,
    and was lucky enough to tape it.  Beautiful sequences, especially the
    views of the LEM in 'flight' above the moonscape, during the descent,
    and of the ascent stage, slowly coming back up to rendezvous, closer &
    closer, then going thru all it's attitude twists'n turns, till it was
    ready to move in for docking.  Brought back a lot of memories, I used
    to closely follow the flights, & all the different facts'n trivia about
    Project Apollo back then.
    
    But for all the stuff I've read, and films I've seen on this, one thing
    escapes me.  Can anyone give a good explanation as to how the 'docking
    sight' on the LEM was actually used in accomplishing the final docking?
    It's the thing made of black bars meeting at right angles, against a
    circular, white background, filmed from the CM as the LEM & CM moved
    toward each other for docking.  I assume the CM Pilot used in to line
    up for docking, but how, exactly?
    
    I also assume the CM is what did the final movement forward for docking,
    while the LEM remained stationary?  But did the LEM Pilot also have to
    line up on something, to make sure his attitude was correct for the CM?
    
    - Tom A.

Article: 46958
From: Wales.Larrison@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Reentry Size of Apollo
Date: 04 Aug 92  21:45:44
 
Hi Henry
..
>>As tiny as Soyuz is, I bet they can't.  Soyuz is smaller than the
>>Apollo capsule, if my memory of the Air & Space museum is correct,
>>and Apollo was a tight enough fit for three.
> 
>Bad example, Matthew.  Apollo maximum capacity for *reentry* was
>five, that being how a Skylab rescue mission (had one been
>necessary) would have been flown.  And you could squeeze several
>more in for orbital maneuvering not involving high G.  (I've been
>in an Apollo, by the way.)

   Actually, the Apollo maximum capacity for reentry was SIX.  A
couple of years ago on a project at work we dug out an Apollo
configuration for a 6-crew capsule done by North American.  It
basically added a second row of couches under the basic three.  This
was built and tested, including suited ingress/egres tests (I saw the
films of this, and found and talked to one of the designers and test
participants - he was still working for Rockwell/North American!)  The
problem with the 6 crew configuration was the counches on the baseline
Apollo were designed to "stroke" on impact to reduce the impact load
on the crew.  For the 6-crew configuraion, no stroking could be allowed. 

   The 5 crew verson I believe your're thinking of was the Skylab
rescue configuration, where a kit was prepared for a Skylab rescue
mission, if needed.  5-crew was selected rather than 6, since it was
felt only 5 people would be needed on the mission (a 4 crew
configuration was also examined, but they wanted to preserve the
option for a backup pilot/medical specialist), and the option to allow
stroking of one couch was still desired (to attenuate the impact on an
injured crewperson) and removable pins to either lock the strut or
allow it to stroke were designed in. 
 -------------------------------------------------------------------
 Wales Larrison                         Space Technology Investor
 
--- Maximus 2.00

Article: 50114
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: ghasting@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (George Hastings)
Subject: ALSEP
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network (Richmond)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 17:47:42 GMT
 
			ALSEP
 
With all the world waiting, we turned our eyes skyward.
Remember that day when we all looked through
Our electric windows on the universe,
Seeing old spheres from a new point of view?
 
Three times again, and again, and again,
Descending on dancing flames,
They scurried, slow-motion, through ancient dust.
Who still now remembers their names?
 
We did the unthinkable, achieved the impossible,
Went where none had preceded, and more.
"Ho-hum! Another launch, you say?
Is football on Channel Four?"
 
Mechanical colonists left behind
When we blasted back home in our ships
Drew life in their bellies from shattering atoms,
Energizing electronic chips.
 
They sensed the heat of ancient fires:
Moon-embers banked deep inside.
They felt the star-bits streaming,
And the rumbling silent tide.
 
ALSEP voices, talking to Earth
In chattering bits and bytes,
Sent their colonial treasures back
Through the lunar days and nights.
 
They measured the limb-shocked solar winds
Changing the charges in sputtered lands,
And vibrating signals crossed the void,
Twitching inked fingers on metal hands.
 
The footprints and tire-tracks, unchanging, remain.
Like paths to the future, they glisten.
Solipsistic sentinals converse with themselves,
But there's nobody left who will listen!
 
			George Hastings
			10/1/1977
 

Article: 52852
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Cancelled Apollos
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1992 08:02:26 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
>> Do you mean that the Apollo 18 mission was targeted for Hadley, not 15? ...
>
>I don't remember the targeting assignments, but the crucial fact here is
>that there were two flavors of Apollo missions involved...
 
More Apollo archeology...
 
Site selection had settled down by early 1970, with minor ongoing
revision.  The cancellation of Apollo 20 had more or less coincided
with a decision that a landing in Tycho crater was too difficult, and
that had been the primary target for Apollo 20, so that one was easy
(although regrettable because Tycho was of great geological interest).
There was also some reshuffling of missions then, because the Marius
Hills mission required instrument development that might not be done in
time for its Apollo 16 slot, and also the site was reachable within the
mission rules only in summer.  So the list then was
 
	13	Fra Mauro
	14	Littrow
	15	Censorinus
	16	Copernicus
	17	Descartes
	18	Marius Hills
	19	Hadley
 
Apollo 13 was meant to visit Fra Mauro, because the Fra Mauro Formation
was thought to consist of material excavated by the impact that formed
Mare Imbrium -- a major event in lunar history, dating of which was
important, and also one that probably excavated material from deep down.
The Apollo site-selection board decided, in the wake of the Apollo 13
failure, that Fra Mauro was still first priority, so Apollo 14 went
there instead of Littrow.  They also recommended moving 15 to a site
near Davy crater, assuming Apollo 14 could get adequate photos.
 
Not only did the 14 photos not come through in time, but by then, it
was clear that more missions were going to die.  After lengthy discussion
and review of a number of sites, Littrow, Descartes, Hadley, and the
Marius Hills were deemed to be both feasible (both Copernicus and
Censorinus were now off the list due to excessively rough terrain)
and scientifically significant.
 
For Apollo 15, it was thought desirable to have a high probability of
major advances in lunar science, adequate photography without waiting
for Apollo 14 results, mission feasibility without deep analysis, and
a site suitable for either an H or J mission so that it could be flown
regardless of which type 15 was (at the time it was still an H, but
if missions were to be cancelled, cancelling the last H mission was
an obvious possibility).  This last was particularly significant
because it meant picking a site that didn't need the J's lunar rover
but would benefit if it were available.  Hadley got high marks for
providing access to several different geological features even without
a rover, being on various disciplines' high-priority lists, and putting
an ALSEP package at a high-latitude site (highly desirable to give
three-dimensional coverage for the seismometers and retroreflectors,
since most other sites were near the equator).
 
When two more Apollos, including the last H mission, were canned,
Hadley and Marius Hills fought it out for Apollo 15.  Hadley won by
a nose:  the two sites were very evenly matched until David Scott,
picked to command the mission, said he preferred landing at Hadley.
The board picked Hadley for 15, pencilled in Descartes for 16, and
left 17 open with several possibilities being debated.
 
Site selection for 16 ended up debating Descartes vs. Alphonsus.
Both looked like good places for highlands material and volcanic
material.  Descartes got the nod mostly because it was thought
preferable to have the 14 and 15 results fully in hand before
committing to a landing at Alphonsus; Alphonsus was left as a
candidate for 17.  In the end, it turned out that the Descartes site
was not volcanic at all, which caused a lot of re-evaluation of the
site-selection photogeology, because it had sure looked like it.
Confusion about the Moon's geological history was getting worse,
not better, with more Apollo results.
 
Site selection for 17 looked like it might produce a full-scale war,
so it got started early, well before 16 flew.  However, in the end
it wasn't that bad, because the fact that it was the last chance for
many years produced strong consensus on objectives:  pre-Imbrium
highlands as far from Mare Imbrium as possible, "young" volcanic
rocks, coverage from orbit of areas not previously seen up close,
and best coverage for some new geophysics instruments.  Three sites
made the short list:  Taurus-Littrow, Gassendi, and (a distant third)
Alphonsus.  T-L got top marks on most everything with the bonus of
a reasonable walking mission if the rover failed.  T-L had one
problem:  in worst-case conditions, Apollo's nominal-landing-area
ellipse would not fit the suitable terrain.  Gassendi also had
operational problems, though, since a slightly off-target landing
might make major objectives entirely unreachable.  The trajectory
people were encouraged to reconsider the T-L calculations based on
15's precision landing; the results cleared T-L and it was picked.
 
Most of the above is from NASA SP-4214, "Where No Man Has Gone Before",
which is the NASA History volume covering Apollo lunar exploration
proper (as opposed to hardware development).
 
>I don't remember exactly which CSMs got used for Skylab.
 
116 (the fifth J CSM) flew the first crew, 117 the second, and 118
the third.  111 (the last H) was Apollo-Soyuz.  119 (the last[?] J)
was allocated as Skylab rescue if necessary, then shifted to Apollo-
Soyuz backup.  Where 115 went I'm not sure.
-- 
MS-DOS is the OS/360 of the 1980s.      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
              -Hal W. Hardenbergh (1985)|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

    "The responsibility for chance...lies within us.  We must begin
  with ourselves, teaching ourselves not to close our minds prematurely
  to the novel, the suprising, the seemingly radical." - Alvin Toeffler 

Article: 30176
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Subject: Moon Dust For Sale
Sender: news@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov (Usenet)
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 17:54:00 GMT
 
Superior Galleries in Beverly Hills, California is having an auction
of space memorabilia on January 11, 1993.  One item of particular
interest is a 2 inch piece of transparent tape which has some Moon
dust on it.  This is the first time that Moon dust is being offered
for sale.   The Moon dust was collected by a NASA technician from the
spacesuit of astronaut Dave Scott after his Apollo 15 trip to the Moon
in July, 1971.  It is guarantteed to be genuine by Superior Galleries
and is expected to be sold in the price range of $75,000 to $100,000. 
For more information on the Moon dust or the auction, you can contact
Superior Galleries at (800) 421-0754 or (310) 203-9855. 

     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Choose a job you love, and
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you'll never have to work
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | a day in your life. 
 

Article: 12656
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: oliver@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
Subject: Trivia quiz - answers
Sender: news@aio.jsc.nasa.gov (USENET News System)
Organization: NASA Johnson Space Center
Date: 29 Dec 92 13:00:42 -0600
 
For those you you who were around last week and tried your hand in
answering the questions of the trivia quiz I posted, here are the
promised answers. Hope this was fun for all. 
 
 
1.  What shuttle flight had the first all-rookie crew?
    STS-2.
 
2.  What shuttle flight had the first all-veteran crew?
    STS-26.
 
3.  Name all the Moon walkers.
    Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Pete Conrad, Alan Bean, Edgar Mitchell,
    Alan Shepard, David Scott, Jim Irwin, John Young, Charlie Duke, Gene
    Cernan and Harrison Schmitt.
 
4.  Which ocean did the first American manned orbital spacecraft land in?
    John Glenn landed in the Atlantic Ocean aboard the MERCURY craft
    FRIENDSHIP 7 in 1962.
 
5.  What did Tom Stafford and Gene Cernan call their Gemini IX rendezvous
    target, whose aerodynamic shroud got snagged?
    The Angry Alligator.
 
6.  With the current manifest, who will be the first American woman to fly
    in space four times?
    Shannon Lucid.
 
7.  With the current manifest, who will be the first man to fly on the shuttle
    five times?
    Story Musgrave.
 
8.  What four signatures are on the plaque mounted to the leg on the Apollo 11
    lunar module?
    Neil Armstrong, Edwin E. Aldrin Jr., Michael Collins and Richard Nixon.
 
9.  To verify Galileo's premise about equal falling speed for two masses, Dave
    Scott dropped a hammer and a feather on the moon.  What kind of feather?
    A Falcon feather.
 
10. What astronaut has flown with the most number of different individuals?
    Guion Bluford has flown with 21 different people.
 
11. Which president signed Executive Order No. 10849 establishing the NASA
    seal and meatball?
    Dwight D. Eisenhower.
 
12. How many foreign payload specialists flew on board space shuttle orbiters
    in 1992?
    Six.  Roberta Bondar, Ulf Merbold, Dirk Frimout, Franco Malerba, Mamoru
    Morhi and Steven MacLean.  Claude Nicollier flew as a mission specialist.
 
13. What countries did they represent?
    Bondar and MacLean, Canada; Merbold, Germany; Firmout, Belgium; Malerba,
    Italy; and Morhi, Japan.
 
14. How many rookie astronauts made their first space flight in 1992?
    Ninteen.
 
15. Astronauts Dan Brandenstein and Robert "Hoot" Gibson commanded the space
    vehicle "Endeavour".  Who commanded the Apollo space vehicle "Endeavor"?
    David R. Scott.
 
16. What date is the anniversary of three shuttle flights since return to
    flight?
    December 2 - STS-27, STS-35 and STS-53.
 
17. Who was honored with the Oscar that flew on STS-45?
    George Lucas.
 
18. What astronauts received Emmys?
    Wally Schirra, Donn Eisle and Walt Cunningham received a special award for
    the first live TV broadcast in space during Apollo 7.
 
19. What was the first delivery for the Ace Moving Company?
    The Satellite Business Systems SBS-3 satellite and Telesat Canada's Anki
    C-3 were deployed on STS-5.
 
20. What three men went to the moon twice?
    Jim Lovell, Apollo 8 and 13; Gene Cernan, Apollo 10 and 17; and John Young,
    Apollo 10 and 16.
 
21. Which astronaut wrote the book "How Do You Use the Bathroom in Space"?
    Bill Pogue.
 
22. Who sang "I was walking on the Moon one day"?
    Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt.
 
23. What satellite, including transponder, is NASA select carried on?
    Satcom F2R, Transponder 13.
 
24. Besides the JSC Building 31 vault, where are the bulk of the pristine
    lunar samples stored?
    Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio, TX.  Extra Credit if you also said
    Building 950.
 
25. Not counting Apollo-Soyuz, who was the first non-American to fly on a
    U.S. spacecraft?
    Ulf Merbold on STS-9.
 
26. What suttle astronaut holds the record for the most EVA time?
    Jerry Ross.
 
27. How many technical and weather delays did John Glenn have before Friendship
    7 was launched?
    Six.
 
28. Who said "I felt red, white, and blue all over"?
    Ed White remarking on the first American EVA during Gemini 4.
 
29. Who described the moon as "A very dark and unappetizing place"?
    William Anders during the Apollo 8 mission.
 
30. How many Saturn V's flew?
    Thirteen - Apollos 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and Skylab
    1.  Apollos 5, 7, and the remaining Skylab missions were launched on
    Saturn 1Bs.
 
-- 
 
Pat Oliver -  	Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company at NASA JSC
		OLIVER@vf.jsc.nasa.gov
		All standard disclamers apply.


Article: 12657
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Trivia quiz - answers
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 20:27:29 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1992Dec29.130042.1@vf.jsc.nasa.gov> oliver@vf.jsc.nasa.gov writes:

>30. How many Saturn V's flew?
>    Thirteen - Apollos 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and Skylab
>    1...
 
If you really want to be picky, you can argue that the count was 12.6666...,
since the Skylab 1 launcher was only the first two stages of a Saturn V.
(The counterargument is that most of the payload was a rebuilt third
stage, of course!)
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 12663
From: rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com (Rich Kolker)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Trivia quiz - answers
Date: 30 Dec 92 04:20:35 GMT
Organization: South Coast Computing Services, Inc.
 
In article <C01FHu.Jsu@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry
Spencer) writes: 

>In article <1992Dec29.130042.1@vf.jsc.nasa.gov> oliver@vf.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>>30. How many Saturn V's flew?
>>    Thirteen - Apollos 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and Skylab
>>    1...
>
>If you really want to be picky, you can argue that the count was 12.6666...,
>since the Skylab 1 launcher was only the first two stages of a Saturn V.
>(The counterargument is that most of the payload was a rebuilt third
>stage, of course!)
>-- 
 
Of course, third stages flew to KSC on a SuperGuppy, so it could be said
they flew twice! :-)
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
   rich kolker       rkolker@nuchat.sccsi.com
                         < Do Not Write In This Space> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Article: 12672
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Trivia quiz - answers
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 03:25:44 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1992Dec30.190747.29554@dcatlas.dot.gov>
joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott) writes: 

>>>30. How many Saturn V's flew?
>>> Thirteen - Apollos 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and Skylab
>>If you really want to be picky, you can argue that the count was 12.6666...,
>>since the Skylab 1 launcher was only the first two stages of a Saturn V.
>
>I vaguely remember some of the Mercury launches and many of the Gemini
>launches...I thought Apollo VI never flew, due to a fire in the CM that
>unfortunately killed 3.  And, I don't remember an Apollo IV.  Oh well...
 
Apollos 4 and 6 were both unmanned tests; Apollo 7 was the first manned
mission (which did not use a Saturn V).  This was the post-fire numbering.
 
(The pre-fire numbering was somewhat confused, to put it politely.  At the
time of the fire, the booster people were calling the Grissom/White/Chaffee
mission Apollo 4 (since three unmanned tests preceded it), and the astronauts
were calling it Apollo 1.  Its only official name was AS-204.  Afterward,
the crew's wishes were honored retroactively... which left the unmanned tests
in limbo.  It's not clear why the first post-fire test was Apollo 4.  There
never was a mission officially designated Apollo 2 or Apollo 3; proposals
to retroactively rename the pre-fire tests were rejected.)
 
Mercury used Redstone and Atlas boosters; Gemini used Titan.
-- 
"God willing... we shall return."       | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
       -Gene Cernan, the Moon, Dec 1972 |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 12674
From: BrianT@cup.portal.com (Brian Stuart Thorn)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Trivia quiz - answers
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 20:42:12 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
 
>I vaguely remember some of the Mercury launches and many of the Gemini
>launches...I thought Apollo VI never flew, due to a fire in the CM that
>unfortunately killed 3.  And, I don't remember an Apollo IV.  Oh well...
>(I was born 11/59)
>
>-JTT
 
        There were no missions officially designated Apollo 1, 2 or 3.
 
        The Apollo 1 mission never took place. This flight was to be
        the first manned mission of an Apollo spacecraft and was
        scheduled for February, 1967. As with all space missions at
        the time, it had a technical designation until it achieved
        orbit, at which time it would get an official name.
        Apollo 1 was officially the Apollo-Saturn 204 mission (AS-204).
        A flash fire during a Countdown Demonstration Test on the
        launch pad destroyed the spacecraft and killed astronauts
        Grissom, White, and Chaffee on January 27, 1967.
        
        Apollo 4 flew unmanned. This was the maiden flight of the
        Saturn 5 (AS-501) and proved the risky 'all-up' principle. All
        stages of the Saturn 5 flew live on the maiden flight. This
        mission took place on November 9, 1967. 
               
        Apollo 5 was an unmanned flight of the Lunar Module only.
        This mission was launched by the Saturn 1B on January 22, 1968.
        The Apollo 5 Lunar Module was launched by the same Saturn 1B
        which had been planned for the Apollo 204 mission.
        
        Apollo 6 was the second unmanned test flight of the Saturn 5,
        (AS-502) launched on April 6, 1968. This was less successful
        than Apollo 4, with two engines out on the S-II second stage
        and the failure of the S-IVB third stage to re-ignite in orbit.
        
        Apollo 7 was the first manned flight of Apollo, launched by 
        Saturn 1B (AS-205, I think) in October, 1968.
        
        Apollo 8 was the first manned flight of the Saturn 5 (AS-503),
        launched in December, 1968. 
        
        Apollo 11, the first manned landing on the moon, was launched
        on the sixth Saturn 5 (AS-506). Before Armstrong and Aldrin
        left the moon, they left behind a crew patch for what would
        have been Apollo 1.
                
        -Brian  
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian S. Thorn                                    "If ignorance is bliss,
BrianT@cup.portal.com                               this must be heaven."
                                                -Diane Chambers, "Cheers"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article: 54911
From: baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Moon Dust Sold
Date: 12 Jan 1993 18:02 UT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
 
The Moon dust that was up for auction yesterday was sold for $42,500. 
When you include the 10% extra that goes to the auction house, that
brings the total price up to $46,750. 

     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | Choose a job you love, and
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | you'll never have to work
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | a day in your life. 
 

Article: 58189
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: kimball@stsci.edu (Timothy Kimball)
Subject: Re: KIDS
Sender: news@stsci.edu
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 18:05:15 GMT
 
Bob McGwier (n4hy@idacrd.ccr-p.ida.org) wrote:

: I really had it brought home to me yesterday how far in the past the moon
: program is to today's kids...
 
There was another example in the Sunday comics. In "Funky Winkerbean",
Jan 17, 1993, some kids are touring the National Air and Space Museum.
Standing in front of an Apollo exhibit, one of the kids says, 
 
    "Which planet was it they landed on again?"
 
The comic's writer, Tom Batiuk, has a note alongside:
 
    "I actually heard someone say this when I was there.
     I did not make this one up!"
--
/* tdk -- Opinions are mine, not my employer's. */


Article: 58046
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: davem@ee.ubc.ca (Dave Michelson)
Subject: God willing, we shall return. 
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1993 00:50:45 GMT
 
In case anyone was interested, this is the full text of the little speech
that Gene Cernan gave just before he climbed up the ladder of the APOLLO
17 lunar module for the last time.  I haven't left any text out; the
ellipses correspond to actual pauses in the monologue made in December
of 1972.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
This is Gene and I'm on the surface...  And as I take man's last steps
from the surface, back home...  for some time to come, but we believe
not too long into the future, I would like to just let...  what I
believe history will record...  that America's challenge of today has
forged man's destiny of tomorrow.
 
And as we leave the Moon and Taurus-Littrow, we leave as we came and,
God willing, as we shall return - with peace and hope for all mankind.
 
Godspeed the crew of APOLLO 17.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Dave Michelson                             University of British Columbia 
davem@ee.ubc.ca                                  Antenna Laboratory 

Interesting Gene has often been quoted as saying "God willing, we shall
return".  In fact what he said implies to me that he was assuming we would
return, but "God willing", that return would be with peace and hope.  Nice
little speach, I think.

Burns

re .74
    
>In fact what he said implies to me that he was assuming we would return, but
>"God willing", that return would be with peace and hope.
    
    You are right about the way it parses but I would think that what he
    meant was "God willing we shall return". Perhaps he could part with
    tradition and post here what he meant since he's the only one who
    knows.

From:	US1RMC::"baalke@kelvin.Jpl.Nasa.Gov" "Ron Baalke" 13-JUL-1993
To:	sci-space-news@ames.arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	Apollo 11 Logo

David W. Garrett
Headquarters, Washington, D.C.
July 13, 1993
(Phone:  202/358-1600)

NOTE TO EDITORS/PHOTO EDITORS:  N93-42

LUNAR LANDING COMMEMORATIVE LOGO AVAILABLE

	The official commemorative logo marking the 25th anniversary
of the first lunar landing, July 20, 1969, is now available. 

	The design incorporates an eagle, from the original Apollo 11
crew insignia, descending toward the lunar surface with an olive
branch, symbolizing America's peaceful space mission. 

	The logo may be obtained by contacting the NASA Headquarters
Broadcast and Imaging Branch, 202/358-1900. 

Color     93-HC-312
B&W      93-H-336

     ___    _____     ___
    /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke         | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
    | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     Jet Propulsion Lab |
 ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   M/S 525-3684 Telos | There is no such thing as
/___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA 91109 | a "temporary" tax increase.
|_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                     | 

RE: <<< Note 459.76 by VERGA::KLAES "Quo vadimus?" >>>

>	The official commemorative logo marking the 25th anniversary
>of the first lunar landing, July 20, 1969, is now available. 

Gee, NASA ahead of schedule (it's only 24 years at this point).
						-- Tom

Today is the 24th anniversary of the first time a human being stepped on
celestial body other than Earth.

When will it happen again?

Burns

Article: 67658
From: etssp@levels.unisa.edu.au
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Apollo 11: For All Mankind (transcript)
Date: 21 Jul 93 18:11:34 CST
Organization: University of South Australia
 
In honour of the 24th anniversary of Neil and Buzz's first steps on
the Moon, here is a transcript of the NASA film "For all mankind" of
Apollo 11. I've tried to be as faithful as possible to the original,
so please forgive me if I've made any errors. Anything in square
brackets are my comments. Anything in round brackets is text appearing
on the screen, in double quotes is voice from astronauts and mission
control, and the rest is the narrator. I have not attempted to
identify who the speakers are. 
 
Steven S. Pietrobon,  Australian Space Centre for Signal Processing
Signal Processing Research Institute, University of South Australia
The Levels, SA 5095, Australia.     steven@spri.levels.unisa.edu.au
 
 
(This film of the Apollo 11 Mission was produced as a report film by
 THE MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER and is not for general public distribution.)
 
(NASA seal)
 
Over three billion years ago life first appeared in the seas of an
infant Earth. Over 400 million years ago living creatures left the
protected waters to begin life on land. About two million years ago
the earliest man walked upright, on the land. Two hundred four years
ago, James Watt made improvements to the steam engine and began the
age of technology, forever altering the course of man. Sixty six years
ago, two men named Wright again changed the pattern of life on this
planet. Today, men first left [the] atmosphere of Earth to walk in the
vacuum of the Moon. 
 
And we may wonder, will our lives ever be the same. Will future
generations look back from the Earth, from another planet, from
another star, and say `This was the beginning'. 
 
(APOLLO 11  FOR ALL MANKIND)
 
Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins, Edward `Buzz' Collins: Three men to
represent the culmination of a dream and the beginning of a new
concept in reality. 
 
So they rode through the atmosphere toward the open vacuum. A trip not
only through space, but through time. Toward a world untouched by the
evolutionary processes of Earth. A journey that was to be a door to
the future and a window on the past. 
 
Now in Earth orbit it was time for Trans Lunar Injection, the start of
the trip out. 
 
"Apollo 11, this is Houston err slightly less than one minute to
ignition and everything is go."  "Roger."  "Ignition."  "We confirm
ignition and the thrust is go." 
 
The burn completed, on their way to the Moon. The next step was to
jettison their launch vehicle, turn around, and dock with the Lunar
Module, still attached to the third stage. Pulling free now of the
useless third stage they continue their coasting flight. 
 
"Ahh Houston, Apollo 11. How many miles out do you have us now."  "Err
roughly about err 50,000."  "It's a beautiful sight." 
 
So they coasted toward the Moon. As Jason sought the golden fleece to
regain a kingdom, these three sought a cargo of knowledge to gain a
kingdom for all men, a kingdom of infinite frontier. Then on July
19th, 1969, Apollo 11 prepared for LOI, Lunar Orbit Insertion. 
 
"11, Houston. You are go for LOI, over."  "Roger, go for LOI."  "And
we've had loss of signal as Apollo 11 goes behind the Moon." 
 
Now, those of us on the Earth waited for the radio signal to be
acquired as Armstrong, Collins, and Aldrin emerged from their first
transit behind the Moon. 
 
"Apollo 11, Apollo 11, this is Houston. How do you read?"  "Reading
you loud and clear Houston. How about us?" 
 
The next day, July 20th, marked the beginning of a new era. Mike
Collins, alone in the Command Module, called Columbia, watched as Neil
Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin undocked the Lunar Module, called Eagle. As
the Eagle rotated slowly, Collins inspected it carefully, for now it
was time for the descent to the surface of the Moon, and into history.
 
"Eagle, Houston. We're all go."  "How does it look?"  "The Eagle has wings." 
"Rog."  "Looking good."  "Roger Neil." 
 
A seperation maneuver had placed the Command Module below the Eagle,
so that half an orbit later, there would be clearance for DOI, Descent
Orbit Insertion. Armstrong and Aldrin looked down at Columbia as they
passed over the landing site. 
 
"Eagle, Houston. You are go for DOI, over."  "Roger, go for DOI. Do
you have LOS and and ALS on?"  "Roger. Both looking good. Going over
the hill." 
 
Again, Eagle and Columbia passed behind the Moon. When they emerged,
Eagle would be on the way down, awaiting the signal that would begin
powered descent and end with man's first Lunar landing. 
 
"Eagle, Houston. We read you now. You're go for PDI, over."  "Roger,
understand."  "Got the Earth right out our front window." 
 
50,000 feet above the Moon, Eagle's descent engine ignited and began
the decceleration for landing. As they descended, Armstrong and Aldrin
watched the craters and mountains of the Moon pass beneath them. 
 
"Eagle, Houston. You're go for landing, over."  "Roger, understand. Go
for landing." 
 
At this point, the Eagle rolled onto its back, to give the landing
radar surface acquisition. Now the crew was flying blind, hurtling
towards the Lunar surface. Only their instruments and the voice of
Mission Control telling them where they were until the slow pitch
maneuver brought the Lunar horizon to their view. 
 
"100 feet [altitude], 3 and half [feet per second] down, 9 [feet per
second] forward, 5% [thrust?]. 75. Height, 75 feet. ??? looking good,
down a half, six foward."  "60 seconds [of fuel remaining]."  "Lights
on."  "???, down two and a half, forward, forward, ???, three feet
down, two and a half. Three feet, two and a half down, faint shadow.
Four forward. Four forward. Drifting to the right a little. ??? Down a
half."  "30 seconds [!]"  "Four forward, picking up some dust. Got
your shadow out there."  "Contact light."  "OK, engine stop."  "We
copy you down Eagle."  "Houston, err Tranquility Base here. The Eagle
has landed."  "Roger Tranquility, we copy you on the ground. You got a
bunch of guys about to turn blue. We're breathing again, thanks a
lot."  "Very smooth touchdown." 
 
And from Mike Collins, alone in the orbiting Columbia.
 
"??? Eagle, is that Tranquility, over."  "Yeah, I heard the whole
thing." "Mike, good show."  "Tranquility, ahh be advised there's lots
of smiling faces in this room and all over the world, over."  "And two
of them up here."  "Rog, that was a beautiful job you guys."  "And
don't forget one in the Command Module."  "Rog." 
 
"Now we'll get to the details of err, of what's around here, but it
looks like a collection of just about every variety of err shape,
angularity, granularity, about every variety of rock you can err find.
Ahh there doesn't appear to be too much of general color at all."  "We
see some um angular blocks out err several hundred feet in front of us
that are probably err two feet in size and have err angular edges." 
 
Now in the lesser gravity of the Moon, Armstrong and Aldrin donned
their equipment and prepared to explore this stark lonely world. 
 
"Ahh, do you think you can open the hatch at this pressure, about ahh
point one two psi."  "Ahh, we're gonna try it."  "Roger."  "Ahh, the
hatch is coming open." 
 
Guided by Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong in his bulky suit worked his way
through the Eagle's forward hatch. 
 
"How I'm doin'."  "You're doin' fine."  "OK, Houston, I'm on the porch."  
"Roger, Neil."  "Yeah, we're getting a picture on the TV."  "I'm err
at the foot of the ladder. The LM footpads are only err err depressed
in the surface about err one or two inches. I'm gonna step off the LM
now. That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." 
"There seems to be no difficulty in moving around here ??? and we
suspect that err its even, perhaps easier than the simulations in one
sixth g that we performed err on doing it in simulations on the
ground. Basicly no trouble to err walk around."  "Ahh that looks
beautiful from here Neil."  "It has a stark beauty all its own, its
err like much of the high desert of err the United States. Its err
different, but its very pretty out here." 
 
Armstrong next set about taking pictures and collecting a contingency
sample of Lunar soil. 
 
"The surface is fine and powdery. I can, I can pick it up loosely with
my toe. It does adhere in fine layers err like err powdered charcoal
to the err to the sole and and sides of my boots. I only go in err
small fraction of an inch, maybe an eighth of an inch, but I can see
the footprints of my err boots and the treads in the fine sandy
particles." 
 
Then it was time for Aldrin to join him.
 
"Are you  ready?"  "All set."  "Now I wanna err back up and partially
close the hatch.  Making sure not to lock it on my out."  "A-ha-ha.
Particularly good thought."  "That's our home for the next couple of
hours and we wanna take good care of it."  "There you go."  "OK, now I
think I'll do the thing."  "Hey you got it?"  "That's a good step." 
"Yep."  "About a three footer. Beautiful, beautiful."  "Isn't that
something?"  "Magnificant site out here."  "Isn't it fun?" 
 
Then the first man on the Moon read a plaque attached to a leg of the
Eagle. A plaque representing the philosophy of a nation that itself,
less than two centuries earlier had been thought by many so-called
practical men an impractical dream. 
 
"Underneath it says `Here men from the planet Earth first set foot
upon the Moon, July 1969 A.D. We came in peace for all mankind.' It
has the crew members signatures and the signature of the president of
the United States." 
 
And as we watched them plant the flag of the United States in the
Lunar soil we perhaps wondered, what dream dreamt today by what
impractical dreamer will be tomorrow's reality. 
 
"Columbia, this is Houston, are you reading you loud and clear? Over."
"Yeah, reading you loud and clear, how's it goin'?"  "Oh it's
beautiful Mike, it really is."  "Oh gee, that's great. Is the lighting
half way decent?"  "Yes indeed. They got the flag up now. You can see
the Stars and Stripes."  "Beautiful, beautiful, just beautiful." 
 
Now Buzz Aldrin developed the choerography for future Lunar explorers.
The steps with which those who follow will traverse the Moon. 
 
"Ahh you do have to be err rather careful err to keep track of where
your center of mass is. Times it takes about two or three paces to err
make sure that you err got your feet underneath you. That's about two
or three or maybe four easy paces can bring you to a fairly smooth err
stop. Like a football player you just have to put out to the side and
cut a little bit. So-called kangaroo hop. It does work but it seems
moving forward ability is not quite as good." 
 
"Ahh, Neil and Buzz, the president of the United States is in his
office now and would like to say a few words to you, over."  "That
would be an honour."  "Go ahead Mr. President. This is Houston, out." 
"Hello Neil and Buzz. I'm talking to you by telephone from the Oval
Room at the White House. And this certainly has to be the most
historic telephone call ever made. Because of what you have done, the
heavens have become a part of man's burrow. And as you talk to us from
the Sea of Tranquility it inspires us to redouble our efforts to bring
peace and tranquility to Earth. For one priceless moment, in the whole
history of man, all the people on this Earth are truly one. One in
their pride in what you have done and one in our prayers that you will
return safely to Earth."  "Thankyou Mr. President. It's a great honour
and privilege for us to be here representing not only the United
States, but men of peace of all nations and with interest and a
curiosity and with a vision for the future. It's an honour for us to
be able to participate here today." 
 
As Armstrong and Aldrin set about the business of collecting samples
and setting up experiments, Earth observed them. 
 
"Heart rates on both crewmen averaging between 90 and 100. Flight
surgeon reports they're in great shape." 
 
Watching their loping skating stride, it was as though we peered
through a lens that distorted time itself. 
 
"Ahh Houston, I don't think there's any hope for using this err
leveling device to come up with an accurate level."  "Ahh Roger 11,
ahh press on."  "Would you believe, the ball is right in the middle
now."  "Wonderful, take a picture before it moves." 
 
So they went about their tasks of exploration. Aliens on a distant
world and strangely enough, they looked as if they belong there. 
 
"Boys, this is Houston. You have approximately three minutes until you
must commence your EVA termination activities, over."  "Roger, understand." 
 
It is now time to leave the dusty Lunar plain, stow the equipment,
samples, and photographs, to be returned to Earth. 
 
"OK, the hatch is closed and latched and we're about secure."
 
Next, jettison the now useless equipment, clean house in Eagle, and
rest for the next day's lift-off and rendezvous. 
 
"Eagle and err Columbia, this is the backup crew. Our congratulations
to yesterday's performance and our prayers are with you for the
rendezvous, over." "Thankyou Jim."  "Thankyou Jim." 
 
For lift-off, the ascent engine would push the Eagle into orbit. For
this one maneuver, this engine would have to work. There was no
alternative. We listen to the countdown from the Moon. 
 
"Our guidance recommendation err is ping and you're cleared for
take-off." "Roger, understand. We're number one on the runway." 
"Nine, eight, seven, six, five, fourth stage. Engine on ascent.
Proceed. [lot's of static] seven. Beautiful. Twenty six, thirty six
feet per second up [static] five. Pitch over. Very smooth. Ahh, got
lock."  "Very quiet ride. There's that one crater down there."  "Going
right down U.S. one."  "Man, that's impressive looking isn't it?" 
 
So they departed Tranquilty Base, pushed towards orbit by the ascent
engine. Up and away from man's first firm extraterrestrial foothold,
across the harsh pitted landscape of the Moon. Then, following
rendezvous procedures developed thorugh Gemini and Apollo, Eagle drew
nearer and nearer to Columbia. Alone in Columbia, Mike Collins watched
the Eagle's climb, it's flashing beacon a friendly signal. For hours
he had kept his vigil. Now his companions were returning. Control
thrusters firing, Eagle and Columbia move together for docking, the
last movements of their Lunar duet. After the docking, the transfer of
the crew and their precious samples of the Moon to Columbia, the
ascent stage of the Eagle was jettisoned. It was time for the final
burn in Lunar orbit, Trans Earth Injection, TEI. Again we waited.
Waited for Apollo 11 to emerge from behind the Moon. Coming home. 
 
"Hello Apollo 11, Houston. How did it go, over?"  "Tell 'em to open
the LRL doors Charlie."  "Roger, we got you coming home." 
 
On the way home. Neil Armstrong, Mike Collins, and Buzz Aldrin. Then
on July 24th, the crew of Apollo 11 witnessed a final sunset over
Earth's horizon and prepared for entry. 
 
"Err, you're cleared for landing."  "Rog, gears down and locked." 
"See you later." 
 
Now the three men wearing Biological Isolation Garments entered the
mobile quarantine facility and their Earthly confinement. 
 
"Neil, Buzz, and Mike, I want you to know that I think I'm the
luckiest man in the world and I say this not only because I have the
honour to be president of the United States, but particularly because
I have the privilege of of speaking for so many in welcoming you back
to Earth. As a result of what you have done, the world's never been
closer together before, and we thankyou for that." 
 
In reaching out for the Moon man has touched his destiny. But to
obtain that destiny we must take firm hold of that which we now only
touched. Then reach again. For these men, the first, were only the first. 
 
From the Moon, Earth exists as a warm colorful sanctuary in the
airless black of space. But in our planetary system, Earth is the
anomaly, the strange enviro- ment. And now it is time, time for man to
break free of his provincial planet, to expand, physically and
mentally, into the future, into the universe, into reality. And this
was the beginning. 
 
(We came in Peace for all Mankind)
 
(NASA seal)
 
(Music courtesy of London Records, Inc.)
 
(Produced for NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION by 
 A-V CORPORATION, Houston, Texas.)

Article: 67790
From: francis@.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Francis Vaughan)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: >Re: Apollo 11: For All Mankind (transcript)
Date: 23 Jul 1993 05:13:10 GMT
Organization: Adelaide Univerity, Computer Science
 
In article <1993Jul22.125957.28085@den.mmc.com>, gregb@den.mmc.com
(gregb) writes: 
 
|> The transcript appears to be incomplete - The "alarms" which
|> occured during the final seconds of lunar descent are missing
|> from the transcript (the guidance computer failed). Only Armstrong's 
|> training averted a catastrophic crash landing into the moon. The "coded"
|> message in the transcript notified Mission Control the LEM
|> descent was off-nominal. This is why Houston says
|> "you've got a bunch of guys about to turn blue."
 
Nope and Nope.  You are confusing two seperate issues.
 
Armstrong had essentially no idea whatsoever what the alarms meant,
except that the guidance computer was reporting an internal error. The
entire success of resolving this problem was due not to any of
Armstrongs training but due to the training and skill of the person in
mission control who decided that it was OK to proceed with the
landing. Both his skill and that of his support group in a back room.
Two seperate alarms occured during powered descent.  On both occasions
the controller responsible deeemed that it was safe to proceed.
Fifteen seconds before landing another mission controller announced
that there was thirty seconds of fuel left.   This was probably the
main reason "a bunch of guys" were about to turn blue. 
 
When the Apollo 11 crew returned to earth they all got awarded the
Medal of Freedom, one other person also received this medal:  The
controller who made the call. 
 
Armstrong however should be credited with a very cool and disciplined
landing, landing the LEM in an area strewn with boulders quite some
distance from the planned landing area (due to yet to be resolved
problems with mascons purturbing orbits and flight) was very much an
expression of skill and training.  That he did it under the pressure
of fuel limits and the psycological pressure of the first landing are
a great credit to him. 
 
The guidance controller problem did not directly endanger the LEM, if
the failure was bad, mission control would have called an abort, in
which case the descent stage would have been jettisoned and the LEM
would have acsended to orbit once again.  There was a small window,
close to the ground in which the LEM was descending sufficiently fast,
but also so close to the moon that there was not enough time between
calling an abort and reversing the descent to avoid impacting the
moon.  However the guidance computer problem occured a long time
before this window.  The guidance computer did not fail at any stage. 
If it had done so one suspects an instant abort call would have been
made.  The call made was to simply ignore the error and proceed as
normal.  The decent was in fact still essentially "nominal" up to then. 
 
The "coded" message was simply an internal error diagnostic from the
guidance software.  Essentially the computer ran a real time kernel
and was notifying the outside world that it was overloaded and was
missing deadlines.  The problem turned out to be a small foul up
between MIT and mission planning, the guidance software was running a
feature that kept track of the command module, however after the
feature was added, a later decision was made not to use it.  Rather
than go through the paperwork of removing the feature the programmers
(incorrectly) decided that it could be disabled by removing the input
data.  Wrong, the program simply latched onto a random data stream and
was madly trying to make sense of it, causing the computer to miss
deadlines.  A simple change of one switch position was all that was
required to fix it for the ascent.  It was the need for this change of
switch position that was lost in the changes to the configuration. 
 
						Francis Vaughan 

    "My feet are on the ground, but my head is in the stars." - Ruth Gordon 

Article: 67823
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Re: Apollo 11: For All Mankind (transcript)
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1993 17:03:02 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1993Jul23.135542.14563@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
mancus@pat.mdc.com (Keith Mancus) writes: 

>> When the Apollo 11 crew returned to earth they all got awarded the 
>> medal of freedom, one other person also received this medal;  the
>> controller who made the call.
>
>  Please tell us his name...
 
Steve Bales.  It's arguable that the folks in the back room supporting
him should have gotten more credit than they did, also.
-- 
Altruism is a fine motive, but if you   | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
want results, greed works much better.  |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

    re .last few
    
    Regrettably I was too young to appreciate the details of the Apollo
    missions at the time. We got the afternoon off from school to go and
    watch the Apollo 11 moon landing on TV. We didn't have a TV then so I
    went back to the teacher's place. (We used to live in a shoebox in the
    middle of highway, father used to thrash us to sleep, ...)
    
    Recently I moved house and while unpacking came across a little
    brochure about some of the Apollo missions, apparently printed in 1971.
    [You can tell what an anal retentive I am!] It contained one detail
    that I hadn't realised. The time spent on the moon by the Apollo 11
    astronauts was only 21 hours amd 36 minutes and the time "moon walking"
    a mere 2 hours 31 minutes. Talk about a flying visit.
    
    I fear I might be too *old* by the time humans next set foot on the moon.

Article: 3380
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (UPI)
Newsgroups: clari.tw.space,clari.news.gov.usa,clari.local.texas
Subject: Podium JFK used in 1962 space speech put on display at JSC
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 93 11:25:26 PDT
 
	CLEAR LAKE CITY, Texas (UPI) - A podium used by President
Kennedy to deliver a speech that launched the nation's mission to get
a man to the Moon and back was unveiled Sunday at the Johnson Space
Center near Houston. 

	In a ceremony marking the 31st anniversary of the Sept. 12,
1962 speech at Rice University, the podium - still bearing the
presidential seal - was put on permanent display after being in
storage for three decades. 

	Kennedy called on NASA to send an astronaut to the Moon and
bring him back safely before the end of the decade.  The agency
achieved that goal in July 1969 when Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin
walked on the Moon and returned to Earth with Michael Collins to
complete the historic Apollo 11 mission. 

	In the speech, Kennedy said ``The exploration of space will go
ahead, whether we join in it or not, and it is one of the great
adventures of all time, and no nation which expects to be the leader
of other nations can stay behind in this race for space.'' 

	Rice later donated the podium to the JSC, where it was put in storage. 

Article: 76981
From: apengell@axion.bt.co.uk (Alan Pengelly)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Apollo books
Date: 4 Nov 1993 08:57:51 GMT
Organization: BT Laboratories
 
I've just finished reading Charles Murray's book on Apollo (which is
pretty good), and would like to dig a bit deeper into the technical
issues. Are there any books available which look specifically at the
development of the Saturn V, LEM and CSM. I've read that the
development of the F1 engines was particularly difficult, so anything
on this would be of great interest. 
 
Incidentally, I recommend the video "For All Mankind". It's a summary
of the Apollo programme and has some great footage. With the
soundtrack by Brian Eno, it's quite beautiful. Only gripe is the end.
You see the LEM lift off from the moon and then its splash down. I
would have liked to see some re-entry shots at least. Really brought
back the memories though..... 
 
Regards
 
Alan
 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Alan Pengelly               (apengell@axion.bt.co.uk)  tel (+44) 473 646652 |
| G61 B81                                                fax (+44) 473 644605 | 
| Information Systems Development,                                            |
| BT Laboratories, Martlesham Heath, Ipswich, IP5 7RE, Suffolk, England, U.K. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Article: 77080
From: francis@cs.adelaide.edu.au (Francis Vaughan)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Apollo books
Date: 5 Nov 1993 11:42:50 GMT
Organization: Adelaide Univerity, Computer Science
Sender: francis@.cs.adelaide.edu.au (Francis Vaughan)
 
In article <2bag6f$cl2@zaphod.axion.bt.co.uk>, apengell@axion.bt.co.uk
(Alan Pengelly) writes: 

|> I've just finished reading Charles Murray's book on Apollo (which is pretty
|> good), and would like to dig a bit deeper into the technical issues. Are 
|> any books available which look specifically at the development of the Saturn
|> V, LEM and CSM. I've read that the development of the F1 engines was
|> particularly difficult, so anything on this would be of great interest.
 
Yes, this book does leave one with some tantalising glimpses of a much
greater story.  As well as the F1 engines I would love to read
something on the development of the crawlers.  The authors do provide
a pretty extensive bibliography, however much is essesially usless
unless you have access to a very well stocked US library.  I have
managed to chase down a couple of other books. 
 
For a light, profusly illustrated treatment of Apollo try - Apollo
Expeditions to the Moon, Edgar Cortright.  NASA SP-350 1975 Short
essays by many of the "names" in the project.  Well worth obtaining
for the pictures alone.  The picture of a test pilot ejecting from an
errant Lunar Landing Training Vehicle is alone worth it. 
 
"Where no man has gone before, A History of Apollo Lunar Exploration
Missions" Willian David Compton, NASA History Series, NASA SP 4214,
1989 US Govt Publication. 
 
This book lists another enormous amount of source material, again
mostly out of reach most of us.  It includes an appendix which details
the location, availability and quality of the source material used.  I
would greatly reccomend this book as a starting point. 
 
These books ARE available, I have a copy of the second right next to
me as I type. What are heartbreakingly hard to find are some of the
earlier volumes in the history series. 
 
Books like:
 
"Moonport: A history of Apollo Launch Facilities and Operations"
Charles Benson and William Faherty, NASA SP-4204, 1978
 
"Chariots for Apollo: A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft"
Coutney Brooks and James Grimwood, NASA SP-4205,  1979
 
"Stages to Saturn: A Technological History of the Apollo/Saturn Launch
Vehicles"  Roger Bilstein, NASA SP-4206,  1980
 
"Managing NASA in the Apollo Era"  Arnold Levine, NASA SP-4102 1982
 
The first three I have tried to get and the reply is either "out of print"
or "unlisted/unknown."
 
This is really discoraging, my Uni library has over one million books
(I am told) but does not have these.  Besides I would prefer to own,
not borrow.  Living in the antipodies does not help me in finding
these books either. 
 
There are many others covering Gemini, Ranger, planetary missions, space 
science and the like.  
 
Seriously, if anyone can find any of these I would be more than a bit
interested in buying copies. 
 
						Francis Vaughan
 
Department of Computer Science          _--_|\          Phone:  +61 8 303 5592
University of Adelaide                 /      \         Fax:    +61 8 303 4366
Adelaide 5005                          \_.--*_/         Home    +61 8 364 2649
Australia                                    v                         
 

From:	US1RMC::"BAALKE@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov" "Ron Baalke" 18-NOV-1993 
To:	rocks-and-fossils@MIT.EDU
CC:	
Subj:	Moon Rock Goes on Display

  Priceless Moon rock goes on display
  November 17, 1993

	MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. (UPI) -- A priceless piece of gray Moon
rock housed in a special triangular glass prism filled with nitrogen
as a preservative goes on permanent display Thursday at NASA's
Mountain View Center. 

	The one quarter-pound, fist-sized coarse-grained basalt,
estimated to be 3.4 billion years old, was carved from a larger piece
gathered by Apollo 15 astronauts during their Moon walk July 30, 1971.

	The rock, the fifth Moon memento on display in California,
rests in a special security case at NASA's Ames Research Center, which
is open to the public weekdays from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

	``The nitrogen keeps the rock in pristine condition,'' NASA
spokesman Boyd Mounce said.  ``Otherwise it would tend to rust and
deteriorate in the atmosphere.'' 

	The tiny piece of the Moon will be exhibited with lunar sample
glove boxes, which were used by scientists to handle extraterrestrial
samples without contaminating them. 

	Other Moon rocks on display in the state are at the California
Academy of Sciences in San Francisco, the International Aerospace Hall
of Fame in San Diego, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, and
the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda. 

	Worldwide, a total of 65 Moon rocks can be viewed in 21
states, the District of Columbia, and seven foreign countries. 

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1993 7:06:25 GMT
% From: Ron Baalke <BAALKE@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
% To: rocks-and-fossils@MIT.EDU
% Message-Id: <931118070625.2020b473@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
% Subject: Moon Rock Goes on Display

Well, not *exactly* priceless.  There's plenty more where that one came from
which could be had for a few 10s of billons of $!

:-)

Burns

P.S. Please, you folks from the "Cost of Space Travel" note...don't flame at me
about how it would really be hundreds of billions, or it would only be a few
thousand if we did...  Ok?

    I find the concept of a moon rock on display at the *Nixon* library
    totally mind-boggling.

    	He was President when APOLLO 11 landed on the Moon in 1969, and
    had a famous telephone conversation with Neil and Buzz while they 
    were there.  As an amusing side note, while Nixon was talking to
    the astronauts, Buzz Aldrin was relieving himself in his urine
    collection bag, another lunar "first". :^)
    
    	But Nixon is also responsible for killing much of the progress
    that NASA had planned to do, like a large, permanent space station,
    lunar colonies, and manned expeditions to Mars.  So maybe he doesn't
    deserve to have a Moon rock in his library.
    
    	Larry
    

Article: 79701
From: davidd@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (David DeFelice, 3-6186)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 crew
Date: 13 Dec 1993 10:30 EST
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
 
In article <2eb2hg$sc8@access2.digex.net>, prb@access2.digex.net (Pat) writes...

>Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins also were detailed for almost
>a year after the mission to PR flacking for the US and NASA.
 
From the latest NASA Astronaut Bios:
 
Buzz Aldrin:  Since retiring form NASA, the Air Force, and his
position as commander of the USAF Test Pilot School at Edwards AFB in
1972, he authored the autobiography "Return to Earth". Aldrin has
remained at the forefront of efforts to ensure a continued leading
role for America in manned space exploration to advance his life-long
commitment to venturing outward in space.  He is creating a master
plan of evolving missions for sustained exploration utilizing his
concepts of perpetual cycling orbits and a tetrahedron design for
starcraft and starports.  In addition, he lectures throughout the
world on his unique perspective of America's future in space.  He has
authored a book about the Apollo program titled "Men from Earth". 
 
Personal note:  I was privileged to met Mr. Aldrin at an informal
briefing at which I presented to him some of the work here at NASA
Lewis which related to his exploration concepts. 
 
Neil Armstrong:  Amrstrong subsequently held the position of Deputy
Associate Administrator for Aeronautics, NASA HQ Office of Advanced
Research and Technology, from 1970 to 1971, when he resigned from
NASA.  During 1971-1979, Armstrong was professor of aerospace
engineering an the Univ. of Cincinnati, where he was involved in both
teaching and research.  Currently, Armstrong resides in Ohio, where he
is chairman of CTA, Inc., a computing systems company. 
 
Michael Collins:  Upon leaving NASA in January 1970, collins became
Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs.  In April 1971,
Collins became the director of NASM, where he remained for 7 years. In
April 1978, collins became Undersecretary of the Smithsonian Institution.  
In 1980, Collins became Vice President of the LTV Aerospace and Defense 
Company, resigning in 1985 to start his own firm. 
 
***************************************************************************
David M. DeFelice - NASA Lewis Research Center - Community Relations Office
(216) 433-6186            Cleveland, Ohio                                  
___________________________________________________________________________
 
"Why can't life be menu driven or at least have an 'undo' feature?"
 
***************************************************************************

Article: 80317
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Lest we forget
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 20:06:17 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
25 years ago today, large-scale exploration of the Moon began with the
launch of Apollo 8.  (Unfortunately, it ended three years later.) 
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 12
From: etssp@levels.unisa.edu.au
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.science
Subject: Apollo 12: Pinpoint for Science (transcript)
Date: 21 Dec 93 13:36:19 +1030
Organization: University of South Australia
 
Here is a transcript of the NASA film "Pinpoint for Science" of Apollo
12. I've tried to be as faithful as possible to the original, so
please forgive me if I've made any errors. Despite listening to the
tape many times I could not understand some sentences. For these
sentences I used words that sound most like what I heard, even though
the sentence may not make sense. Anything in square brackets are my
comments. Anything in round brackets is text appearing on the screen,
in double quotes is voice from astronauts and mission control, and the
rest is the narrator. I have not attempted to identify who the speakers are. 
 
Steven S. Pietrobon,  Australian Space Centre for Signal Processing
Signal Processing Research Institute, University of South Australia
The Levels, SA 5095, Australia.     steven@spri.levels.unisa.edu.au
 

(NASA seal)
 
April 19th, 1967, Surveyor 3 landed on the Moon in a crater of Oceanus
Procellarum, the Ocean of Storms. With Surveyor's electronic eye, we
viewed the Lunar surface. With its meachanical arm we dug a small
shallow trench in the Lunar soil. Now on November 14th, 1969, thirty
one months after Surveyor's landing, men were leaving Earth to land on
the Ocean of Storms. Charles "Pete" Conrad, Richard Gordon, Alan Bean.
The crew of Apollo 12, the second manned landing on the face of the
Moon. Their target, the site of Surveyor 3. 
 
"Ignition sequence start, six, five, four, three, two, one, zero. All
engines running, commence lift-off." 
 
Apollo 12 lifted off in the driving rain.
 
"Pete Conrad reports the yaw program is in." "Cleared the tower."
"Tower clear." 
 
(APOLLO 12: PINPOINT FOR SCIENCE)
 
"The pitch and roll program of this baby is really going."
 
Thirty seconds later, lightning struck the spacecraft.
 
"Yow, what happened here? We had everything in the world drop out."
"I'm not sure we got hit by lightning." "Fuel cell lights and AC bus
light, fuel cell disconnect, AC bus overload one and two, main bus A
and B out." 
 
"OK, we're all organised again Jack." "We've had a couple of cardiac
arrests down here too Pete." "Hey there, I'll tell you one thing, this is 
a first class ride, Houston." "You've got a go orbit. You're looking good." 
 
In space and on Earth, they checked out the systems, to be sure that
the lightning had caused no damage that would endanger the mission.
The time for commitment neared. The burn to send Apollo 12 to the
Moon. Trans Lunar Injection, TLI. 
 
"Apollo 12, Houston, the good word is you're go for TLI." "Hoopee doo,
we're ready." "We didn't expect anything else." "We didn't train for
anything else Pete." "You better believe it." "We have data and thrust
is go. Burn looks good." 
 
With engine cut-off Apollo 12 was on its way to the Moon. Now they
turned around to dock with the Lunar Module and pull it free of the
now useless booster. 
 
"We got a hard dock Houston. She looks good."
 
The next burn would place Apollo 12 on a new path to the Moon.
Previous missions had followed a trajectory that would allow them to
loop around the Moon and with no futher burns return to Earth. But
Apollo 12, in order to land at the proper site, with the proper
lighting, would break out of the free return path. Should a failure
occur, a burn of the Service or Lunar Module engine would be needed to
get them home. 
 
"Seven, six, five, main seq[uence] ninety nine go, two, one,
ignition." "Apollo, caught lock. OK, all involved now." "There you
go." "Have water." "five" "main seq" "six, very good." 
 
Now they settled down to the routine of the outward flight.
 
"We're trying all these things that we didn't have in Gemini, like
toothpaste and shaving and uh we're having a real ball up here."
"Roger, all dressed up and no place to go." "Oh, we're going some
place. We can see it getting bigger and bigger all the time." 
 
Then, on November 17th, they prepared for orbit around the Moon.
 
"Our ahh motion to the left is not as apparant as our motion towards
the Moon, therefore we have the decided impression that we're going
right into the centre of that baby right now." "OK Houston, we're
maneuvering to the burn attitude." "Rog, we copy that 12." "We're
beginning to ahh go into darkness at this time." "Roger 12." "Matter
of fact, we're there." "Apollo 12, Houston, you're go for LOI." "Roger
Houston, go for LOI. Burn check list is complete to minus six minutes
and we're holding at that point." 
 
LOI, Lunar Orbit Insertion. The burn of the spacecraft rocket engine
that would place Apollo 12 into orbit around the Moon. With this burn
occurring behind the Moon there would be no communications with the
spacecraft until it came over the Lunar horizon. The Command Module
Yankee Clipper, the Lunar Module, Intrepid. 
 
"Apollo 12, Houston." "Hello Houston, Yankee Clipper with Intrepid in
tow has arrived on time." "I guess like everybody else that just
arrived, all three of us are plastered to the windows, looking." 
 
The next day Pete Conrad and Alan Bean entered the Lunar Module,
leaving Dick Gordon in the Command Module. Now the Intrepid and the
Yankee Clipper undocked and separated, preparatory to Intrepid's
descent and landing on the Moon. 
 
"OK, here you go again." "Maybe." "Back off Dick." "There he goes."
"Say Houston the sim one and three today." "Really Pete." 
 
As with the orbit insertion burn, the burn to begin descent was made
behind the Moon. Mission Control again contacted Intrepid as it came
over the horizon. 
 
"Intrepid, Houston, how do you read?" "Hello Houston, this is
Intrepid." "Roger, we read you loud and clear." "We had a great DOI
burn." "We'd just watched our first Earth rise which was fantastic." 
 
The Surveyor 3 target was located in the middle of five craters,
arranged like a snowman. The upper crater, called Head Crater, the
body, called Surveyor Crater. Surveyor 3 is located in this crater.
The object, to land as close as possible to Surveyor Crater. Then at
50,000 feet, Intrepid's engine fired and began the landing sequence. 
 
"OK, we're at 19,000 feet. I got some kind of horizon out there. I got
some craters too, but I don't know where I am yet." "OK." "Air and
viper 254." "OK." "I'm starting to cheat and look out there. I think I
see my crater." "Hey baby, I'm not sure." "Coming through seven, gonna
have 360." "364 Pete. 364." "Pitch over." "Pete there it is! There it
is! Golly God! Right down the middle of the road. Outstanding, 42
degrees Pete. Hey its starting right towards the end of the crater, as
you look out there!" "Forty two." "I can't believe it! Amazing!
Fantastic!" "42 degrees babe." "It just keeps on gliding in." "Coming
down at about 19 feet a second. She's looking good." "Intrepid,
Houston, go for landing." "...just over one." "Roger, go." "Roger."
"40 degrees LBD Pete, 40 degrees." "Its just so fantastic, I can't
believe it." "We're at 2000 feet." "Boys on the ground doing OK, 1800
feet up, 39 degrees, 38 degrees, 36 degrees, you're 1200 feet Pete.
1000 feet, coming down at 30. Looks good out there babe, looks good.
32 degrees, you're at 800 feet. 33 degrees, 600 feet. We've got
Surveyor Crater right where its supposed to be! You're beautiful! 240
coming down at five. Hey you're really maneuvering around." "Yeah."
"Come on down Pete." "OK." "Ten percent fuel." "200 feet, coming down
at three. You can come on down." "OK." "180 feet, nine percent, you're
looking good. We're gonna get some dust before long. 96 feet, coming
down at six, slow down the decent rate. 82, 80 feet, coming down at
four. You're looking good. 50 feet, coming down. Watch for the dust.
40 coming down at two. You're looking good. Watch the dust. Coming
down at two Pete, you got plenty of gas, plenty of gas babe. Hang in
there." "30 seconds." "18 feet coming down at two. He's got it made.
Come on in there. 24 feet. Contact light." "Roger, copy contact."
"PRO?" "Yeah, PRO." "OK." "Engine arm off." "OK." "I cycled these
valves, we got your engine command over- ride off." "Yeah." "A good
thing we leveled off high," "Yeah." "and came down because I sure
couldn't see what was underneath us once I err got into that dust."
"Its a nice place to land." "Look at those boulders out there on your
right Pete. Jeepers me." 
 
As Conrad and Bean began preparations for their first trip of
exploration, men on Earth began their attempts to fix their exact
landing site. They were aided by Dick Gordon orbiting in Yankee Clipper. 
 
"I have Intrepid. I have Intrepid." "Well done Clipper." "Hey, he's on
over Surveyor Crater. He's about err a full length Surveyor Crater
diameter from reference." "Roger." "Dick Gordon using the 28th power
sextent for these sightings." "Hey that looks like it may be. I see
Surveyor. I see Surveyor." "Maybe." "Roger Clipper. Good eyeball. Well done." 
 
A major goal of Apollo 12 had been accomplished. For before man can
engage in meaningful Lunar exploration, they must be able to select a
precise site, and get there. But now it was time to exit the Intrepid
and begin the exploration and experiments. Conrad climbed out first. 
 
"OK. OK I'm at the porch. Hey, I'll tell you what we're parked next
to." "Yeah." "We're about 25 feet from the Surveyor Crater." "That's
good. That's where we want it to be." "I got, I bet you when I get
down to the bottom of the ladder I can see Surveyor." "OK." "Down to
the, the pad." "OK." "Whoopee! Man, that may have been a small one for
Neil, but that's a long one for me. Al, you'll never believe it. Guess
what I see sitting on the side of the crater? Yeah, its Surveyor all
right. The old Surveyor, yes sir." "Ha ha ha." "Does that look neat?
It can't be any further that 600 feet from here. How about that?" 
 
Now Pete Conrad collected a preliminary geological sample.
 
"I have the decided impression I don't want to move too rapidly. But I
can walk quite swell. Seems a little weird I tell you. Don't think
you're going to steam around here quite as quick as you thought you
were. Hey Al." "Yep." "Can work out here all day." "Just take your
time." "Dum, ta dum dum dum. Dummy dum dum dum dum." 
 
Now Al Bean left Intrepid to join Conrad on the surface of the Moon.
 
"Good shape." "OK. I'll pull the err hatch closed here." "OK. Don't
lock it." "Hey, if I'd had landed twenty feet behind where I landed,
we'd had landed right smack in that crater." 
 
Inadvertantly the television camera was pointed directly at the Sun
causing the tube to burn out. The only unsuccessful aspect of the
entire mission. 
 
"Houston." "Pete, go ahead." "OK. Yeah we have the flag up. Like I
said, I hope everybody down there is as proud of it as we are to put
it up." "That's covered it Pete. We're proud of what you're doing." 
 
They prepared an experiments package to be left on the Moon. An
automated scientific station called ALSEP that would send information
to Earth for a year powered by a nuclear electric generator. 
 
"OK. And we're off to load the ALSEP. A hick, go." "Got to be able to
move out with this thing." 
 
They moved to the site slected to set up the station.
 
"Hey there's another one of those mounds over there." "Where? Hey
you're right. What do you suppose they are?" "I don't know. It looks
like a small volcano." 
 
They put together the experiment station.
 
"How far do you estimate we are from the LM? 600 feet? 700 feet?" "At least." 
 
ALSEP, an acronym for Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package. Piece
by piece, they assembled the station. 
 
"OK. I got the ahh Solar Wind deployed here."
 
The Solar Wind experiment, to measure atomic particles thrown off by
the Sun as they strike the Moon. A device to measure the Moon's
tenuous atmosphere. A magnetometer to measure the Lunar magnetic
field, which was later found to be ten to twenty times stronger than
many scientists had expected. A seisometer, to measure physical
properties of the crust and enterior, and a data station, to collect
the experimental measurements and transmit them to Earth. With ALSEP
deployed, Conrad and Bean began collecting geological samples. 
 
"Look out. There's a beauty. Look at that." "Son of a gun, we gotta have that."
 
They drove a core tube into the surface to collect soil from various depths.
 
"OK I'm core drooping it right now." "Tail." "Order it a bit and count
it. But now its full length." "We show you err three hours and seven
minutes into it, into the EVA, and we'd like you back err to the LM to
start the close out in ten minutes. That's ahh three plus one seven."
"It's a smoky to get back to that LM, in a long way." "Hey Houston,
we're approaching the ALSEP headed back to the LM." "Pete and Al,
we're picking up ahh you're heavy footprints going by the seisometer."
"OK, I think we'd ought to dust each other off." "Yeah, man. We are
filthy." "OK, coming up the ladder." "Hey, you're shaking the whole
bill." "Sorry about that." 
 
"Yankee Clipper, Houston." "Hello Houston, Clipper here." "Clipper,
you're sort of a forgotten man for a little while. We're all, all eyes
are on you now. We're with you." 
 
As Dick Gordon circled the Moon, Pete Conrad and Al Bean rested for
their next expedition. Their total time on the Lunar surface had been
just under four hours. Twelve and a half hours later they went out again. 
 
"Can't fit, looks long step." "OK, Houston." "Roger, copy Pete."
 
Before they began their geological expedition to the surrounding
craters and to Surveyor, they worked around the Lunar Module, getting
ready the tools and containers they would need. 
 
"Got the ahh parch bag on ahh Pete right now, Houston." "Roger, we
copy that." "Hey, I wonder what happened since yesterday?" "I think
everybody learned to locate." 
 
As Bean readied the equipment, Conrad went out to the ALSEP station to
check an instrument, about which the Earth based scientists had shown
some concern. 
 
"I'll whip off to the ALSEP to check the site. I'll meet you at point
one at Head Crater." "Houston, Pete's on his way to the ALSEP." 
 
After Conrad checked the ALSEP experiments they began the geological
traverse, during which they would cover about a mile and take samples
from six craters. 
 
"Hey, you get a big surprise when you look into this Head Crater Al.
Its a heck of a lot deeper than it looks, eh." "There you go, that,
that's a good rock." "Hey, look at the pits in it too. That, this is
going to be a good rock Houston." "OK Houston, coming up on Bench
Crater right now." "Boy, there's some big fragments out here." "Get
some pictures." "What a fantastic sight." "Al, look at the bottom of
that crater." "Hey hey, there's some good rock samples right here.
Come on." "Why don't we stop here and look at the chart a little bit?"
"Of course." "Man, does that LM look small back there." "Pete and Al,
we show you're 1200 feet from the LM." "OK." "You know what I feel
like Al?" "What?" "You ever see those pictures of giraffes running in
slow motion?" "To copy?" "That's exactly what I feel like." "Hee hee
hee. That's an exciting feeling. I'm going to sleep tonight." 
 
Then they arrived at Surveyor, their target. While the Surveyor activities 
were a bonus, they were symbolic. Symbolic of the success of Apollo 12. 
 
"And we're just going to move to the area." "Now that's it. See which
way it came in. See the way the skew pads dug in over there." "Dug up
dirt. Its still sitting there." "OK Houston, I err, I'm jiggling that,
the Surveyor is firmly planted here. That's no problem." "OK Al, we're
ready to start getting a TV camera." "OK." "All right, did you see
that, that material disintegrate? Hey, that cuts easy. OK, two more
tubes on that TV camera and that baby's ours." "Done. There you go."
"In the bag. In the bag. Yeah, I gotta zip it up." "Good show." "Pete,
now let me cut this scoop off." "Sure. You didn't think you're gonna
leave without a scoop did you?" "OK. Let's head for Block Crater." 
 
So they left Surveyor, and after a stop at a crater called Block, they
were back at the Lunar Module. Collecting the Solar Wind experiment,
stowing the rock boxes. 
 
"Its really ridiculous. I got dust all over the rock boxes and I'm
trying to blow it off." 
 
Bean re-entered the Lunar Module first. Conrad, using a transfer
apparatus similar to a clothes line reel sent the samples up to him.
Then, Conrad too left the Lunar surface. 
 
"OK. Houston, ahh, if you can mark me off the Lunar surface." "Roger,
we got that Pete. At ahh, three hours and fifty minutes into the EVA."
"OK. Up the ladder I come. Hi Ho. Hi Ho. Hi Ho." 
 
But there was no time to rest. The Lunar Module had to be prepared for
lift-off from the Moon and rendezvous with Yankee Clipper. 
 
"Looking good Pete." "Three, two, one, lift-off. And away we go." "The
engine is firing." "Going" [static] "we gotta neat thing babe." "We're
on our way." "And one minute going right twenty Pete." "OK." "Good
jumping." "Everything looks good Pete. Frankly..." "Sure does." 
 
So they rose to their rendezvous. And from Dick Gordon in Yankee Clipper.
 
"Boy, you sure look strange down there amongst all the sand dunes."
"All right. About half a mile, ahh, 19 feet a second. Make it..."
"You're looking better all the time Yankee." "OK. I'm down to three
feet a second." "Intrepid now at station keeping ahh with the Yankee Clipper." 
 
The two vehicles moved togther for docking.
 
"We've captured." "Capture." "OK. Dock gears are off." And you're home
free, horay." 
 
Now Conrad and Bean rejoined Dick Gordon in the Command Module,
bringing with them the samples, experiments, and photographs to be
returned to Earth. The next step, jettison the Lunar Module. Then send
it crashing into the Moon, to help calibrate the seisometer left on
the surface. This instrument was designed to measure the intensity of
meteor impacts, Moonquakes, landslides, and similar phenomona. 
 
"Guidance and Control also reports that, that the two spacecraft have
ahh separated." "Apollo 12, Houston. The LM is on its way down."
"Roger, we'll watch." 
 
The men on Earth monitored the output of the seisometer. Waiting for impact.
 
"Countdown for LM impact. Three, two, one, mark. LM impact." (Dr.
Maurice Ewing, Columbia University) "As for the meaning of it, I'd
rather not make an interpretation right now, but ehh, it is as though
one had struck a bell, say, in it, in the bal, balcony of the church.
A single blow, and found that the reverbations from it continued for
thirty minutes." 
 
After fifty five minutes, the reverbations still had not faded
completely. Apollo 12 continued its orbits of the Moon, gathering
photography for scientific study, including the Frau Mauro area, the
landing site for Apollo 13. And then it was time to head back to Earth. 
 
"Roger roger. Bye bue. See you on the other side." "Have fun."
 
The burn to send them home would take place behind the Moon. On Earth
we waited. Waited for Apollo 12 once more. 
 
"Apollo 12, Houston." "Hello Houston, Apollo 12 crew home."
 
Shortly before re-entry, the crew of Apollo 12 watched the Earth move
to blot out the Sun. 
 
"We're getting a spectacular view beneath us. We're using the err Sun
filter, the g and optics looking through it, and its unbelievable." 
 
Then Apollo 12 hit the atmosphere of Earth at 25,000 miles an hour.
 
"Course right on the money." "Rog. We concur Pete."
 
But the log of Apollo 12 does not end with splashdown. It only begins.
 
"Man, have I got the grape fruit rock of all grape fruit rocks." "Hey,
I'm looking at a rock that has small crystals in it." 
 
And on the Moon, an experimental station called ALSEP sends back its data. 
Each experiment representing a milestone in our knowledge of the Moon. 
 
(Dr. John Freeman, Rice University) "The Lunar Atmosphere in its site
has been turned on and err I'm happy to say is functioning perfectly."
(Dr. Douglas Clay, J.P.L.) "The Solar Wind Spectrometer has been
functioning, of course, since ALSEP has been turned on." (Dr. Gary
Latham, Columbia University) "The seismic experiment as, as been
reported is functioning in all respects properly." (Dr. Frank Press,
M.I.T.) "I think it will represent a major discovery of, completely
unanticipated about the Moon." (Dr. Gary Latham, Columbia University)
"We're going to have to, to throw the book away, and ahh begin over
again, which seems to be the case for the Moon in general." 
 
Apollo 12 was a milestone in manned extraterrestrial exploration. It
achieved its pinpoint landing, as close as possible to its selected
target marked by Surveyor. It set a pace and a pattern of scientific
exploration that future missions will not only follow, but will go beyond. 
 
(NASA seal)
 
(Produced for NATIONAL AERONAUICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION by A-V
CORPORATION Houston, Texas) 

Article: 48967
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Value of the next load? (was Re: Sotheby's space auction)
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1993 18:38:32 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <21DEC199307462935@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: 

>>My goodness, I didn't mean to suggest you could pay for the mission
>>this way (although it might break even if the $400K/g price held up, a
>>foolish assumption).  I just wanted to propose a Gedankenexperiment.
>
>Your questions hinted at doing a privately-funded
>mission to return lunar samples for profit.   Maybe I assumed wrong,
>but I found the idea a little intriquing.     
 
So did other people, once upon a time...  There was a
moderately-serious proposal (admittedly from some slightly-odd people)
to privately fund Apollo 18, using all the obvious methods --
sponsorships, advertising, sale of lunar samples, etc. -- to bring in
revenue.  It may have been financially optimistic but apparently it
wasn't financially ridiculous: the first-cut numbers suggested it
might work, given some reasonable assumptions about what NASA would
charge for things. 
 
NASA was thoroughly hostile to the idea and it never went anywhere.
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 81425
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 landing/MO schmatics
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 1994 22:02:07 GMT
 
In article <1994Jan15.030035.8611@moe.corollary.com>
garyl@moe.corollary.com (Gary Lorman) writes: 
 
>1. Last night I watched a kids show about the moon landing, and how 
>they had almost run out of landing fuel. (<20secs left if I remember right).
>Anyway, I was wondering what the plan was if they had run out of fuel?
>Could they fire the Ascent modules' engine and return to the command
>capsule, or would it have been a very bad day (ie, crash)?
 
Let me quote from "Chariots for Apollo" (Pelligrino):
 
"...sixty seconds on a countdown to abort. If Armstrong did not have his
ship sitting on the surface within a single sweep of the stopwatch, he
would be ordered to fire the decent engine to full throttle, then fire
the guillotine and ascent engine and - Too late for that now, Aldrin
thought.  Altitude 50 feet.  We've entered the dead-man zone.  One
wrong move and we'll be on the rocks before we can reach the abort
button." 
 
There's your basic answer: they would fire the ascent module's engine
and cut free of the decent moule.  There's a little addendum to the story
as well, though.  Turns out that the system used to measure out remaining
fuel on LM-5 wasn't extremely accurate and that Armstrong actually had
more fuel remaining on board than indicated.  It wasn't quite as close
as was thought at first.  Unfortunately, I couldn't quickly locate a
reference for this fact, but I remember reading it.  Can anybody
back me up here?
 
How many people know that immediately after the landing, one of the
descent stage fuel lines started registering a rapid increase in
temperature and pressure.  Engineers were seriously concerned that 
it could cause a minor explosion in the decent stage or squirt 
oxidizer into the hot engine compartment.  Immediate lift-off was
considered, but decided against by a few engineers.  Fortunately,
the pressure was relieved somehow and (remarkably) the story never
made it into the pre that Armstrong and Aldrin were ever in any danger.
-- 
--------------
Gary Schroeder  		
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov        
Brookhaven National Laboratory 

Article: 81432
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
From: davem@ee.ubc.ca (Dave Michelson)
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 landing/MO schmatics
Sender: news@ee.ubc.ca (Usenet News)
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 1994 09:49:28 GMT
 
In article <1994Jan16.220207.9244@bnlux1.bnl.gov>,
gary l. schroeder <schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov> wrote:

>Let me quote from "Chariots for Apollo" (Pelligrino):
 
Pellegrino and Stoff, p. 179.
 
>How many people know that immediately after the landing, one of the
>descent stage fuel lines started registering a rapid increase in
>temperature and pressure.  Engineers were seriously concerned that 
>it could cause a minor explosion in the decent stage or squirt 
>oxidizer into the hot engine compartment.  Immediate lift-off was
>considered, but decided against by a few engineers.  Fortunately,
>the pressure was relieved somehow... 
 
According to P&S (p. 168), it went away on its own.
 
--
Dave Michelson                             University of British Columbia 
davem@ee.ubc.ca                                  Antenna Laboratory

Article: 81932
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: honais@moonmanees5_vega (Eric Jones,)
Subject: Re: Apollo 11's Post-landing Close Call
Sender: news@newshost.lanl.gov
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 1994 15:21:15 GMT
 
tfrielin@catfish.BBC.PeachNet.EDU (Tom Frieling) writes:

> gary l. schroeder" <schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov>writes:
> 
> >How many people know that immediately after the landing, one of the
> >descent stage fuel lines started registering a rapid increase in
> >temperature and pressure.  Engineers were seriously concerned that
> >it could cause a minor explosion in the decent stage or squirt
> >oxidizer into the hot engine compartment.  Immediate lift-off was
> >considered, but decided against by a few engineers.  Fortunately,
> >the pressure was relieved somehow and (remarkably) the story never
> >made it into the pre that Armstrong and Aldrin were ever in any danger.
> 
> I remember vividly watching the Apoll 11 landing on TV in my living room 
> and if my memory isn't playing tricks on me I recall hearing the Mission 
> Control talk over the loop about a rise in the helium pressure in the 
> Descent Stage. They sounded concerned but the TV commentators (I had on NBC 
> and Frank McGee was on) were so busy congratulating that it was ignored. 
> 
> I recall being rather alarmed and half wondering if Apollo 11 might lift 
> off and that the commentators would miss the whole thing.
> 
> Finally, I heard in the background controllers reporting helium pressure 
> dropped and chatter stopped. 
> 
> Does anyone else remember hearing this on TV or is my memory playing tricks 
> on me?
> Thomas J. Frieling
> Bainbridge College
> tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu
> Fax:  912-248-2589
 
It did happen but really wasn't a big deal.  The LM fuel tanks were
pressurized with helium supplied from separate tanks and, apparently,
there was blockage in a line in the descent stage at some point
shortly after landing. The pressure rise was in this line. Remember,
this was in the descent stage.  There wasn't much fuel left and, in
fact, they were going to vent the tanks in order to drop the pressures
to zero.  The worst thing that could have happened was that the line
could have burst and, as far as I know that was not a concern.  In
August 1991 I had the privilege of spending a couple of days with
Armstrong and Aldrin going through the mission minute-by-minute and I
assure you that it was a matter of academic/engineering interest only.
As for the issue of aborting the mission during the final descent, you
can be sure that they ran simulations of such aborts over and over and
over again. Except for the 1201 alarms and the need to fly beyond West
Crater, the Apollo 11 landing was pretty tame compared with the
simulations.  More so for the rest of the missions. As for the amount
of fuel they had left, the measurements weren't very accurate but they
did have a pretty good idea about engine performance and the fuel use
profiles and, given that operational conservatism was pretty ingrained
in those days, if Houston had said abort, they would have headed back
to orbit.  Remember, Tom Paine had told them that, if they had to
abort, they would get the next flight and get to try again. Thirty
seconds of fuel may not sound like a lot but with somebody as skilled
as Armstrong flying the bird, it was plenty of margin.  Extra fuel
meant you couldn't land extra gear and, for the later missions, they
took advantage of LM upgrades to fly the full ALSEP, the Rover, and
food and water for 3 days.  They didn't use those upgrades to
dramatically increase fuel margins. 

Hope this helps.
 
Eric M. Jones
honais@vega.lanl.gov

Article: 82155
From: we.anderson%ccmail@x400gw.msfc.nasa.gov (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Apollo Fire at Kennedy
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 16:03:54
Organization: NASA Spacelink
 
Here's some info I copied from NASA Spacelink:
 
APOLLO 204/APOLLO 1
 
          January 27, 1967.  Tragedy struck on the launch pad during a
preflight test for Apollo 204 (AS-204), which was scheduled to be the
first Apollo manned mission, and would have been launched on February
21, 1967. Astronauts Virgil Grissom, Edward White, and Roger Chaffee
lost their lives when a fire swept through the Command Module (CM). 

          The exhaustive investigation of the fire and extensive
reworking of the CMs postponed any manned launch until NASA officials
cleared the CM for manned flight.  Saturn 1B schedules were suspended
for nearly a year, and the launch vehicle that finally bore the
designation AS-204 carried a Lunar Module (LM) as the payload, not the
Apollo CM.  The missions of AS-201 and AS-202 with Apollo spacecraft
aboard had been unofficially known as Apollo 1 and Apollo 2 missions
(AS-203 carried only the aerodynamic nose cone).  In the spring of
1967, NASA's Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight, Dr.
George E. Mueller, announced that the mission originally scheduled for
Grissom, White and Chaffee would be known as Apollo 1, and said that
the first Saturn V launch, scheduled for November 1967, would be known
as Apollo 4.  The eventual launch of AS-204 became known as the Apollo
5 mission (no missions or flights were ever designated Apollo 2 and 3). 

          The second launch of a Saturn V took place on schedule in
the early morning of April 4, 1968.  Known as AS-502, or Apollo 6, the
flight was a success, though two first stage engines shut down prematurely, 
and the third stage engine failed to re-ignite after reaching orbit. 
 
THE MANNED FLIGHTS
 
Apollo 7
Saturn 1B
October 11-22, 1968
Walter M. Schirra, Jr.
Donn F. Eisele
R. Walter Cunningham
 
10 days, 20 hours
163 Earth orbits. First manned CSM operations in lunar landing
program. First live TV from manned spacecraft. 
 
 
Apollo 8
Saturn V
December 21-27, 1968
Frank Borman
James A. Lovell, Jr.
William A. Anders
 
06 days, 03 hours
In lunar orbit 20 hours, with 10 orbits.  First manned lunar orbital
mission.  Support facilities tested. Photographs taken of Earth and
Moon.  Live TV broadcasts. 
 
 
Apollo 9 (Gumdrop and Spider)
Saturn V
March 03-13, 1969
James A. McDivitt
David R. Scott
Russell L. Schweickart
 
10 days, 01 hour
First manned flight of all lunar hardware in Earth orbit. Schweickark
performed 37 minutes EVA. Human reactions to space and weightlessness
tested in 152 orbits. First manned flight of lunar module. 
 
 
Apollo 10 (Charlie Brown and Snoopy)
Saturn V
May 18-26, 1969
Eugene A. Cernan
John W. Young
Thomas P. Stafford
 
08 days, 03 minutes
Dress rehearsal for Moon landing. First manned CSM/LM operations in
cislunar and lunar environ- ment; simulation of first lunar landing
profile. In lunar orbit 61.6 hours, with 31 orbits. LM taken to within
15,243 m (50,000 ft) of lunar surface. First live color TV from space.
LM ascent stage jettisoned in orbit. 
 
 
Apollo 11 (Columbia and Eagle)
Saturn V
July 16-24, 1969
Neil A. Armstrong
Michael Collins
Edwin E. Aldrin, Jr.
 
08 days, 03 hours, 18 minutes
First manned lunar landing mission and lunar surface EVA. "HOUSTON,
TRANQUILITY BASE HERE. THE EAGLE HAS LANDED."--July 20, Sea of Tranquility. 

1 EVA of 02 hours, 31 minutes. Flag and instruments deployed; unveiled
plaque on the LM descent stage with inscription: "Here Men From Planet
Earth First Set Foot Upon the Moon. July 1969 A.D. We Came In Peace
For All Mankind." Lunar surface stay time 21.6 hours; 59.5 hours in
lunar orbit, with 30 orbits. LM ascent stage left in lunar orbit. 20kg
(44 lbs) of material gathered. 
 

Apollo 12 (Yankee Clipper and Intrepid)
Saturn V
November 14-24, 1969
Charles Conrad, Jr.
Richard F. Gordon, Jr.
Alan L. Bean
 
10 days, 04 hours, 36 minutes
Landing site: Ocean of Storms. Retrieved parts of the unmanned
Surveyor 3, which had landed on the Moon in April 1967. Apollo Lunar
Surface Experiments Package (ALSEP) deployed. Lunar surface stay-time,
31.5 hours; in lunar orbit 89 hours, with 45 orbits. LM descent stage
impacted on Moon. 34kg (75 lbs) of material gathered. 
 
 
Apollo 13 (Odyssey and Aquarius)
Saturn V
April 11-17, 1970
James A. Lovell, Jr.
John L. Swigert, Jr.
Fred W. Haise, Jr.
 
05 days, 22.9 hours
Third lunar landing attempt.  Mission aborted after rupture of service
module oxygen tank.  Classed as "successful failure" because of experience 
in rescuing crew.  Spent upper stage successfully impacted on the Moon. 
 
 
Apollo 14 (Kitty Hawk and Antares)
Saturn V
January 31-Febraury 09, 1971
Alan B. Shepard, Jr.
Stuart A. Roosa
Edgar D. Mitchell
 
09 days
Landing site: Fra Mauro. ALSEP and other instruments deployed. Lunar
surface stay-time, 33.5 hours; 67 hours in lunar orbit, with 34
orbits. 2 EVAs of 09 hours, 25 minutes. Third stage impacted on Moon.
42 kg (94 lbs) of materials gathered, using hand cart for first time
to transport rocks. 
 
 
Apollo 15 (Endeavor and Falcon)
Saturn V
July 26-August 07, 1971
David R. Scott
James B. Irwin
Alfred M. Worden
 
12 days, 17 hours, 12 minutes
Landing site: Hadley-Apennine region near Apennine Mountains. 3 EVAs
of 10 hours, 36 minutes. Worden performed 38 minutes EVA on way back
to Earth. First to carry orbital sensors in service module of CSM.
ALSEP de- ployed. Scientific payload landed on Moon doubled. Improved
spacesuits gave increased mobility and stay-time. Lunar surface stay-
time, 66.9 hours. Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV), electric-powered,
4-wheel drive car, traversed total 27.9 km (17 mi). In lunar orbit 145
hours, with 74 orbits. Small sub-satellite left in lunar orbit for
first time. 6.6 kgs (169 lbs) of material gathered. 
 
 
Apollo 16 (Casper and Orion)
Saturn V
April 16-27, 1972
John W. Young
Thomas K. Mattingly II
Charles M. Duke, Jr.
 
11 days, 01 hour, 51 minutes
Landing site: Descartes Highlands. First study of highlands area.
Selected surface experiments deployed, ultraviolet camera/spectrograph
used for first time on Moon, and LRV used for second time. Lunar
surface stay-time, 71 hours; in lunar orbit 126 hours, with 64 orbits.
Mattingly performed 01 hour in-flight EVA. 95.8 kg (213 lbs) of lunar
samples collected. 
 
Apollo 17 (America and Challenger)
Saturn V
December 07-19, 1972
Eugene A. Cernan
Ronald B. Evans
Harrison H. Schmitt
 
12 days, 13 hours, 52 minutes
Last lunar landing mission. Landing site: Taurus-Littrow, highlands
and valley area. 3 EVAs of 22 hours, 04 minutes. Evans performed
trans-Earth EVA lasting 01 hour 06 minutes. First scientist-astronaut
to land on Moon, Schmitt. Sixth automated research station set up. 
LRV traverse total 30.5 km. Lunar surface stay-time, 75 hours. In
lunar orbit 17 hours. 110.4 kg (243 lbs) of material gathered. 
 


Article: 82206
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Choice of Armstrong for App 11?
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 1994 09:12:08 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <2if3ub$c67@panix.com> bpollak@panix.com (Benny Pollak) writes:

>I read some time ago that Neil Armstrong was chosen to the first on the moon
>because he was a civilian. Is there any thruth to that?
 
No.  At the time he was selected as Apollo 11 commander, it was by no
means clear that the landing would occur on that mission.  Michael
Collins (in "Carrying the Fire") says that at the time, he'd have
given no better than 50% odds that Apollo 11 would be the first to
*attempt* a landing.  (He figured 10% for Apollo 10, assuming
everything going well, and 40% for Apollo 12, assuming problems on the
first LM test flight.)  Moreover, Armstrong and Aldrin got Apollo 11
because they had been backup crew for Apollo 8 and Slayton's general
rule for crew selection was that the backup crew for mission N was
prime crew for N+3... and the selection for the Apollo 8 crews was
made still earlier. 
 
When the crew selections were first being set up, there was indeed
some feeling that some astronauts were better choices than others for
the first landing... but the leading choices were thought to be
McDivitt and Borman, not Armstrong.  Some attempt was made to set up
the crew rosters so one of them would be likely to command the first
landing, but later cancellations and changes hopelessly muddled that. 
 
>Also, was there some controversy between Armstrong and Aldrin regarding
>Armstrong being the first of the LEM?
 
Early on, some plans called for Aldrin to be first out, presumably
based on the Gemini division of responsibilities where the commander
stayed with the ship and the pilot did the spacewalk.  Accounts vary
somewhat about how this changed.  Aldrin's own version is that after
some initial back and forth, and enough delays for all kinds of rumors
to get started, Slayton decided the matter:  first, Armstrong was the
senior astronaut of the two, so he had priority if there were no
technical issues involved; and second, there *was* a technical issue
involved, in that the cabin layout was somewhat asymmetrical and the
man on the left -- Armstrong -- had much easier access to the hatch
opening, so he pretty well had to be first out and last in. 
-- 
Belief is no substitute                 | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
for arithmetic.                         |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

    A while back on TV (here in Oz) someone mentioned that one of the artifacts
    that the Apollo astronauts had deposited on the moon was a golf club.
    Can anyone confirm or refute this piece of Apollo trivia? I hadn't heard
    of it.
    
    {Digression: The circumstances in which the above claim was made were as
     follows. It was during a pause in a day/night cricket match. One of the
     cameras idly homed in on the moon and the commentator remarked that it
     was a pity that the Americans don't play cricket so that they might have
     left a cricket bat up there instead of a golf club.}

RE: <<< Note 459.96 by AUSSIE::GARSON "Hotel Garson: No Vacancies" >>>

>    A while back on TV (here in Oz) someone mentioned that one of the artifacts
>    that the Apollo astronauts had deposited on the moon was a golf club.

I think it was Alan Shepard on Apollo 14 who brought the bottom-half of a club
which could be screwed onto the shaft of a lunar sampling tool-type device, and
made three drives. As he only used one hand, and swung rather slowly, I'm
pretty sure that the ball didn't go very far.
						-- Tom

  Well actually, if he hit it the ball may have gone quite far. 

  When swinging a golf club right handed, the right hand doesn't do an awful
lot, or at least it shouldn't. If you use too much right hand, the ball will
"hook" if there is air and it wouldn't go as far in a vacuum. The left arm and
hand should do most of the work. 

  Add to that the fact that there is no air to slow it down, the lower gravity,
and I bet that if he caught the sweet spot it would have gone several hundred
yards. 

  In any case, I guess we'll have to wait a while to find out. Talk about a
lost ball, 

  George 

RE: <<< Note 459.98 by HELIX::MAIEWSKI >>>

>  Add to that the fact that there is no air to slow it down, the lower gravity,
>and I bet that if he caught the sweet spot it would have gone several hundred
>yards. 

Indeed, I'm sure even a poor drive would go this far. From the film I've seen,
however, the swing was more like a putt! The Apollo-era EVA suits didn't have
much mobility. 
						-- Tom

  ... and then too there's the question of how much spring there was in the
"shaft" of his club. I'll bet it didn't exactly swing like a Spalding graphite.

  George

re .97
    
>I think it was Alan Shepard on Apollo 14 who brought the bottom-half of a club
>which could be screwed onto the shaft of a lunar sampling tool-type device
    
    So I'ld guess that he didn't leave it behind anyway?
    
    And a cricket bat would, it appears, have been infeasible - rather
    ungainly as a sampling tool, perhaps useful if they had wanted to pitch a
    tent. (-:
    
re .various
    
    FWIW for a given ball velocity, the range is inversely proportional to
    the acceleration due to gravity i.e. 6 times as far on the moon,
    ignoring aerodynamic effects such as drag and spin (and assuming a
    uniform gravitational field).

RE: <<< Note 459.101 by AUSSIE::GARSON "Hotel Garson: No Vacancies" >>>

>    So I'ld guess that he didn't leave it behind anyway?

The club? I would guess that the club was left on the Moon, as so much stuff
was (e.g., EVA suit backpaks)
						-- Tom

Article: 83081
From: etssp@levels.unisa.edu.au
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Apollo 13: Houston, we've got a problem (transcript)
Date: 15 Feb 94 09:19:41 +1030
Organization: University of South Australia
 
Here is a transcript of the NASA film "Houston, we've got a problem"
of Apollo 13. I've tried to be as faithful as possible to the
original, so please forgive me if I've made any errors. This tape was
expecially difficult to transcribe as there is a lot of recorded
speach (often very noisy). For some of the noisy sentences I used
words that sound most like what I heard, even though the sentence may
not make sense. Anything in square brackets are my comments. Anything
in round brackets is text appearing on the screen, in double quotes is
voice from astronauts and mission control, and the rest is the
narrator. I have not attempted to identify who the speakers are. 
 
Steven S. Pietrobon,  Australian Space Centre for Signal Processing
Signal Processing Research Institute, University of South Australia
The Levels, SA 5095, Australia.     steven@spri.levels.unisa.edu.au
 
(NASA Seal)
 
"This little tape recorder has been a big benefit for us on passing
through the time away on our transit out to the Moon. And its err,
rather odd to see it floating like this in the, in Odyssey while its
playing the, the theme from 2001." 
 
April 13th, 1970. The mood could only be described as relaxed. Apollo
13, man's fifth Lunar mission. The third scheduled to land on the
Moon, continued its tranquil coast. 
 
"This is the crew of Apollo 13. Wish everybody there a nice evening
and a, we're just about to close out our inspection of Aquarius and
get back to a pleasant evening in Odyssey. Goodnight." "13, we got one
more item for you when you get a chance. We'd like you to err, stir up
your cryo tanks. In addition err, have a shaft and trunnion," "OK."
"for a look at the comet Benedict [?] if you need it." "OK, stand by."
[static] "OK Houston, we've had a problem here." "This is Houston, say
again please." "Passin' it." "Ahh, Houston, we've had a problem. We've
had a main B bus undervolt." "Roger, main B undervolt. OK, stand by
13, we're looking at it." "And we had a pretty large bang associated
with the err, caution and warning there." (Apollo 13) "And as I
recall, main B was the one that err, had a Amp spike on it err, once
before." ("Houston, we've got a problem") "And in our mirror err,
we're starting to err, go ahead and button up the tunnel again." 
 
April the 11th, 1970. Launch day. The crew of Apollo 13. Jim Lovell,
commander and veteran of three previous missions. He had orbited the
Moon Christmas 1968 on Apollo 8. Fred Haise, his first time up, Lunar
Module pilot. Jack Swigert, Command Module pilot. Three days ago he
was on the backup crew. Now he replaced Ken Mattingly. Mattingly had
been dropped from the mission because he had been exposed to german
measles. Hw would watch the launch from Houston's mission control. 
 
"Auto sequence initiated Flight." "Roger." "Flight, Booster." "Go."
"SIVB pre- press[urisation] complete." "Rog." "Flight, Booster. S1C
prepress complete, we're on internal power and we're go." "Roger.
How's it look ECON? Got your stabil..." "Looks good Flight." "OK."
"MCC recorder to flight speed." "Ignition Flight." "Roger." "Go at
start Flight." "Roger." "That's it go, all engines." "Rog." "OK
Throttle, how does it look?" "Looks good here Flight. Go to green."
"OK Booster, how do you look?" "S1C looks good Flight." "OK Capcom, we
go you on the ground." "OK, we're go at one Capcom." "Can believe it
Flight." "Roger." "Booster, how do you look?" "We look good Flight.
We're go." "OK Pilot?" "We're go Flight. Looks good here." "Guidance,
how does it look?" "Good Flight." "OK ECON, G&C?" "Looks good Flight."
"Looks good Flight." "OK Dirk?" "Looks fine." "Fuel matched, fuel,
we're go all right." "Roger Boost." "Go for staging Capcom." "Confirm
and brought out five hundred." "Staging Flight." "Roger." "Flight,
final trajectory confirms staging." "Roger." "Flight, Booster. Inboard
out was way early." "OK." "Flight. Confirm. Number five engine down."
"Rog." "Booster, you don't see any problem with that though do you?"
"Ahh, negative. Not right now Flight. All the other engines are go." 
 
The next step in a routine of Lunar flight was to burn out of Earth
orbit toward the Moon. Then, pull free of the third stage and dock
with the Lunar Module Acquarius. At the controls of the Command Module
Odyssey, Jack Swigert. 
 
"We've hard docked ahh, Houston." "Roger, understand, hard dock. Good deal."
 
They pulled Acquarius away from the Saturn third stage, the SIVB.
 
"OK, I can ahh, I can see the SIVB now out the hatch window."
 
Odyssey and Aquarius moved away from Earth toward the Moon.
 
(FLIGHT DIRECTOR   [Checklist attached to console] 
    [console]              CSM EECOM [underlined in red]
                    0443 EPS COMM/LAUNCH TAB
                    0613 CSM EPS CRYO
                    0618 EPS High Density [handwritten]
                           CSM G&C [underlined in red] ...)
 
"OK Houston, we've had a problem here." "Flight, Guidance." "Go
Guidance." "We've had a hardware restart. I don't know what it was."
"Yeah." "Ahh, Houston, we've had a problem. We've had a main B bus
undervolt." "You see an AC bus undervolt there Guidance? Err EECOM?"
"Negative Flight." "I believe the crew reported it." "We got a main B
undervolt." "We may have an instrumentation problem Flight." "Rog."
"And we had a pretty large bang associated with the ahh, caution and
warning there." 
 
(VOICE OF ASTRONAUT JACK SWIGERT) "Ahh, the sensation I had ahh, that
I had felt a vibration accompanying the bang ahh, not a large
vibration of shudder." 
 
"Is there any ahh, kind of leads we can give them, or are we looking
at instrumentation? We got a real problem or what?" "We're reading
ahh, zero in two pressure in fuel cell one and thirteen PSI on ahh,
fuel cell 302 pressure." "OK err, what do you wanna do? Open circuit
fuel cell one and two?" "That's right Flight." 
 
(VOICE OF ASTRONAUT FRED HAISE) "...shutdown ahh, ahh, the reactants
valve and I ahh, asked for a reconfirmation since ahh, when you do
that its alread., irreversible. If you shut one of these things down
they ahh, ahh, only can be restarted from ahh, ground support equipment." 
 
"You know, that's, that's a significant G&C. It looks to me looking
out the ahh, hatch that we are venting something." "We are, we are
venting something out the, into the ahh, into space." "OK, let's
everybody think of the kind of things we'd be venting. G&C, you got
anything that looks abnormal on your system?" "Negative Flight." "How
about you ECOM? See anything ahh, with the instrumentation you got
that could be venting?" "That's affirm Flight. Now you look at the
system Flight as far as venting is concerned." "OK, let's start scanning." 
 
"Here is a bulletin from ABC News. The Apollo 13 spacecraft has had a
serious power supply malfunction that could cause the Lunar landing
mission to be terminated early." 
 
"I assume you called in your backup ECOMs?" "Flight, say again." "You
called in your backup ECOMs now, see if we can get some more brain
power on this thing." "We got one here." "Rog." 
 
"At the moment the astronauts are continuing to try to isolate their
trouble. Late reports says the spacecraft is operating on battery
power alone, all unnecessary equipment has been turned off." 
 
"OK, now let's everybody keep cool. We got ahh, LM still attached. LM
spacecraft's good, so if we need ahh, to get back homem we got a LM to
do a good portion of it with. OK, let's make sure that we don't do
anything that's going to blow our CSM electrical power with the
batteries or that will cause us to loose the main or ahh, the fuel
cell number two. OK, we wanna keep the O2 on that kind of stuff
working. We'd like to have RCS, but we got the Command Module system,
so we're in good shape if we need to get back home. Let's solve the
problem and let's not make it any worse by guessing." 
 
(VOICE OF ASTRONAUT JIM LOVELL) "My concern was increasing all the
time. It went from `I wonder what this is gonna to do to the landing.'
to `I wonder if we can get back home again.'" 
 
"OK, karman karma makeo." "Flight, go ahead." "I think the best thing
we can do right now is start power down." 
 
"Right about then it ahh, it was quite apparant to me that ahh, it was
just a question of time that the Command Module was gonna be dead." 
 
"You don't wanna get fuel cell pumps off do you?" "We can do that on
fuel cell number one Flight." "OK, well let's make sure we don't blow
the whole mission." "Ohh, the thing that concerns me is starting to
stow equipment. We, we had a problem, we don't know the cause of the
problem." "Flight, I have got a feeling we've lost two fuel cells. I
hate to put it that way but ahh, I don't know why we lost them. It
doesn't all tag up." "Network from Flight." "Flight, Network." "Bring
me up another computer in the RTCC will you." "Ahh, we got ahh, one
machine on the RTCC and we got dual safety downstairs." "OK, I want
another machine up in the RTCC and I want a bunch of guys capable of
running D logs down there." "Roger that." 
 
"What all this means is only speculation at this point. First, though
there has been some tumbling or rotation of the spacecraft, the
astronauts do not appear to be in any immediate danger." 
 
"I'll tell you what. Ahh, G&C can you get somebody in the backroom to
try to figure out what the equivalent delta-v is we're getting, so
that we can see if we can backtrack to see if we can fugure out what's
venting." "Rog. We'll give it a try Flight." "OK." 
 
"When I looked up and saw both oxygen pressures, one absolutely zero,
the other one going down, err it, it dawned on me and I'm sure Jack
and Fred about the same time, that we were indeed in serious trouble."
"The only way to survive the situation was to transer to the LM." 
 
"Flight, ECOM." "Go ahead ECOM." "The pressure in O2 tank one is all
the way down to 297. You better think about getting in the LM, or
using the LM systems." 
 
"I'd say this is the serious err, situation that we ever had in manned
spaceflight." (CHRISTOPHER KRAFT, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, MANNED SPACECRAFT
CENTRE) "We'll always call the LM a good lifeboat under those
circumstances." (Press Conference, April 13, 1970) "If at anytime in
the mission, however, the LM had separated, and we would gotten
ourselves into a rendezvous situation, or a the, the Command Module
being around the Moon, then what you say is absolutely true. It would,
it would be a fatal situation." 
 
"Telemeter from Flight." "Go ahead Flight." "I want you to get some
guys figuring minimum power in the LM to sustain life." 
 
The accident had occurred 200,000 miles from Earth. Lovell, Swigert,
and Haise rode on the Lunar Module, attached to a lifeless Command
Module. Apollo 13 started as a mission of scientific exploration. It
was now a matter of survival. Since the Command Module was dead,
except for the oxygen and power hoarded for re-entry, the guidance
platform of Aquarius, designed to land-on and take-off from the Moon
would have to be used. 
 
"The first milestone, and I consider this after the accident I guess,
more or less the survival now. The first milestone was to get the
alignment on the LM platform. Alignments are important it, you know,
because without knowing exactly which way the attitude of the
spacecraft is in space, there's no way to tell how to burn, or how to
ma., use the engines of the spacecraft to get the prop., the proper
trajectory to come home." (SIGURD A. SJOBERG, DIRECTOR OF FLIGHT
OPERATIONS) "The position we are in now, Earth-Moon plane, we have to
go around the, the ahh, the Moon to get back, if we are going to use
the descent engine. You, you would have had enough capability with the
SPS engine, but of course we can't really use that now. So we have to
go to the back side of the Moon to come back." 
 
To get into the correct orbit around the Moon the crew had burned out
of a trajectory that would automatically bring them back to Earth.
They would have to get back onto a safe course toward Earth. 
 
"You need put it through a `throttle to min' also Flight." "Throttle
to min?" "Yes, she's 29 percent now roughly." 
 
"First maneuver was very good, was ahh, completed on time and because
it was a manual burn we had a three man operation. Jack would ahh,
take care of the time, he'd tell us when to light-off the engine, when
to stop it. Fred handled ahh, pitch maneuver, I handled the roll, roll
maneuver, and I pushed the button to start and stop the engines." 
 
"Acquarius, you're go for the burn." "40 percent." "OK Aquarius,
you're looking good." "Auto shut down." 
 
The first problem was solved, they were back on the path to Earth. 
But there were many other problems to be solved. From a building at
Houston's Manned Spacecraft Center, systems experts coordinated the
coast-to-coast effort to get the crew back. One of the big problems
was consumables. There would be enough to eat and drink, but in space
there are other factors; oxygen to breath, elctrical power to keep the
spacecraft alive, water to cool the equipment and keep it operating. 
 
"What we'll be doing 'till we get them back on the water is
concentrating on everything that is de., their, their lives are
dependent upon at the moment, rather than worrying about the accident,
'cause there's nothing we can do about that now. It, it appears at the
present time that everything is under control, and that ahh, we have a
safe situation at the moment." 
 
"Hey, I wanna say you guys are doing real good work." "So are you guys Jack."
 
(GLYNN LUNNEY, FLIGHT DIRECTOR) "We are about 70 hours from home and
ahh, we think we have ahh, ahh, the situation in control. We projected
the ahh, consumables as I've described and ahh, we have a plan for
carrying out the rest of the mission, but ahh, ahh, there's going to
be no relaxation at all as far as that goes, from now until splash." 
 
There was a key decision to be made before Apollo 13 went behind the
Moon. Where to bring them down. Their present course would take them
to the Indian Ocean where recovery would be difficult. A burn to bring
them home quicker would take them to the Pacific Ocean near the
recovery forces. Bringing them home even faster would place them in
the South Atlantic, again away from recovery forces. It was decided to
take them to the Pacific. 
 
"Over in ahh, the simulators, both here and at the cape, and at the
contractors that err, continuously, ever since err, last night."
(GERALD GRIFFIN, FLIGHT DIRECTOR) "We've tried to simulate virtually
everything that we've had the crew do that ahh, that is non-normal,
that they've done, and ahh, we've proven most everything that we ahh,
been able ahh, to run on the simulator prior to passing it up to them,
but maybe some details are not done, at least we've checked the
feasibility of everything we've done. We'll continue to do that." 
 
They passed one hundred, thirty seven miles from the Moon. For Lovell
it was the second time that he had seen the Moon so near, but there
was no time for contemplation, there was another critical burn coming.
 
"OK, let's get the, let's get the cameras put away." "Cut-off confirmed." 
"Result, you have work to ourselves."
 
And in Houston, the newsmen poured in to tell an anxious world the story.
 
"Well, that was going along with the ignition slide, then I thought that..."
 
Shortly after Apollo 13 had separated from the Saturn third stage, the
stage had been sent onto a trajectory toward the Moon. Its impact
would be recorded by the seisometer left by Apollo 12. 
 
"By the way ahh, Acquarius, we see the results now from ahh, twelve's
seisometer. Looks like your booster just hit the Moon and its err,
rockin' it a little bit. Over." "Well at least something worked on
this flight." "I'm sure glad we didn't have ahh, a LM impact, too."
"Jim, you are go for the burn, go for the burn." "Right, understand,
go for the burn." "Guidance OK?" "We're good Flight." "Control OK?"
"We're OK Flight." "Telemetry?" "We're go Flight." "INCO OK?" "We're
good Flight." "Ground confirms ignition." "Go burn, 40 percent."
"Acquarius, Houston. You're looking good." "Roger." "Shutdown."
"Roger, shut- down." "I say, that was a good burn." "Acquarius,
another one to power down as soon as possible." "Understand." 
 
To conserve the electric power and cooling water, the crew shutdown
all but the vital life sustaining systems of the LM. 
 
"I think the LM spacecraft is in excellent shape and its fully capable
of ahh, getting the crew back." (EUGENE KRANZ, FLIGHT DIRECTOR) "Ahh,
I think as we've found before, everytime we've put the LM spacecraft
through a test, its always done much more than it was guaranteed to
do, and I think this is ahh, good case in point." 
 
Conserve the consumables, cooling water, electric power.
 
"The LM water gun was leaking and ahh, we shut that off. Ahh, I guess
it leaked about a quart of water out of it, I would estimate. But it
took me about two days to get my feet dry and of course its, I think
you all were aware that the temperatures were going down in both
vehciles and that ahh, it made for for very chilly feet for a couple
of days." 
 
[Moving electronic sign on building] (...CREW AND GOTTEN INSTRUCTIONS
FROM GROUND EXPERTS T...) [Newspaper advertisement] (Evening Standard,
MOON SHOT LIFE AND DEATH DRAMA) "?" [Newspaper headline] (WE'RE NOT
CONCERNED) (FIFTH AVENUE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, PRAYER SERVICE FOR
ASTRONAUTS AT 12:10 TODAY, DR. BRYANT M. KIRKLAND) (TODAY 10 A.M.,
SPECIAL PRAYER FOR APOLLO 13) 
 
"Lord, your astronauts will come back safe." "If I may be serious for
one moment and ask the entire audience for a moment of prayer for the
crewmen of the Apollo 13. We'll hold silence for a moment please." 
 
"RCS-A stands at six two percent and B at six two percent." "I say,
we've gone a hell of a long time without any sleep." "We ought to
start thinking about getting us back to sleep again because ahh, I
ahh, I didn't get any sleep last night at all." 
 
"...Command Module just slowly kept going down in temperature until I
think err, just prior to re-entry ahh, it was down to about 38
degrees. And along with that there was a, a sort of chilling ahh,
coldness. The walls were perspiring, the windows were completely wet,
and it err, it wasn't too healthy. I recall that we went to get some
hot dogs one day and it was like reaching into the freezer for them,
for the food." 
 
"If you want my opinion how they handled the situation when it
happened, they handled it exactly liked we expected them too. They,
everybody's well on top of it as anybody could be, with knowing what
we know, do, which is not very much, I'll have to admit." (DONALD K.
SLAYTON, DIRECTOR OF FLIGHT CREW OPERATIONS) "But I think they did
everything right within the knowledge that was available to us and
ahh, in a timely fashion which is what err, all we expect of them.
They did a beautiful job of it." 
 
"We actually had a third little sleep restraint which Fred goes in,
put on, and buttoned up, and kept a little bit warm." 
 
The astronauts faced another problem, their own exhaled breath. The
Lithium Hydroxide chemical to take Carbon Dioxide out of the air was
not sufficient in the Lunar Module. They would have to adapt the
canisters from the Command Module to fit the hoses in the LM. On the
ground, an adapter was fashioned from materials the crew had available
in the LM. Cardboard from a checklist, plastic bags, and tape. After
checkout in an enviromental chamber, the directions for construction
were sent up to Aquarius. 
 
"At this point in time, I think the partial pressure of Carbon Dioxide
was err, reading about fifteen millimetres, and we constructed two of
these things and put them on line and I think within an hour the err,
partial pressure of CO2 was down to two tenths." 
 
"Well you see that err, survival err, err, now became one of ahh,
initiative and ingenuity and, and it was one which the ground
continually helped us err, go on. We had all kinds of people on the
ground trying to think up ways of, of extending our lifetime." 
 
There would still be another burn. A mid-course correction to get
Apollo 13 into the narrow corridoor through the atmosphere for a safe
return to Earth. 
 
"We're at burn attitude Flight." "Acknowledge." "Ignition. Thrust
looks good. Good shutdown." "Hang in there. Won't be long." 
 
"There were moments when I didn't know how much consumables we had.
Whether we could make it back or not, but ahh, ahh, in a situation
like that, there is only one thing you can do. You just keep going and
ahh, you just keep thinking that way and working some more and ahh, so
that's exactly what we did." 
 
On April 17th, they prepared for re-entry. After a small course
correction burn, they jettisoned the damaged Service Module. 
 
"And that's sep." "Copy that." "And there's one whole side of that
spacecraft missin'." "Is that right?" "A whole panel has blown out.
Almost from the ahh, base to the ahh, engine." "Its really a mess."
"Man, that's unbelievable." 
 
Next, they got back into Odyssey, to jettison Acquarius prior to entry
into the atmosphere. 
 
"LM sep." "OK, copy that.  Farewell, Aquarius, and we thank you." "OK,
LOS in a minute and a half. Ahh, entry attitude we'd like omni charlie
and welcome home." "Thankyou." 
 
(Evening Standard. APOLLO 13: ON TARGET, APOLLO 13: THE EDGY HOURS)
 
"Odyssey, Houston. Standing by, over." "OK Joe, we're..." [applause]
"Odyssey, Houston. We show you on the mains. It really looks great."
[greatly distorted "We show you on zero. Looking great."] "Apollo 13,
Apollo 13. This is recovery, over." "Recovery, we're going through
5000." "Ahh, wonderful 13. This is recovery and your chutes look
good." "Apollo 13. This is recovery. We observed your RCS burn, over."
"Recovery, Apollo 13 is descending." "Houston. Roger that." "Apollo
13. This is recovery, over." "Over one splashdown at this time. The
parachutes are [static] the astronauts are in the water [static]." "R
zero can read magnetic freedom one half miles. You won't give up
[static]." "You are zero, roger [static]." (...THEY'VE MADE IT!
Gallant astronauts make perfect splashdown+++) "This is 401. The
Command Module is stable one at this time. Riding comfortably
[static]." "The vertical axis' are approximately 15 degrees [static]."
"401, you are cleared to position for training in the ellocution."
"White water. Roger [static]." "OK, capacity 19270 [static]." 
 
[whistling and applause] "I recall, Captain, when I spoke to you on
the phone, you said that you regretted that you were unable to
complete your mission. I hereby declare that this was a successfull
mission. From the start, the exploration of space has been hazardous
adventure." (HONOLULU, APRIL 18, 1970) "The voyage of Apollo 13
dramatised its risks. The men of Apollo 13, by their poise and skill,
under the most intense kind of pressure, epitomise the character that
accepts danger and surmounts it. Their's is the spirit that built
America. Your mission served your country. It serves to remind us all
our proud heritage of a nation. To remind us that in this age of
technicians and scientific marvels, that the individual still counts.
That in a crisis, the character of a man or men, will make the
difference." 
 
(FIFTH AVENUE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, PRAYER SERVICE FOR ASTRONAUTS AT 12:10
TO-DAY, DR. BRYANT M. KIRKLAND)
 
"GNC?" "Go." "Circuits?" "Go." "Procedures?" "Go." AFD?" "Go."
"Network?" "Go." "Computer suite?" "Go." "Rog. Network, give me an
ever. RTC, you on AFD conference?" "RTC's on AFD conference." "OK all
flight controllers, let's play it cool." 
 
(Writer/Producer, Don Wiseman. Editor, Richard L. Atwell. Production
Manager, William W. Robbins. Production Coordinator, NASA, John D.
Williams, Jr. Produced by A-V Corporation, Houston, Texas for NASA) 
 
(special thanks to: ABC, CBS, NBC, WGN-TV Chicago, WTTG Washington, D.C., U.S.
Army Photo Teams, U.S. Air Force Photo Teams, Charles E. Gallagher, New York)
 
(NASA seal, H.Q. 200)

Article: 83106
From: croth@freenet.uwm.edu (Chris Roth)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Jim Lovell, Apollo 13, New Book
Date: 16 Feb 1994 17:17:18 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
Sender: daemon@cs.utexas.edu
 
Astronaut Jim Lovell has a new hardcover coming out very soon. If
anyone has read it, let us know if there is any new information in it
that is interesting. 
 
I have always suspected there were a few things going on during the
stressful Apollo 13 mission that were not widely reported, nor
reported at all. Somewhere I read that a psychiatrist was consulted.
And that one of the astronauts (not Lovell) felt guilty about
something...I guess during a burn he did not know where to sit and was
worried his body mass may have thrown off the trajectory...my memory
is unclear on all of this. 
 
I know they took uppers to stay awake. 
 
I think Lovell wants to be remembered for his other flights. Perhaps
he is sick of being asked about the 1970 mission. Understandable.
 
Anyone know what happened to the PLAYBOY centerfold taped to Pete
Conrad's arm-booklet? This prank unfolded on the lunar surface in
1969. Wonder if he left it there or brought it back. Help me! 
 
All responses to:  croth@freenet.uwm.edu
 
  Mr. Chris Roth
  PO Box 71065
  Shorewood WI 53211-1065
  (414) 332-4373

From:	US1RMC::"yoffa@ecs.umass.edu" "MAIL-11 Daemon" 19-FEB-1994 03:42:07.31
To:	sci-space-news@ames.arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	Apollo 11 25th Anniv & STS Mission Profiles Magazine Discount Rate

[A bit commercial, but the magazine does seem to be a reasonable
information source, and this way you won't have to go to KSC to get a
copy (unless you just happen to be there watching a flight ;-). -PEY] 

Well, I'm just about done playing journalist and reporting on the
STS-60 mission, but for a break, I read through the "STS Mission
Profiles" magazine which I bought in the KSC NASA Exchange sundry
store.  On page 26 is a notice about the Apollo 11 25th Anniversary
Special Issue and a special break on subscriptions.  This magazine 
is GREAT but it *is* a little expensive.  If you're a real Shuttle
fanatic--I mean, fan--you'll want it anyway and you may want to
subscribe.  This discount is just the ticket.

For those of you not familiar with the magazine, it is a dedicated
collection of information, summaries, data, trivia, NASA photos
(both B/W and *FULL COLOR*), previews, reviews, and explanations.
You get crew biographies and flight plans.  It's all well worth it.
The current issue ($4.95 at the sundry store) covers STS-60 (and was
on sale *during* the mission) and STS-61 in review (there's discussion
about the scrub due to weather).  Other issues I've seen (alas, only
one or two others made it my way) also covered the "current" mission
and reviewed/summarized the one just landed.  There's also a flight
manifest which is updated monthly.

Here's the subscription form/advertisement from page 26 (pretty 
much verbatim):

<begin advertisement>

<picture of Apollo 11 25th Anniversary logo...same as on cloth patch>

Relive the excitement of man's first landing on the Moon brought to
you by the award winning staff at STS Mission Profiles.  Presented in
the same style & depth that we provide for each shuttle flight, each
_60 PAGE_ issue (8 color pages) will be packed with *RARE* color & B/W
photos, timeslines, graphics, charts & little known details of the 
first lunar landing mission.  (Developed from crew de-briefing
transcripts, misison reports & NASA photos & Apollo program documents)

   *  From liftoff to splashdown, the epic eight-day flight of 
      Apollo 11 is recreated as you have never seen before & 
      reviews every major event of the entire mission.  Extensive
      background information is provided on the crew, the 
      Saturn V launch vehicle & Apollo spacecraft.  Crew
      comments will provide valuable insight into the very
      first lunar operations and procedures.

   *  Published in time for the 25th anniversary of the first
      Moon landing (July 20, 1994), this special edition dedicated
      to Apollo 11 can serve as the perfect souvenir & collectors
      item of this once-in-a-lifetime event for you & your family.

                 *** Only $9.75 + shipping & handling ***

CONTENTS INCLUDE Apollo 11 Prime & Back-Up Crew Biographies, Apollo
Program Overview, Apollo 11 Mission Overview, Lunar Surface
Exploration Plan, Apollo Spacecraft & Saturn V Booster, Crew
Selection & Training, Countdown and Pre-Launch Preparations,
Launch, Parking Orbit Operations and Spacecraft Checkout,
Trans-Lunar Injection & Coast, Lunar Orbit Insertion, Lunar
Module Operations and Preparations, Undocking and Descent Orbit
Initiate, Moon Landing, Moonwalk, Return to Lunar Module, Ascent
and Lunar Orbit Rendezvous, Trans-Earth Injection, Re-Entry and
Splashdown, Post Flight and 20th Anniversary Press Conference
Highlights.

TABLES AND CHARTS:  Command and Service Module Statistics, Lunar
Module Basics and Portable Life Support System, Saturn V Booster
Statistics, Apollo 11 Flight Records, Spacecraft and Launch 
Vehicle Checkout History, Apollo 11 Chronologies, Pre-Launch Prep,
Countdown and Launch Timeline, Lunar Surface Activities, Command
Module Orbital Timeline and Mission Anomaly Summary Chart.

+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

When you order your Apollo 11 Special Issue, take advantage of our 
early renewal/extension and new subscriber discount offer.  Any
8 issue early renewal to extend your current subscription--or if
you order a new subscription to STS Mission Profiles--entitles you
to a discount off the regular subscription price.

Subscription Discount When Order Apollo 11 Special Issue:
---------------------------------------------------------
8 issues (approximately one (1) year):

    (reg)      (w/discount)
$32.50          $29 US 
$50.00          $44 Canada
$70.00          $50 Overseas Airmail

Order Today!  Available in early 1994 * Limited edition press run.

-----------------------------cut here-------------------------------

NOTE:  A **ONE-TIME** shipping & handling charge of $1.75 for US and
Canada orders and $3.75 for Overseas Airmail orders is applied only
to the Apollo 11 Special Issue.  Multiple orders do not incur multiple
shipping charges.

[ ] Apollo 11 Special Issue - $9.75 each
        US & Canada        _____copie(s) x $9.75 + $1.75 = ________
        Overseas Airmail   _____copie(s) x $9.75 + $3.75 = ________

[ ] Discounted 8-issue subscription to STS Mission Profiles
      $29 US     $44 Canada     $50 Overseas Airmail     + ________

                         Total enclosed (in US Funds) is = ________

Name_______________________________________________________________

Street Address_____________________________________________________

City_______________________  State______ Zip Code___________- _____

Country____________________________________________________________


-------------------------------cut here------------------------------
send form and money to  STS/Apollo 11
                        P.O. Box 751387
                        Memphis, TN  38175-1387
                        USA

--
Sarah R. Yoffa
BSME, 2/94 :)
Internet: yoffa@ecs.umass.edu
(I'm not quoting anyone on anything 'til I get my facts straight.)

Article: 83322
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: tfrielin@catfish.BBC.PeachNet.EDU (Tom Frieling)
Subject: A Moment of Rememberance for Robert Sherrod
Sender: news+@cs.cmu.edu
Organization: [via International Space University]
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 18:49:09 GMT
 
Let us have a moment of rememberance for Robert Sherrod who died last
week in Washington at the age of 85. 
 
For you younger Space Digesters, Mr. Sherrod was a crack war
correspondent during World War II and later covered the space program
in the 1960s.  He conducted a great deal of research on the Apollo
Program in preparation for a book that, sadly, was never finished. 
 
But that research material is now kept in the NASA History Office for
future researchers so his work was not in vain. 
 
Get a copy of Apollo Expeditions to the Moon and read his chapter "Men
for the Moon." 
 
RIP Robert, and thanks.
 
Thomas J. Frieling
Bainbridge College
tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu
Fax:  912-248-2589

Article: 83470
Newsgroups: sci.space
From: tfrielin@catfish.BBC.PeachNet.EDU (Tom Frieling)
Subject: Message from Space Digest
Sender: news+@cs.cmu.edu
Organization: [via International Space University]
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 1994 18:13:56 GMT
 
>Subject: Re: DISCUSSION:Cheap Manned Moon Missions?
>Date: 24 Feb 1994 04:45:10 GMT
 
>Nick Janow, in response to Marcus Lindroos INF, writes:
>
> Why men on the moon now?  Remote sensing and automated rovers and processors
> (producing oxygen) could "pave the way" for future manned missions, someday.
> Why spend the extra money for manned missions now?
>
>>Because manned missions are far more newsworthy.  I've met many
>>people over the years who watched (with admiration, I might add)
>>the Apollo Moon-landings, and the 1st shuttle launch. High-level,
>>non-negative exposure translates into greater political support 
>>for the whole business (and pleasure) of space.
>
>>Seen any interviews with Clementine?
>
>>Followups to sci.space.policy, please.
>
>>-- 
>>Philip R. Young                         young@bunyip.oz.dg.com
>
>>It won't happen overnight, but it will happen. - Rachel Hunter
 
Yes, but public interest is a two-edged sword. Let's not forget how
fickle the American Public is. It's no coincidence that there is a
program on the Comedy Central network called "Short Attention Span
Theatre." 
 
Why, by the time TV coverage finally got good on Apollos 15, 16, and
17 thanks to the remotely controlled TV on the Lunar Rover, the
American Public was bored and network coverage was slim. 
 
For you younger readers, this was in the early 1970s when there was no
cable TV to speak of, no NASA Select on backyard satellite dishes--only 
NBC, CBS, and ABC (plus PBS, which despite being government sudsidised 
did no coverage). 
 
One moonwalk (on Apollo 16, I think) was covered by NBC on a Saturday
afternoon because *both* the prime and backup baseball Games of the
Week were rained out. If I'm remembering correctly (and I think I am)
the other two networks did not cover Young and Duke walking on the
Moon. What does that say about the value of public support? 

Tom Frieling

Article: 17911
From: powell@seas.ucla.edu (Tom Powell)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Gene Kranz' Retirement Party
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 1994 11:01:59 -0800
Organization: UCLA
 
I had the good fortune to attend Gene Kranz' retirement party. The
following is a paraphrase of part of the presentation. 
 
To set the story, there was a set of overflow conditions with the
Apollo 11 lunar lander's computer, caused by running the landing radar
and (inadvertaintly) the rendezvous radar simultaneously. This caused
an alarm condition that was part of a test configuration, but not
supposed to ever occur during flight. (My apologies if the facts are a
little off.) The flight controller handling this is known as EECOM and
on the Apollo 11 lunar landing was Steve Bales (part of Flight
Director Kranz' "White Flight"). Dr. Kraft was sitting behind Kranz at
the MOD console. 
 
Dr. Chris Kraft, telling about showing some senator around Mission
Control shortly after Apollo 11: 
 
"They watched the tape of Kranz calling for the GO/NOGO for powered
descent to the Moon." I'm sure we have all heard it ticked-off many
times." Kraft noted that that set of communications demonstrated the
highest form of professionalism and preparation. Kraft then stated
that for the rest of his life he will be able to hear EECOM stating
'GO' followed by the Flight Director saying 'GO for landing', over and
over throughout the last few minutes of the Apollo 11 landing." 
 
Another speaker was Steve Bales. 
 
At about the age of 20, with low fuel and the first lunar landing on
the line, Steve Bales was the man who made the 'GO' call. The one that
Christopher Columbus Kraft could not forget. I'm not certain that many
other EECOMs would/could have made that same call. 
 
Steve's story:
 
"During a lull, shortly before powered descent to the Moon, Kranz got
on the loop (intercom) for one last pep talk. He said (paraphrasing as
best I can) 'that no matter what happened, he was behind his troops and 
their decisions.'"  The GO/NOGO call then came, followed by the alarm. 
 
Bales didn't really say much more. Kranz wiped a tear or two from his
eye and turned from the audience. 
 
NASA will not be the same.
 
John Bain
UCLA

Article: 17932
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: Mike Chan <chan_michael@tandem.com>
Subject: Re: Gene Kranz' Retirement Party
Sender: michaelc@Everest.Tandem.COM (Michael Chan)
Organization: Tandem Computers Inc.
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 06:02:30 GMT
 
I don't know Gene Kranz, but his name stood out in telling of the
mission controllers' story in _Apollo, Race for the Moon_. Sure got
the feeling those were the glory days in Mission Control, and Kranz
was at the top of the cast of characters. 
_________ 
Mike Chan
My opinions are my own, not my employer's.

Article: 18017
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: bain@seas.ucla.edu (John Bain)
Subject: Re: Gene Kranz' Retirement Party
Sender: news@seas.ucla.edu (News Daemon)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 18:29:04 GMT
Organization: UCLA
 
In article <2l3ihc$sr@nml1sun.hsc.usc.edu>, khayash@nml1sun.hsc.usc.edu
(Ken Hayashida) wrote:
 
> powell@seas.ucla.edu (Tom Powell) writes:
> >I had the good fortune to attend Gene Kranz' retirement party. The
> >following is a paraphrase of part of the presentation.
> 
> Where was the party?  Who else was there?
 
The party was at the Gilruth Center at JSC. In attendance were
500-1000 of his closest friends, including quite a mix of colleagues
and friends from all phases of manned space flight. 

> What is Gene Kranz going to do, now that he's retired from the 
> space race?
 
In the words of his daughter Joan, "Dad has turned the garage into an
operating room."  He is building a Murphy Renagade Spirit sport biplane
kit.  He has started flying again (flew in the Air Force) and has
attacked his new hobby with the same vengence and energy as his
previous work.  Look for him at Oshkosh this summer (along with the
25th annivesary of Apollo celebration). 

> thanks for the interesting post.
> khayash
 
Small trouble with our news server, this was all posted by John Bain.
 
John
UCLA

Article: 18109
From: dumoulin@titan.ksc.nasa.gov (Jim Dumoulin)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Extremely Trivial Apollo Question
Date: 10 Mar 94 16:55:40 EST
Organization: NASA, Kennedy Space Center
 
In article <2lldmu$6lb@search01.news.aol.com>, bluespook@aol.com
(BlueSpook) writes: 

> Don't know if you got a response to this or not, but here it is anyway:
> 
> Apollo 10 landed on 5/26/69 at 12:52:23. Not sure what time zone that refers
> 
> Katie Berryhill
 
  The information below was extracted from KSC's World Wide Web server
 in the historical section on Apollo 10.  The information actually
 came from the NASA publication Chariots for Apollo.  The landing time
 quoted was Eastern Daylight Time.
                                        Jim Dumoulin
 
-------------------------------------------------------
Mission Name: Apollo-10 (26)
  Pad 39-B (1)
  Saturn-V AS-505 (5)
  1st Launch LC-39B
 
Crew:
  Eugene A. Cernan
  John W. Young
  Thomas P. Stafford
 
Backup Crew:
 
Milestones:
  05/18/69 - Launch
 
Payload:
 CSM-106 (Charlie Brown) and LM-4 (Snoopy)
 
Mission Objectives:
 Demonstrate performance of LM and CSM in lunar gravitation field.  Evaluate 
CSM and LM docked and undocked lunar navigation.  All mission objectives
were achieved.
 
Launch:
 May 18, 1969; 12:49:00 a.m. EDT Kennedy Space Center, FL.  No Delays.
 
Orbit:
  Altitude: 190km x 184km
  Inclination: xxx degrees
  Orbits: 
  Duration:  08 Days,  0 hours,  03 min,  23 seconds
  Distance:  miles
 
Landing:
  May 26, 1969; 12:52am EDT. Landing point 15deg 2min South by 
164deg 39min West; Miss distance not available.  Crew on board 
U.S.S. Princeton at 01:31 p.m. EDT; spacecraft aboard ship at 02:28 p.m.
 
Mission Highlights:
  Apogee, 190 kilometers; perigee, 184km; translunar injection, 
02:39:21 MET; maximum distance from Earth, 399,194km; first CSM-LM
docking in translunar trajectory, 03:17:37 MET; lunar orbit insertion, 
75:55:54 MET; first LM undocking in lunar orbit, 98:11:57 MET; first
LM staging in lunar orbit, 102:45:17 MET; first manned LM-CSM docking 
in lunar orbit, 106:22:02 MET; transearth injection 137:36:29 MET.
 
  Dress rehearsal for Moon landing. First manned CSM/LM operations in
cislunar and lunar environ- ment; simulation of first lunar landing
profile. In lunar orbit 61.6 hours, with 31 orbits. LM taken to within
15,243 m (50,000 ft) of lunar surface. First live color TV from space.
LM ascent stage jettisoned in orbit. 
 
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Jim Dumoulin                      INTERNET: DUMOULIN@TITAN.KSC.NASA.GOV
   NASA / Payload Operations      SPAN/HEPnet: KSCP00::DUMOULIN
   Kennedy Space Center
   Florida, USA  32899               "America needs SPACE to grow"
  

From:	VERGA::US1RMC::"davida5625@aol.com" "MAIL-11 Daemon  13-Mar-1994 1624" 
        13-MAR-1994 16:19:12.37
To:	nss-chapters@hela.iti.org
CC:	
Subj:	A Modest Proposal

   Yet Another Modest Proposal from David Anderman

Celebrating the Apollo 11 25th Anniversary on a nationwide basis is
proving to be somewhat difficult. Not only is it a lot of work, but
several other organizations besides NSS and its chapters are involved,
creating both conflicting agendas and a sense that even if the NSS
chapters don't participate, someone else will. Even worse, there is no
clear goal. One could argue that if a chapter simply held a lecture
about Apollo 11, then that would be a major contribution to the
celebration. Given the expectations are so low, the results will
likely be even lower. 

It is a real shame that the Moon landing anniversary will likely
result in a small and ultimately forgotten celebration, with no
tangible results. As we draw farther away in time from the Moon
landings, I suspect that each succeeding celebration will be smaller. 

I would like to change this, and I believe that NSS and its chapters
can work together to celebrate an Apollo anniversary in such a manner
that clear goals can be established, and concrete results attained.
Paradoxically, the NSS chapters will be asked to commit to less work
than the typical SpaceWeek celebration, and yet receive greater
benefits than virtually any other endeavor. 

Even more paradoxically, the anniversary to be celebrated is one that
one would imagine would be ignored: Apollo 13, the mission that failed. 

A major film studio recently announced the start of filming of Jim
Lovell's story of the Apollo 13 mission, starring Tom Hanks and
directed by Ron Howard. This will be a major movie, to be released on
or near the April 13, 1995 25th anniversary of the flight. 

My proposal is that NSS and its chapters get themselves tied in with
the studio to maximize the benefits from this enormous exposure. 

Here are the roles that NSS and the chapters should play. Please note
that NSS headquarters alone cannot pull this off, and neither can the
chapters. 

NSS headquarters should contact the studio, and inform them of their
interest in promoting the movie. The idea here is that the 100 NSS
chapters, encompassing most major media markets will work with NSS and
the movie studio to promote the Apollo 13 film. 

What can NSS and its chapters do?

First off, Ad Astra can publish interviews, before the premiere, with
Tom Hanks and Jim Lovell. Having Tom Hanks on the cover of Ad Astra
dressed in a Moon Suit would be a major bonus that the film studio
would be eager to supply. 

Secondly, the NSS chapters would participate on a nationwide basis
with the studio to promote the film. Specifically, the chapters would
promote the film by: 

* Generating press releases locally about Apollo 13 (the releases would
be supplied by NSS headquarters);

* Appearing on radio talk shows during the days leading up to the
premiere, with the topic being Apollo 13, and how lessons learned from
the mission will help open the space frontier. The speakers should -not- 
talk about the details of the mission. This is known as a *spoiler*. 

* Appear at the Thursday night 'sneak' premiere, with an astronaut in
tow, if this can be worked out with NSS. 

* Work the crowds (and there will be lines of people waiting for a Tom
Hanks space movie) at the Thursday premiere and the first weekend of
showing with a special handout (more on this in a moment). 

The role of NSS:

* Get in touch with the studio to present the idea.

* Coordinate any astronaut appearances at local events (this is a bonus)

* Publish the Ad Astra articles

* Work with the film studio and a major aerospace firm to produce a
special packet of information to be distributed during the first
weekend of the film's showing. The aerospace firm is likely to be the
company that buys Grumman this year, and the packet cover will likely
feature Tom Hanks and a LM. 

The benefits to the film studio:

* Publicity on a local level throughout the United States (and beyond).
This type of media coverage is rarely attained by any film, and could be
worth millions.

The special handout will contain:

*Information about Apollo 13 (that doesn't spoil the movie, but rather
gives the reader a little technical knowledge that enhances the movie,
such as what all those NASA acronyms mean); 

*A professionally designed cover (done by the movie studio based on the
film's publicity material);

*Information about the major aerospace company;

*Information about NSS;

*Membership info, and a postage paid envelope addressed to NSS;

More packet details:

*The packet should be printed for free by the aerospace company, and
distributed in bulk to participating NSS chapters. Cost to NSS for the
packet should be close to zero. 

*The chapters can put their insignia on the packet membership form;
anyone returning the form to join NSS will generate a membership
rebate to the local chapter. Since the cost to NSS of all this will be
close to zero, the normal rebate should apply. 

*Chapters will participate prospectively to allow NSS to estimate the
number of packets to be printed and mailed. 

                  Frequently Asked Questions:

*What if the movie is a bomb?

This proposal concerns the first weekend of the film's showing, when
large crowds are on hand, regardless of the quality of the movie.  If
the movie is bad, the crowds will thin out the next weekend.  Even the
world's biggest box office dud had big crowds the first weekend. 

*What if chapters don't want to, or can't, participate?

Since chapters should indicate in advance if they wish to participate,
NSS can still move forward without some chapters. However, an early
indication of lack of interest by a majority of the chapters, such as
not responding to this proposal, would be significant in making a
go/no go decision. 

*What if the movie theaters don't want the chapters to give out the
special packet?

If a movie theater manager were reluctant to allow the chapter to
distribute a packet designed by a major movie studio, distributed by
an organization that is promoting the film locally, and that contains
a direct tie-in to the movie, I would be surprised. Keep in mind that
every time that an attendee takes a packet home, that's portable
publicity for the movie and the theater. However, I would expect that
some theaters will want to distribute the packet themselves, and would
hope that the chapters would discuss this with the theaters in advance. 

*Why should anyone at the theaters read the packet?

Waiting in line for a movie seems like an eternity, even if the wait
is only five or ten minutes; the wait inside the theater is also
seemingly interminable. To give away attractive packets tied in to the
movie would be shooting the proverbial fish in the proverbial barrel.
The likelihood that people would actually look at the packets would be
extremely high. 

*Why should the studio want to work with NSS?

Publicity is everything for a movie, even a potential blockbuster like
the Apollo 13 story. Having hundreds of people working for free to
publicize the movie in virtually every media market in the country is
an unprecendented bonanza for the studio. Not even NASA can give them
that kind of coverage. 

*What's in it for the chapters?

Unlike SpaceWeek, which is a low intensity event, this will allow the
chapters access to large numbers of pro-space people in one place. NSS
usually spends big $ to reach out to these people; this movie will
bring them to us. I would presume that every time a chapter receives a
rebate from NSS for a new member, they would enroll that person in the
chapter, thereby swelling the chapter ranks dramatically. 

Also, chapters working the media will raise their profile in the local
community considerably. 

*What's in it for NSS?

Apart from the publicity for NSS in the media markets, I suspect that
NSS would be quite happy with the additional members gained at little
or no cost.

*OK, how many new members are we talking about?

I would estimate about 100,000 packets could be distributed nationally
by the chapters, NSS headquarters, perhaps allied organizations, and
some movie theaters themselves. If one can assume that the usual 1%
for direct mail will carry over to this new  self-selected market, the 
result would be a very respectable free membership drive.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to add your questions to the FAQ, either by
email or by phone.

David Anderman
Chair, NSS Chapters Assembly
916/421-2621
DavidA5625@aol.com

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% From: davida5625@aol.com
% X-Mailer: America Online Mailer
% Sender: "davida5625" <davida5625@aol.com>
% To: nss-chapters@hela.iti.org
% Date: Sun, 13 Mar 94 16:13:48 EST
% Subject: A Modest Proposal

Date: Sat, 30 Apr 94 3:16:41 EDT
From: LEMAY JEAN <e202404@er.uqam.ca>
Subject: Absence of Apollo in Nixon retrospectives

Michael Flora at the NASA MSFC was surprised that media retrospectives
on Nixon made no mention of the culmination of the Apollo program
under his administration or of things like his long distance phone
call to the first moonwalkers. 

I found this absence fitting because media-connected types who
authored biographies of Nixon, or NASA under him, stressed the fact
that his absolute personal hatred of anything started under Kennedy
(from the Peace Corps to the Moon program) prompted him to
bureaucratically strangle NASA in general and the rest of the Apollo
program in particular. 

The original Apollo program called for continuing flights to the Moon
and the eventual establishment of bases in a separate program. 

Under Nixon NASA administrators who were rocket jocks or rocket
jock/space cadet sympathyzers were gradually rplaced with bland
lawyers and bureaucrats whose only interests were in saying yes to the
Nixon administration. 

The transition was gradual in that Nixon was careful to avoid
attacking NASA openly, but it was sharp when one considers the total
lack of support for the agency that the Nixon administration showed in
the WHite House or through indirect efforts on Congress.  Contrast
this with the continuous congressional support for NASA that LBJ did
his very best to raise in both houses, first as a Democratic party
wheeler-dealer from Texas in the fifties, then as a vice president and
later as a president. 

Keeping the whole sordid business of the gutting of the Apollo program
and of NASA out of the media retrospectives on Nixon was a simple
question of diplomacy, and a wish to remember tricky Dicky for his
more positive contributions, such as getting the US out of Vietnam,
getting China back in the "concert of nations" and giving Americans
the illusion that their democracy really works, by getting caught with
his pants down at Watergate, and having to resign. 

Jean LeMay

Spaceweek '94 - Boston

Celebrate the 25th Anniversary of the Apollo X Mission.

When: Friday, May 20, 1994, 6:00 - 9:00 PM

Where: JFK Library, Columbia Point, Boston, MA

Program: Apollo X Crew, Thomas Stafford, Eugene Cernan, John Young
           Mrs. Grace Corrigan, Mother of Christa Corrigan McAuliffe
              and Author of "A Man on the Moon," Andy Chaikin

Cost: $25.00 at the door, Bring a copy of this posting and
      receive a $5.00 National Space Society Boston Chapter discount

Contact info: Bruce Mackenzie 617-944-7027 (before 12 noon Friday)
E-mail: dou@anuxv.att.com  (Don Doughty)

From:	US4RMC::"baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov" "Ron Baalke" 13-JUN-1994 
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	Moon Rock For Sale

                            MOON ROCK FOR SALE

     A Moon rock will be auctioned off by Superior Galleries in
Beverly Hills, California on June 25, 1994.  The Moon rock was returned
to Earth from an unspecified Apollo mission.  The following is the
exact text from Superior Galleries' catalog on the space auction:

        "Lot 318. Moon Rock.  An actual black basaltic moon rock
         (.65 carat) mounted on a moonstone pendant surrounded by
         diamonds.  The moon rock comes with a provenance provided
         by the consignor tracing it back to a motel owner in the
         Cape who received the moonstone as a friendship gift from
         an astronaut.  The consignor has offered this rock to NASA
         with the proviso that they pay him for it if it proved to
         be genuine and/or if it was destroyed in testing.  They
         refused, but didn't confiscate the stone.  We are selling
         the rock moon (pendant) as is, based on the owner's
         certificate of authenticity."

     The estimated value of the Moon rock ranges from $25,000 to $35,000.
For more information on the Moon rock or the auction, you can contact
Superior Galleries at (800) 421-0754 or (310) 203-9855.

     This will be the third time that lunar material has been available
at an auction.  The first time was in January 1993 when Moon dust was
auctioned by Superior Galleries.  The Moon dust was collected by a NASA
technician onto a 2 inch piece of transparent tape from the spacesuit of
astronaut Dave Scott after his Apollo 15 trip to the Moon in July, 1971.
This Moon dust sold for $46,750.  The second time occurred at the Sotheby's
auction house in New York in December 1993.  Three small fragments scooped
up by the Soviet's Luna 16 spacecraft in 1970 sold for a whopping $442,500.

      ___    _____     ___
     /_ /|  /____/ \  /_ /|     Ron Baalke     | baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov
     | | | |  __ \ /| | | |     JPL/Telos      | 
  ___| | | | |__) |/  | | |__   Galileo S-Band | If you follow the herd, you
 /___| | | |  ___/    | |/__ /| Pasadena, CA   | will eventually end up in the
 |_____|/  |_|/       |_____|/                 | slaughter house.

Article: 3683
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.astro,alt.sci.planetary
From: joe@montebello.soest.hawaii.edu (Joe Dellinger)
Subject: Re: Moon Rock For Sale
Sender: news@news.Hawaii.Edu
Organization: School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 1994 10:42:34 GMT
 
In article <13JUN199405463575@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov>
baalke@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Ron Baalke) writes: 

>     This will be the third time that lunar material has been available
>at an auction.  ... Three small fragments scooped up by the Soviet's
>Luna 16 spacecraft in 1970 sold for a whopping $442,500.
 
	And don't forget we've already established that there's at
least one more moonrock up for grabs in a landfill somewhere in
Ireland! (Lost among the rubble of a burnt building!) 

-- 
     /\    /\    /\/\/\/\/\/\/\.-.-.-.-.......___________
    /  \  /  \  /Hawaii Institute of Geophysics, Honolulu\/\/\.-.-....__
___/    \/    \/Joe Dellinger, Internet: joe@montebello.soest.hawaii.edu\/\.-.__
Soon to be relocating to the mid-continental tourist paradise of Tulsa, Oklahoma

    	Thursday, June 16 - "The Apollo Astronaut Experience."  Talk by
    Andrew Chaikin, Apollo program science historian and author of the
    new book, A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts,
    655 pages, by Viking Penguin.  6 p.m., Boston University, Stone
    Science Building, Room B-50, 675 Commonwealth Avenue.  Free to the
    public.  For questions call 617-353-9709.
    

Article: 2694
From: adastra@access.digex.net (R Wagner/Ad Astra)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: Help on Apollo Commemorative Bill
Date: 15 Jun 1994 10:38:35 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
 
We need help getting congressional co-sponsors for the 1994 25th
anniversary of Apollo commemorative bill, House Joint Resesolution
353.  This bill designates the time period July 16-24 as "National
Apollo Anniversary Observance" 
 
In the House, HJ Res. 353 needs almost 100 more co-sponsors before
it will be considered.  The deadline is June 24.  The cost of this
legislation to the nation is minimal. Most members of congress
would sign on to this bill, but many representatives have a
standing rule that they will not co-sponsor a bill unless they
receive constituent requests.  This means us!
 
Attached is a list of members we know to be interested but requiring
constituent calls.  This list is not extensive. In fact, these
are only a few of the members who would sign on if they received
even a few calls or letters.
 
This is an easy thing for us to do and it stands a good chance of
succeeding.  Plus, we can get congressional staff and members to
focus on space, even if only for a moment.  We need an easy victory
now and then, so please help H.J. Res. 353 to its goal of 215 co-sponsors! 
 
Following is a list of identified Members of Congress who would sign 
H.J. Res. 353 if they heard from a minimum of 10-12 constituents. If you 
live in the district of any one of these members, please give their DC 
office a call, today! 
 
Nita Lowrey, NY -- (202)225-6506
Blanche Lambert, AR -- (202)225-4076
Julian Dixon, CA -- (202)225-7084
Pat Williams, MT -- (202)225-3211
Joseph Knollenberg, MI -- (202)225-5802
James Hayes, LA -- (202)225-2031
Ron Machtley, RI -- (202)225-4911
Gene Taylor, MS -- (202)225-6401
John Olver, MA -- (202)225-5335
Ben Cardin, MD -- (202)225-4016
James Oberstar, MN -- (202)225-6211
Bernard Sanders, VT -- (202)225-4115
Lynn Woolsey, CA -- (202)225-5161
Tim Johnson, SD -- (202)225-2801
Maria Cantwell, WA -- (202)225-6311
Glen Browder, AL -- (202)225-3261
Bill Barrett, NE -- (202)225-6435
Randy Cunningham, CA -- (202)225-5452
Bart Stupak, MI -- (202)225-4735
Peter Hoekstra, MI -- (202)225-4401
Maurice Hinchey, NY -- (202)225-6335
Paul Henry, MI -- (202)225-3831
Dave Camp, MI -- (202)225-3561
Larry Combest, TX -- (202)225-4005
Mel Hancock, MO -- (202)225-6536
Christopher Shays, CT -- (202)225-5541
Fred Upton, MI - (202)225-3761
Pete Stark, CA -- (202)225-5065
David Mann, OH -- (202)225-2216
Earl Hutto, FL -- (202)225-4136
Bob Carr, MI -- (202)225-4872
Earl Pomeroy, ND -- (202)225-2611
 
David Brandt -- National Space Society (NSS)
 

Article: 20142
From: rogerg7389@aol.com (RogerG7389)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Where do the Apollos rest?
Date: 10 Jun 1994 22:13:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
 
In article <hwyau.771247784@dcs.ed.ac.uk>, "H W Yau <hwyau@epcc>" writes:
 
Apollo 20 was sacrificed early to enable the creation of Skylab.
Apollos 18 & 19 were planned as major lunar science missions, ala
Apollo 17. Multiple and lengthy surface EVAs, large areas covered
with the Lunar Rover, advanced experiments, targeted for
high-interest geological regions.
 
The hardware was bought and paid-for, all that was needed were the
operational dollars. It was like buying a Rolls Royce and then
leaving it in the garage because you couldn't afford the gas. It
remains one of the great crimes of the Twentieth Century and there's
lots of blame to go around (NASA, Congress, Nixon).

Article: 20150
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Where do the Apollos rest?
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 1994 03:58:26 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <2tb6jd$9fv@search01.news.aol.com> rogerg7389@aol.com
(RogerG7389) writes: 

>Apollo 20 was sacrificed early to enable the creation of Skylab.
 
Not entirely correct.  The original Skylab wasn't going to use a
Saturn V at all, and in fact the change wasn't officially approved
until after the success of Apollo 11.  It *did* make things easier for
Skylab, and once Skylab was switched to a Saturn V, either Apollo 20
had to go or the Saturn V production line had to be restarted.  The
surprising thing was that it took six months for Apollo 20 to be
officially cancelled. 
 
>The [18/19] hardware was bought and paid-for, all that was needed were the
>operational dollars... lots of blame to go around (NASA, Congress, Nixon).
 
Not to mention the scientific community -- Rep. George Miller
commented afterward that if the planetary scientists had made as much
of a fuss before the cancellation as they did afterward, those two
missions might well have been flown. 
-- 
"...the Russians are coming, and the    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
launch cartel is worried." - P.Fuhrman  |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 20151
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Where do the Apollos rest?
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 1994 04:12:36 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <hwyau.771247784@dcs.ed.ac.uk> "H W Yau <hwyau@epcc.ed.ac.uk>" 
writes: 

>At the risk of sounding misty-eyed and sentimental, does anybody know whether
>the missions for Apollos 18,19 and 20 had been planned? Would they have been
>`more of the same', or had NASA intended something special?
 
The Apollo target list changed a number of times, and planning for
18-20 never got to the point of firm target selection.  At the time of
its cancellation, Apollo 20 was pencilled in to go to Tycho, but that
site had been left until last because there were grave doubts about
whether it could be done safely, despite its spectacular nature and
great scientific interest. 
 
During the post-13 hiatus, Harrison Schmitt tried to sell a program of
four ambitious missions, in hopes of getting public attention:  Tycho,
Mare Orientale, the north pole, and the farside.  But with NASA pinched
for funds and upper management deathly afraid of losing a crew by being
too daring, there wasn't much hope of this happening.  Schmitt spent
quite a while pushing for the farside mission, but the communications-
relay satellite it required would have needed new development money,
and that simply could not be had.  (It was hard enough to get the
development money for Apollo's very highest post-11 priority, the
extended-duration LM plus rover.)
-- 
"...the Russians are coming, and the    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
launch cartel is worried." - P.Fuhrman  |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 20171
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.tech
Subject: proposed Apollo farside mission
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 1994 18:18:28 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
(Cross-posted to sci.space.tech, since this has wandered far from the
original shuttle-related topic...)
 
In article <2ti51b$fgm@jac.zko.dec.com> fisher@skylab.enet.dec.com () writes:

>|>...Schmitt spent
>|>quite a while pushing for the farside mission, but the communications-
>|>relay satellite it required would have needed new development money...
>
>Just out of curiosity, would that comsat have been synchronous?  That would
>mean it would have to be at the Earth's distance, or perhaps orbiting the 
>Earth at one of the Lagrange points, right?  If it did not have to be 
>synchronous, then what was wrong with the CSM as a relay station?
 
I've never seen a clear explanation of what orbit that relay satellite
would have been in.  It's damnably hard to find any sort of information
on the various advanced-Apollo proposals, even relatively modest ones
like this.
 
The right place to put a farside comsat is in a "halo orbit" around the
Earth-Moon L2 point.  However, I'm not sure that the halo orbits were
known at the time.  The L2 point itself is useless, because it's not
visible from Earth. 
 
If I'd been planning it, with Apollo-era knowledge and technology,
assuming I didn't know about halo orbits, I'd probably just put the
comsat in an elliptical lunar orbit with a high apolune over the
landing site.  This wouldn't give continuous coverage, but with careful
planning, it would be enough to cover major activities like landing,
moonwalks, and takeoff.
-- 
"All I really want is a rich uncle."    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Wernher von Braun |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 20172
From: derekb1939@aol.com (DerekB1939)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: proposed Apollo farside mission
Date: 15 Jun 1994 04:42:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
 
This may not be a really reliable source of information, but I
remember reading James Mitchner's "Space", where he chronicled the
Apollo 18 flight, and they did land on the far side and use a
satellite for a communications relay to Earth.
 
Maybe you might want to check out that and see if Mitchner may have
based it on plans that would have been used.
 
          -Derek
 

Article: 20219
From: rdl1@ukc.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: proposed Apollo farside mission
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 94 10:58:14 GMT
Organization: University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.
 
In article <CrCLIu.9Gv@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry
Spencer) writes: 

>(Cross-posted to sci.space.tech, since this has wandered far from the
>original shuttle-related topic...)
>
>In article <2ti51b$fgm@jac.zko.dec.com> fisher@skylab.enet.dec.com () writes:
>>|>...Schmitt spent
>>|>quite a while pushing for the farside mission, but the communications-
>
>I've never seen a clear explanation of what orbit that relay satellite
>would have been in.  It's damnably hard to find any sort of information
>on the various advanced-Apollo proposals, even relatively modest ones
>like this.
>
>The right place to put a farside comsat is in a "halo orbit" around the
>Earth-Moon L2 point.  However, I'm not sure that the halo orbits were
>known at the time.  The L2 point itself is useless, because it's not
>visible from Earth. 
>
>If I'd been planning it, with Apollo-era knowledge and technology,
>assuming I didn't know about halo orbits, I'd probably just put the
>comsat in an elliptical lunar orbit with a high apolune over the
>landing site.  This wouldn't give continuous coverage, but with careful
>planning, it would be enough to cover major activities like landing,
>moonwalks, and takeoff.
 
Tut tut, Henry, you underestimate the Apollo-era scientists and engineers.
 
Bob Farquar did a PhD (published as NASA TR R-346) on the control and 
use of libration point satellites, mentioning Lunar farside communications
as the obvious application. Although this was published in 1970 (say 
mid-Apollo era, in time for getting a comsat in place for a farside
mission), it cites many papers on libration point dynamics published from
about 1966 onwards.
 
It also cites 'Interplanetary Flight' by Arthur C Clarke (1950) - I 
wouldn't be at all surprised if Clarke had thought about using comsats
near lagrangian points.
 
Although the above do not mention 'halo orbits' by name, Farquar at
least was completely familiar with the dynamics and manoeuvring
required for an operational farside communication system, so an
Apollo-era implementation probably would have used a halo orbit, or
something very similar (the delta-V requirements for stooging around
near the lagrange points are very modest). 
 
(As a sideline, a friend once told me he asked an Apollo astronaut whom
of all his colleagues etc. he most respected, and the answer came back
'Bob Farquar'. Don't know which astronaut though, but an interesting
answer, given that the 'competition' would have included such gods as
Von Braun) 
 
Ralph Lorenz
Unit for Space Sciences
University of Kent
UK
 
Article: 20278
From: kcarroll@zoo.toronto.edu (Kieran A. Carroll)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.tech
Subject: Halo Orbits
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 14:58:21 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <CrpGr9.HyF@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry
Spencer) writes: 

>In article <2tqqmm$27t@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> andy@cse.ucsc.edu (Andy John) writes:
>>What's a halo orbit?
>
>It's an orbit -- in a loose sense of the word -- *around* (in this case)
>the Earth-Moon axis, roughly centered on one of the in-line Lagrange
>points.  (Technically, it is an orbit around the Earth that is perturbed
>into a weird shape by the presence of the Moon, but never mind that.)
>Seen from a distance, the orbit looks like a halo above the Moon.  Such
>orbits are *almost* stable, requiring only very small stationkeeping
>burns.
>
>Such an orbit around the farside Lagrange point has the advantage that,
>unlike the point itself, it is far enough out from the Earth-Moon axis
>to be visible from the Earth, while remaining visible from most of the
>lunar farside.
>-- 
>"All I really want is a rich uncle."    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
>                    - Wernher von Braun |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
 
 
I've been expecting someone else to point out the most obvious fact
relating to halo orbits (at least in *my* mind), and so didn't bother
mentioning it myself, but either I missed it being posted or it's more
obscure than I thought, so here goes... 
 
A very successful space mission was planned around using a halo orbit,
the ISEE-3 (International Sun-Earth Explorer 3) mission of the (?)
late 1970s. This placed a fields-and-particles spacecraft at the
Sun_Earth Lagrange point located about 1.5M km sun-wards of Earth, or
to be more precise in a halo orbit around that point. A halo orbit was
used because, if ISEE-3 had been placed *at* the Lagrange point, the
sun would have been directly behind it as seen from the Earth, and the
radio emissions from the Sun would have made communications with the
spacecraft impossible. With a halo orbit, the spacecraft could be kept
a large-enough angular distance away from the Sun/Earth axis,
permitting communications. 
 
I have a paper (source unknown) by Robert W. Farquhar and Daniel P.
Muhonen of NASA GSFC, and David L. Richardson of Computer Sciences
Corporation, titled "Mission Design for a Halo Orbiter of the Earth,"
which describes this in all its gory details. In its reference list,
Farquhar is cited as the author of NASA TR-346, Sept. 1970, "The
Control and Use of Libration-Point Satellites," and a May 1969 article
in [Astronautics and Aeronautics] titled "Future Missions for
Libration-Point Satellites." It sure looks like Farquhar was the
orbital dynamicist behind the concept, and ISEE-3 must have been quite
a triumph for him. Note also that the *concept* was there in time for
Apollo 18; given the can-do attitude of the Apollo program, I wouldn't
have been surprised if it could have been taken from concept to
practice by NASA in time for Apollo 18. 
 
BTW, ISEE-3 was targeted out of its halo orbit after its prime mission
was over, swung by the Moon a couple of times, and retargetted towards
a comet (Giacobinni-Zinner? Halley?) in the mid-1980s; it was renamed
ICE (Interplanetary Comet Explorer) at that time. I believe that it is
currently on its way towards a future comet encounter. Another triumph
of advanced orbital dynamics for mission planning!
-- 
 
     Kieran A. Carroll @ U of Toronto Aerospace Institute
     uunet!attcan!utzoo!kcarroll kcarroll@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 20279
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: proposed Apollo farside mission
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 16:41:55 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <9496@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> Counsel Wolf <rdl1@ukc.ac.uk> writes:

>Although the above do not mention 'halo orbits' by name, Farquar at least
>was completely familiar with the dynamics and manoeuvring required for an
>operational farside communication system, so an Apollo-era implementation
>probably would have used a halo orbit...
 
Farquhar (note correct spelling!) was definitely using the term "halo
orbit" in 1972, if not earlier.  (In 1972, it shows up in the title of
a paper.)  So I think we can assume that halo orbits were known early
enough to figure in planning for a farside Apollo, although people
might have been nervous about using them for the first time on such a
failure- intolerant mission. 
 
Fortuitously, I've just run across an excellent introduction to how
halo orbits work and what they're good for.  "A Moon Base / Mars Base
Transportation Depot", by Paul W. Keaton, in "Lunar Bases and Space
Activities of the 21st Century" (W.W. Mendell, ed; Lunar and Planetary
Institute, 1985; ISBN 0-942862-02-3 but I think it's out of print) is
readable and gives considerable technical detail. 
 
The trick to finding the halo orbits, it turns out, is to derive
equations of motion for the region near the Lagrange point (the same
equations work for all three in-line points), notice that they give
both periodic effects and exponentially-diverging effects, and look
for a set of initial conditions which zeros out the diverging effects.
The result is sinusoidal oscillations on all three axes (in a
rotating coordinate system), although the ones parallel to the
Earth-Moon axis are smaller than the others.  Perturbations and
higher-order effects require small corrections now and then, but the
diverging effects are so nearly zero that the amounts are small: 
ISEE-3 burned about 10m/s per year to stay in a halo orbit around the
Earth-Sun L1 point. 
 
The paper is also of more general interest.  It's got a very nice
explanation of why you do *not* want to put a transportation depot in
geostationary orbit (there are several reasons), and of why a halo
orbit around the Earth-Sun L1 point is the natural depot location once
you go beyond LEO. 
-- 
"All I really want is a rich uncle."    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Wernher von Braun |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 20221
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: bthorn@cscns.com (Brian S. Thorn)
Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Chaikin
Organization: CNS On-line Services (800-592-1240 customer service)
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 1994 02:01:35 GMT
 
Sc> Yee-hah!  A 655 pg book on Apollo!  Finally something on the subject
Sc> that might be as worthwhile reading as Murray and Cox's "Apollo: Race
Sc> to the Moon".  That book came out 5 years ago and the only thing that's
Sc> come out since is the pathetic book ostensibly written by Deke Slayton
Sc> and Alan Shepard: "Moon Shot".  I don't know if anyone else out there
Sc> was lured into buying this completely bogus book, but if you haven't
Sc> yet, don't.  It's obviously ghostwritten by two _other_ guys, is told
Sc> in a movie/docu-drama format, and includes thousands of details and
Sc> incidental dialogue for which there can be no actual record.  I only
Sc> _wish_ that someone had been taking notes of what Von Braun said during
Sc> private conversations on the phone!
 
Sc> Is this book out yet?  Has anyone seen it?
 
    I bought it about two weeks ago at the local Waldenbooks store. If
    your local bookstore doesn't have it, I'm sure they can order it.
    "A Man On The Moon: The Voyages Of The Apollo Astronauts" was
    published by Viking Penguin, a major national publisher, so it
    should be readily available.
 
    It is well worth the $27.95 US / $34.99 Canada cover price, and I
    doubt it will ever be made available in paperback. The book is
    almost completely narrative, with only a few pages of photographs.
    The book is more for the popular audience than, say "Where No Man
    Has Gone Before", a technical book about Apollo published in 1989,
    and avoids (for the most part) looking back at Apollo from a present
    day perspective (as happened to Al Reinert's "For All Mankind".)
   
    Andrew Chaikin does an exceptional job of describing the Apollo
    flights for the layman, making use of interviews with the astronauts
    conducted over the past decade. He seems to have been most impressed
    with Apollo 12's Pete Conrad. While Alan Shepard currently has his
    own Apollo book ("Moon Shot") on the market, he is not presented
    particularly favorably in Chaikin's book and his Apollo 14 is
    described as being the least-productive of the moon flights.
 
    Chaikin does well in reviving the edge-of-your-seat memories of the
    Apollo 11 landing and Apollo 13 near-disaster. Better yet, he describes
    other edge-of-your-seat events most of us don't remember, like the
    nearly-aborted moon landing of Apollo 16, the lightning strike of
    Apollo 12, and how the Apollo 15 Lunar Rover almost got away from
    astronauts by rolling down a slope.
 
    "A Man On The Moon" is *very* highly recommended to anyone with even
    a passing interest in the Apollo program.
 
    -Brian
 
 * Q-Blue 1.0 [NR] *                  

Article: 20243
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 17:44:04 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <CrMGAn.AAA@cscns.com> bthorn@cscns.com (Brian S. Thorn) writes:

>    ... He seems to have been most impressed
>    with Apollo 12's Pete Conrad. While Alan Shepard currently has his
>    own Apollo book ("Moon Shot") on the market, he is not presented
>    particularly favorably in Chaikin's book and his Apollo 14 is
>    described as being the least-productive of the moon flights.
 
Wilhelms ("To A Rocky Moon", the best history of lunar science) was
clearly slightly horrified that Shepard -- the one astronaut who made
no secret of being completely uninterested in geology -- ended up
commanding the landing at Fra Mauro, one of the most interesting
geological sites on the Moon. 
 
The geologists obviously rank Schmitt first among the moonwalkers in
terms of lunar science return.  There seems to be general agreement
that the Apollo 15 crew (Scott+Irwin) is next, because they were
enthusiastic amateur geologists and put a lot of effort into the
geological side of the training (helped by the presence of Schmitt on
their backup crew).  And Schmitt himself said that Neil Armstrong,
despite very limited training, was probably the single best *observer*
sent to the Moon. 
-- 
"All I really want is a rich uncle."    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Wernher von Braun |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 20251
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Cha
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 13:11:40 GMT
 
In article <CrI6qr.6Kt@cscns.com> bthorn@cscns.com (Brian S. Thorn) writes:
 
>Kl>         Thursday, June 16 - "The Apollo Astronaut Experience."  Talk by
>Kl>     Andrew Chaikin, Apollo program science historian and author of the
>Kl>     new book, A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts,
>Kl>     655 pages, by Viking Penguin.
 
>     I read this book last week, and it is outstanding! The price is
>     hefty ($27.95 US), but its worth every penny.
 
Completely agreed.  As soon as I saw the original post on Friday, I
called the local bookstore to reserve a copy.  I picked it up during 
lunch and could barely wait to finish work to get into it.  
 
It appears (judging by the bibliography and author's interview notes) to
be extremely well researched.  You simply can't write a book like this
without going to the horse's mouth, i.e. the astonauts themselves.  The
dust jacket indicates that Chaikin has been developing this book since
1986.
 
I was glad to see that it covers an aspect of Apollo that hasn't been
particularly well documented up to this point.  Many books have been
written which deal witht the development of the Saturns, the LM, the
CSM, etc., but none have told the real, unedited story of what went on 
between the astronauts behind the scenes.
 
>     If they have any sense, some movie studio should get the rights to
>     this and make it for the big screen, a'la "The Right Stuff". Maybe
>     if Ron Howard's "Apollo 13" movie does well, someone will.
 
Ahem?  What Ron Howard movie?  Haven't heard about this.  My feeling on
it that I'm really not interested in seeing a docu-drama movie on
the subject.  If I want to see someone like Wayne Rogers in a bad moon
landing story, I'll go watch Michner's "Space" again.  Ecchh.  Apollo
does not lend itself to this type of tale.  As evidence, I'd site your
reference to "The Right Stuff".  Great book.  Boring movie.
 
What is really lacking in availability is a very serious and thorough
video documentary of Apollo.  I'm thinking of something like a Ken
Burns-style documentary; several installments complete with interviews
of the men and women involved.  If someone dosen't do this soon it's
going to be too late.  We've already lost one surface-walker, and two
who orbited the moon. The closest we've ever gotten to this type of
film is the excellent "For All Mankind" (although it would have been
nice to occasionally see the faces behind the narration) and a show I
saw on PBS back in '89 called "The Other Side of the Moon" which did
interview a handful of the astronauts and did a reasonable job. 
-- 
--------------
Gary Schroeder  		
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov        
Brookhaven National Laboratory 

Article: 20259
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: bthorn@cscns.com (Brian S. Thorn)
Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Cha
Sender: news@cscns.com (News)
Organization: CNS On-line Services (800-592-1240 customer service)
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 01:17:23 GMT
 
gary l. schroeder (schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov) wrote:

: >     I read this book last week, and it is outstanding! The price is
: >     hefty ($27.95 US), but its worth every penny.
 
: I was glad to see that it covers an aspect of Apollo that hasn't been
: particularly well documented up to this point.  Many books have been
: written which deal witht the development of the Saturns, the LM, the
: CSM, etc., but none have told the real, unedited story of what went on 
: between the astronauts behind the scenes.
 
  How about Michael Collins' "Carrying The Fire" or Buzz Aldrin's
  "Men From Earth"?
 
: >     If they have any sense, some movie studio should get the rights to
: >     this and make it for the big screen, a'la "The Right Stuff". Maybe
: >     if Ron Howard's "Apollo 13" movie does well, someone will.
 
: Ahem?  What Ron Howard movie?  Haven't heard about this.  My feeling on
: it that I'm really not interested in seeing a docu-drama movie on
: the subject.  If I want to see someone like Wayne Rogers in a bad moon
: landing story, I'll go watch Michner's "Space" again.
 
  Well, if they keep trying, eventually SOMEBODY'S gotta do it right! :-)
  Seriously, though. The "Apollo 13" movie was mentioned in various
  media after the Academy Awards show last spring. Ron Howard is directing
  and Tom Hanks stars.
 
: Ecchh.  Apollo
: does not lend itself to this type of tale.  As evidence, I'd site your
: reference to "The Right Stuff".  Great book.  Boring movie.
 
  The movie was too long, but I liked it! "Space" however, was a soaper.
 
: What is really lacking in availability is a very serious and thorough
: video documentary of Apollo.  I'm thinking of something like a Ken
: Burns-style documentary; several installments complete with interviews
: of the men and women involved.
 
  Didn't someone recently mention here that the Discovery Channel was
  working on something like this? A "Civil War-esque" PBS project would
  be good, but a weekly "Space" show on Discovery or TLC would be good
  too. Especially if it were a 10 or 12-week one hour program, like
  "The Day The Universe Changed" or "Connections". If they can get
  Armstrong to host "Frontiers of Flight", surely he can be coaxed out
  to do a "Space" program.
 
  -Brian

Article: 20253
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Apollo book by Chaikin
Sender: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 15:08:56 GMT
 
From honais@vega.lanl.gov Mon Jun 20 09:31:16 1994
From: honais@vega.lanl.gov (Eric M. Jones)
 
Eric said he couldn't post for some reason and asked me to put this up:
 
>I haven't seen the final Chaikin book,
>but read parts of the draft and was very
>impressed.  Andy knows his stuff.
>The Shepard/Slayton book ain't history,
>but I wouldn't be too hard on it.  What
>it does is convey some of the excitment 
>and what we all desperately need is 
>some enthusiasm about the space program.
>I found a copy in the local Sam's Club
>for $13 and if we can get people outside
>the hardcore to read anything halfway
>decent on Apollo, so much the better.
 
Sorry, I can only partly agree with you there.  The (supposedly)
Shepard/Slayton book "Moon Shot" is fictionalized history.  The actual
authors of the book don't make any distinction between real events and
invented dialogue and that bothers me.  If I buy a book based on the
pretext that it documents real history, I don't want to find pure
fiction mixed in with it.  That's the kind of reality/fiction blur
that television gets away with all too often these days.  I'd like to
consider books as a bit of a refuge from that type of trickery. 
 
Chaikin's dialogue, on the other hand, clearly comes from interviews
with the astronauts or from mission radio transcripts.  "Moon Shot"
reads like a cheap dime store paperback, rife with some of the worst
cliches of all time. 
-- 
--------------
Gary Schroeder  		
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov        
Brookhaven National Laboratory 

Article: 20272
From: tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu (Thomas J. Frieling)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Cha
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 15:14:27
Organization: Bainbridge College
 
In article <2u7ciu$d1s@news.ysu.edu> ao311@yfn.ysu.edu (John T. Forall) writes:

>From: ao311@yfn.ysu.edu (John T. Forall)
>Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Cha
>Date: 21 Jun 1994 18:46:54 GMT
 
>In a previous article, schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder) says:
 
>>going to be too late.  We've already lost one surface-walker, and two
>>who orbited the moon. The closest we've ever gotten to this type of
 
>I hate to admit it but I didn't know these men had died.  Which
>astronauts were they?
 
John L. (Jack) Swigert, the last minute replacement CM Pilot for
Apollo 13, died of cancer on December 27, 1982. He had been elected to
the US Congress the month before. 
 
Ron Evans, CM Pilot on Apollo 17 died of a heart attack on April 7, 1990.
 
Jim Irwin walked on the moon on Apollo 15 and died on August 8, 1991 of 
a heart attack.
 
RIP guys, and thanks.

Article: 20273
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: bthorn@cscns.com (Brian S. Thorn)
Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Cha
Sender: news@cscns.com (News)
Organization: CNS On-line Services (800-592-1240 customer service)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1994 00:44:18 GMT
 
  Well, Gary wasn't quite right in the above. It's one surface walker,
  one who orbited the moon, and one who overflew the moon once:
 
  James Irwin, who walked at Hadley Rille with Dave Scott on Apollo 15;
 
  Ron Evans orbited the Moon while Cernan and Schmitt explore Taurus-Littrow
  on Apollo 17;
 
  and Jack Swigert who overflew the Moon during the aborted Apollo 13,
  during which he, James Lovell and Fred Haise nursed a crippled spacecraft
  back to Earth. He never orbited the Moon.
  
  -Brian
  
Article: 20275
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: bthorn@cscns.com (Brian S. Thorn)
Subject: Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Cha
Sender: news@cscns.com (News)
Organization: CNS On-line Services (800-592-1240 customer service)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 1994 00:58:12 GMT
 
gary l. schroeder (schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov) wrote:

: >     If they have any sense, some movie studio should get the rights to
: >     this and make it for the big screen, a'la "The Right Stuff". Maybe
: >     if Ron Howard's "Apollo 13" movie does well, someone will.
 
: What is really lacking in availability is a very serious and thorough
: video documentary of Apollo.  I'm thinking of something like a Ken
: Burns-style documentary; several installments complete with interviews
: of the men and women involved.  If someone dosen't do this soon it's
: going to be too late.
 
  By the way, there is something new coming next month. I don't know
  how serious or in-depth it will be, but "Moon Shot" is apparently a
  multi-night program about the space program. It is probably based on
  the Slayton/Shepard book, if titles are any suggestion. But since the
  quality of books versus movies is not related (i.e., "The Right Stuff")
  we shouldn't discount "Moon Shot" automatically.
 
  "Moon Shot" will be on TBS, and is hosted/narrated by Barry Corbin,
  astronaut Maurice Minnefield on "Northern Exposure" (CBS-TV).
 
  Some of the commercials are interesting. One has Corbin talking about
  Apollo 11 while footage is shown. Corbin says "The "Eagle" had only
  sixteen seconds of fuel left when it landed. SIXTEEN SECONDS!"
 
  Another describes a Gemini spacewalk (with Ed White footage playing)
  Corbin says "Your buddy is outside the ship, connected by a tether
  and can't get back in.  Mission Control gives you strict orders:  If
  he can't get back in... CUT THE LINE." Or words to that effect.
 
  It would make me want to watch...
 
  -Brian

Article: 20280
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech,sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Slayton/Shepard book
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 23:18:26 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
(sci.space.tech added to newsgroup list, and followups pointed there --
this isn't shuttle-related.)
 
In article <1994Jun17.130552.27529@bnlux1.bnl.gov>
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder) writes: 

>... the pathetic book ostensibly written by Deke Slayton
>and Alan Shepard: "Moon Shot".  I don't know if anyone else out there 
>was lured into buying this completely bogus book, but if you haven't
>yet, don't.  It's obviously ghostwritten by two _other_ guys, is told
>in a movie/docu-drama format, and includes thousands of details and 
>incidental dialogue for which there can be no actual record...
 
I came across the Slayton/Shepard book recently, was somewhat put off
by the style, and decided that I definitely wasn't buying it at list
price when I found a couple of things (I no longer remember exactly
what) that made me say "but that's not really right".  I pencilled it
in as something to buy remaindered or secondhand, and maybe read,
since it did seem to have things in it that couldn't be found
elsewhere (there are a lot of books that a dedicated space crazy might
want to read, once, because there's no really comprehensive history of
Apollo, and even books that mostly repeat the obvious will sometimes
come out with something not documented elsewhere).  I don't hold an
occasional minor technical error against an author, since they all
fumble things now and then. 
 
However... I am informed, by Sources I Consider Reliable, that this
book contains major errors, not just minor ones, and should not be
trusted on any question of historical fact.  Treat it as fiction.
-- 
"All I really want is a rich uncle."    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Wernher von Braun |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

    The Apollo 13 movie mentioned in .118 is being directed by Ron Howard
    and stars Tom Hanks as Jim Lovell.  They're filming this at the Cape
    and Houston this summer, apparently with the full cooperation of NASA.
    It's a big budget picture with the full Hollywood treatment.  It could
    be great semi-fiction or, like "The Right Stuff", a complete travesty.

    There's a discussion about this in the Hanks interview in that noted
    technical journal, "Vanity Fair".  Look for the issue with Hanks on the
    cover (May, June?)  Howard and Hanks do sound quite enthusiastic about
    doing a good job, FWIW.

    At the very least, it could serve as the basis for a new attraction at
    Universal Studios :-).

  So I wonder, when the service module blows, are we going to get

  ... Houston Apollo 13, we have a Bus B spike and we're venting a gas

or will it be more like

  ... OH MY GOD JIM, THE SHIP JUST BLEW UP!!!  WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!

  George

Article: 20302
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: choie@ecf.toronto.edu (CHOI  ERIC MANSHUN)
Subject: Al Gore in PM
Sender: news@ecf.toronto.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 17:12:23 GMT
 
There is an article by VP Al Gore in the July issue of Popular
Mechanics, leading off two other articles commemorating the 25th
anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing.  He doesn't say much.  It starts
off reiterating what a wonderful thing the Apollo programme
accomplished and what a swell guy JFK was, and concludes with comments
on how those dastardly Russians the US raced to the Moon are now are
partners in spaceflight. 
 
The 1987 US-USSR and 1992 US-Russia space cooperation agreements are
mentioned, although the fact that they were negotiated by the Reagan
and Bush administrations respectively is not.  As an example of this
new international flavour to spaceflight, the recent HST mission
between American and CANADIAN astronauts is cited.  This must be news
to ESA astronaut Claude Nicollier. 
 
No mention is made of returning to the Moon, or Mars.
 
This is going to be a sad anniversary.
 
Article: 20306
From: tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu (Thomas J. Frieling)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Al Gore in PM
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 14:43:54
Organization: Bainbridge College
 
In article <Crv14o.IBD@ecf.toronto.edu> choie@ecf.toronto.edu 
(CHOI  ERIC MANSHUN) writes:
 
>No mention is made of returning to the Moon, or Mars.
> 
>This is going to be a sad anniversary.
 
Indeed it is, especially for anyone who was at the right age in July
of 1969. I really thought it would all go on forever, or at least that
the year 2001 would be pretty much like the movie. But then, I thought
the Beatles would go on forever too. 
 
The US traded its lunar exploration capabilities for the promise of a
cheaper reusable shuttle as if reusability itself would somehow
magicaly reduce costs. 
 
The recent, short history of the Bush Administration's Space
Exploration Inititative demonstrates how difficult it is going to be
to regain our manned exploration capability. 
 
It seems to me the real problem is not money--you could eliminate or
double NASA's budget without any major impact on the Federal Deficit.
The real problem is a lack of will in the US. 
 
Kennedy said we should go to the moon not because it is easy, but
because it is hard, because that challenge would serve to organize the
best our our talents and abilities. 
 
Why can't we strive for excellence once again? Why is excelling at
anything looked down on now as elitism and elitism and excellence are
now bad in this new age? 
 
We are so obsessed with 'rights' in this country that we've forgotten
that with each right comes with it a responsibility. If we want to
level society to its lowest common denomiator, then let's continue our
obsession with making sure no one's rights are infringed. 
 
But if we are interested in nurturing the best in people, let's make
excelling a positive thing again. I say that the educated, talented,
and yes, smart people in the US have a responsibility to get the space
program moving forward once again, instead of going around in circles.
 
Just my two cents worth.

Article: 20315
From: higgins@fnalv.fnal.gov (Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Apollo Books (was Re: Apollo Talk by Andrew Chaikin at...)
Date: 23 Jun 94 23:13:27 -0600
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
 
In article <1994Jun17.130552.27529@bnlux1.bnl.gov>,
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder) writes: 

> Yee-hah!  A 655 pg book on Apollo!  Finally something on the subject
> that might be as worthwhile reading as Murray and Cox's "Apollo: Race
> to the Moon".  That book came out 5 years ago and the only thing that's
> come out since is the pathetic book ostensibly written by Deke Slayton
> and Alan Shepard: "Moon Shot".  
 
I don't have time to write a lengthy review, but the year-old *To a
Rocky Moon*, by Don Willhelms of the U.S. Geological Survey, is
excellent. It's a history of lunar geology, and touches on Apollo in
many places-- mapmaking, precursor missions, astronaut geology
training, site selection, and a detailed evaluation of the geological
accomplishments of each Apollo mission. 
 
Bill Higgins          |  If we can put a man on the Moon, why can't
Fermilab              |  we put a man on the Moon? -- Bill Engfer
higgins@fnal.fnal.gov |  If we can put a man on the Moon, why can't
higgins@fnal.Bitnet   |  we put a woman on the Moon? -- Bill Higgins

Article: 20314
From: tomsunman@aol.com (TOM SUNMAN)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Apollo / Saturn V material
Date: 23 Jun 1994 22:11:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
 
   I am a 36 year old collector of memoribilia on the Apollo missions
and the Saturn V and Saturn 1b vehicals. Can anyone provide me with
places I may be able to find such items? I am a MAJOR fan of that
spectacular era of our space program and would appreciate any help
one could give me. I'm also looking for any books related to the
same. I do have a number of them but need to find the following (for
starters!) :
 
    "Chariots for Apollo: A history of manned lunar spacecraft" (nasa
1979)
 
    "Moonport: A history of Apollo Launch facilities and operations"
(Nasa 1978)
 
   "Stages to Saturn: A technological history of the Apollo/Saturn
launch vehicals" (nasa 1980) 
 
    Tom Randall
 
    tomsunman@aol.com
    randall@sunydutchess.edu

Article: 20339
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Al Gore in PM
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 1994 16:27:33 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <tfrielin.251.000EBBBE@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu>
tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu (Thomas J. Frieling) writes: 

>The US traded its lunar exploration capabilities for the promise of a 
>cheaper reusable shuttle...
 
Not quite correct, alas.  The US scrapped its lunar-exploration
capabilities well before any sort of decision was made about the shuttle,
and there was little or no relation between the two.  Webb had to fight
hard to get approval to build 15 Saturn Vs in the first place, and with
military spending in Vietnam a heavy drain on the budget, there was little
or no prospect of Congress doing an about-face and funding reopening of
the production line.  The decision to terminate production after the first
15 was made in the mid-1960s, before the shuttle was anything but a vague
notion.  All hope of restarting production was abandoned in 1970, still
a couple of years before shuttle approval.
 
>It seems to me the real problem is not money--you could eliminate or double 
>NASA's budget without any major impact on the Federal Deficit. The real 
>problem is a lack of will in the US.
 
I would say it's a little of both.  If these projects cost a tenth as much,
it would be a lot easier to summon up the will to do them.
-- 
"All I really want is a rich uncle."    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
                    - Wernher von Braun |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry

Article: 20367
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: millard@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Millard Edgerton)
Subject: Re: Al Gore in PM
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 1994 16:31:35 GMT
 
choie@ecf.toronto.edu (CHOI  ERIC MANSHUN) writes:
 
>There is an article by VP Al Gore in the July issue of Popular Mechanics,
>leading off two other articles commemorating the 25th anniversary of the
>Apollo 11 landing.  He doesn't say much.  It starts off reiterating what a
***********  STUFF DELETED for bandwith sake!********
>No mention is made of returning to the Moon, or Mars.
> 
>This is going to be a sad anniversary.
 
Question:  If JFK had lived, would we have gone to the moon?   After his
untimely death, NO congressCritter could or would vote against "his dream"!
However given politics would the congress have supported what JFK proposed?
AND take away the "cold war" also, what would be the outcome, same as now?
 
Some thoughs----
 
***************************************************************************
* When I examine myself and my methods of   | Standard disclaimers apply  *
* thought, I come to the conclusion that the| Millard J. Edgerton, WA6VZZ *
* gift of fantasy ment more to me than my   | millard@eos.arc.nasa.gov    *
* talent for absorbing positive knowledge. A. Einstein                    *
***************************************************************************

Article: 2331
From: rdl1@ukc.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo capsule physical characteristics
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 94 15:29:40 GMT
Organization: University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.
 
In article <20JUN199416260114@rigel.tamu.edu> emk9267@rigel.tamu.edu
(KLINE, ERIC MICHAEL) writes: 

>Hi!!
>
>   I need to know the vehicle moments of inertia about the roll, pitch and
>yaw axes for an Apollo reentry capsule.  Does anyone know these values, or
>better yet, where I could look them up?  Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
>	Thanks, Eric
 
I don't know how representative of flight values these numbers are,
since they are from an investigation of splashdown loads (which used
1/4 scale models). The models used correspond to the following
full-scale values 
 
Mass             3900 kg
I_roll           5560 kg m2
I_pitch          5270 kg m2
I_yaw            4180 kg m2
 
The paper (S M Stubbs, Dynamic Model Investigations of Water Pressures
and Acclereations Encountered During Landings of the Apollo Spacecraft, 
NASA TN D-3980, September 1967) also gives the corresponding figures for 
both model and full-scale in slugs ft2, but I refuse to soil my hands 
with such ghastly units - if you need them, convert them yourself! 
 
Hope this helps
 
Ralph Lorenz
 

Article: 62527
From: omnimuse@aol.com (OMNI Muse)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Andrew Chaikin on America Online
Date: 28 Jun 1994 12:59:02 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
 
                   OMNI Magazine Online
 
                  is pleased to present
 
                            ***
 
                     Andrew Chaikin
 
                            ***
 
           in conference on America Online
 
                  Wednesday, July 6, 1994
 
                        10:15pm - 12:15am ET
 
Andrew Chaikin will be taking questions on his new book MAN ON THE
MOON in OMNI Online's Odeon Auditorium.  Chaikin interviewed most of
the living astronauts while writing his book and will discuss those
interviews in an observance of the 25th anniversary of Apollo 11. 
 
America Online software is available for download from the AOL BBS at
1-800-827-5808.  The regular trial terms prevail; after the first five
hours, the account must be cancelled or AOL's standard charges accrue
($9.95/month which includes 5 free hours, $3.50/hour for each
additional hour). 
 
Once signed on to America Online, the Odeon conference can be reached
via Keyword:  ODEON.  The keyword prompt is accessed by CTRL-K for PCs
and CMD-K for Macs. 
 
If you have any questions, please reply via e-mail.
 
Marilee J. Layman
OMNI Muse
OMNI Magazine Online Remote Staff

Article: 2990
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
From: haas@fred.nas.nasa.gov (Dr. Brian L. Haas)
Subject: APOLLO SPACEFLIGHT CELEBRATION: AIAA/NASA, Santa Clara, CA, July 16.
Sender: news@cnn.nas.nasa.gov (News Administrator)
Organization: AIAA San Francisco Section
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 1994 19:36:39 GMT
 
"One Giant Leap for Mankind"
 
A Celebration of the Past, Present, and Future of Mankind's Adventures
in Space 
 
In Commemoration of the 25th Anniversary of the First Manned Moon Landing 
 
Saturday, July 16, 1994
Santa Clara Convention Center / Westin Hotel
Santa Clara, California
 
(North of US-101 on Great America Parkway, across from Great America
Theme Park on the Tasman Line of the Light Rail) 
 
Come celebrate the 25th anniversary of the first Apollo Manned Landing
on the Moon and catch a glimpse of our promising future in space! 
Working with NASA Ames Research Center, the National Space Society,
the California Space Development Council, The American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, and several professional and educational
organizations, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
is sponsoring this celebration featuring: 
 
1. Family Space Fair

      12:00 - 5:30 pm, $4.00 donation / person at the door
      Kids and parents can meet astronauts and NASA Scientists, 
      participate in "make-and-take" projects like "make your own 
      spacehelmet", and visit educational displays and NASA exhibits.  
 
2. Astronauts/Engineers Reception Banquet

      5:00 pm - 9:30 pm, $36.00 / person 
      (advanced registration req'd)
      Some of the real heros of the Apollo program were the 
      engineers as well as the astronauts who made this milestone 
      possible.  Seven of the most prominent Apollo program engineers 
      will gather from around the nation to share personal reflections 
      on that great accomplishment with aspiring engineers, colleagues, 
      and the public.  On hand will also be Apollo 9 Astronaut Rusty 
      Schweickart!
 
For Banquet Reservations:  

Mail Check (payable to AIAA by July 9th) to:  
AIAA c/o Excel Computers, 
2797 Park Ave., Suite 101, Santa Clara, CA 95050.
 
More Information: 
Gopal Vasudevan (415-969-0961, or GopalV@infoserv.com) 
Juanita Ryan (408-926-0862)
 
--------------------------------------------------------
 
FAMILY SPACE FAIR:
 
Time:      12:00 noon - 5:30 pm
 
Place:     Santa Clara Convention Center at the Westin Hotel
           (North of US-101 on Great America Parkway, across from 
           Great America Theme Park on the Tasman Light-rail Line)
 
Donation:  $4.00 / person - pay at the door
 
Activities:

- Participate in Make-a-Space-Helmet, Paper Airplane Contest,
    Make-a-Hubble-Space-Telescope, and more....
- Visit exhibits by NASA Ames, Excel Computers, Systron Donner, ...
- See displays from the Ames Aerospace Encounter, SETI Institute,
     Astronomical Society of the Pacific, etc....
- Listen to talks by Dr. Chris McKay (NASA), Dr. Seth Shostak (SETI),
     and Space Shuttle Astronaut Dr. George (Pinky) Nelson.
- See a wall-climbing robot!
- Learn about the historical first manned lunar landing 25 years ago.
- Meet and talk with key Apollo Engineers from around the country.  
 
ASTRONAUTS/ENGINEERS BANQUET:
 
Time:      5:00 pm - 9:30 pm
 
Place:     Santa Clara Convention Center at the Westin Hotel
           (North of US-101 on Great America Parkway, across from 
           Great America Theme Park on the Tasman Light-rail Line)
 
Cost:      $36.00 / person - advanced registration required
           Ticket price covers exhibits, family fair, dinner, and 
           distinguished speakers program.

           Mail check (payable to AIAA) by July 9 to:
           AIAA c/o Excel Computers
           2797 Park Ave., Santa Clara, CA 95050
 
Program:
 
5:00 - No-Host Cocktail Hour - chance to chat with speakers.
 
6:00 - Dinner Banquet
 
6:45 - AIAA 1994 Awards Ceremony
 
7:00 - Distinguished Speakers (Presentations and Q&A)
 
       Mr. William Dean, Deputy Director, NASA Ames - Honorary Chairman
       Prof. Aaron Cohen - History of the Apollo Lunar Landing
       Dr. John C. Houbolt - Mission Operations
       Mr. George W. Jeffs - Apollo Command and Service Modules
       Mr. Joseph G. Gavin, Jr. - Apollo Lunar Module
       Mr. Russel L. (Rusty) Schweickart (Astronaut, Apollo 9).
       Prof. Robert Cannon - Apollo Engineer
       Mr. Arnold Aldrich - A Look to the Future
 
9:00  - Ending

        Tour Schedule for Andrew Chaikin, author of A Man on the Moon

        Most appearances consist of a lecture on the Apollo astronaut
    experience followed by a book signing.

      July 10  Chicago 7:00 p.m. Adler Planetarium
      July 13  New York 7:30 p.m. Hayden Planetarium
      July 14  Washington 6:00 p.m. Smithsonian Associates lecture
      July 16  Houston evening event, Space Center Houston
      July 17  Houston author brunch, Space Center Houston
      July 18  Boulder 5:30 p.m. Fiske Planetarium, U. Colorado
      July 20  Good Morning America ABC-TV, sometime between 7-9 a.m. EDT 
               (time may vary in other time zones)
      July 21  Seattle - Evening lecture at Pacific Science Center
      July 22  Talk of the Nation Science Friday, NPR, 2:00 p.m. EDT  
      July 23  Seattle 2:00 p.m. Museum of Flight

        Chaikin will also sign books at the Experimental Aircraft 
    Association event, July 28-31, in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. 

      August 4  Chapel Hill, NC evening lecture, Moorhead Planetarium

        If your bookstore has run out of copies, A Man on the Moon is
    being reprinted, so bookstores should have no difficulty obtaining
    copies from their distributors, or if necessary, from Viking. 

        Larry 
                                  

Article: 20567
From: kjenks@sd-www.jsc.nasa.gov (Kenneth C. Jenks)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Lost Moon
Date: 6 Jul 1994 15:43:58 GMT
Organization: NASA/JSC/SD5, Space Biomedical Research Institute
 
David A Borzillo (borzilda@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu) wrote:

: In an interview with Tom Hanks, he anounced that his next project will be  
: Lost Moon, the story of Apollo 13.  Filming starts in August.  Sounds  
: really interesting!
 
Mr. Hanks, Ron Howard, Kevin Bacon, and Bill Paxton have been
roaming around JSC gathering experiences and (presumably) source
material.  I saw a couple of them in a robotics lab last month.
 
They flew on the KC-135 Zero Gravity Aircraft last week -- I have
an autographed barf bag to prove it.  Mr. Hanks ("Call me Tom")
sat next to me during take-off.  (No, I won't tell who got sick --
that's private medical data, and shame on you for asking.)  They
spent most of the flight tumbling around, tossing things back and
forth, and playing with a squeeze bottle of water.  I was busy,
first with our experiment then, after parabola 30, being sick in
the back of the plane, so I didn't keep a close eye on our celebrities.
They had a NASA videographer assigned to them for the flight.  It
was the first KC-135 flight I recall where we had a welcoming
committee waiting for us after landing at Ellington.  Usually, it's
just our fellow experimenters and the ground crew.
 
I hope Mr. Howard does as well by NASA in this film as he did by
fire fighters in Back Draft.  Apollo 13 has some really good dramatic
points going for it -- including the fact that most of the audience
won't remember the ending.  I'm a movie buff, and I'm really looking
forward to it!
 
I wonder who they'll get to play Kranz....  Maybe Gene will come out
of retirement to play himself.  I sure hope they get him or someone 
like him as a consultant.
 
-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/SD5, Space Biomedical Research Institute
      kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368
 
                  "HERE MEN FROM THE PLANET EARTH
                    FIRST SET FOOT UPON THE MOON
                           JULY 1969, A.D.
                  WE CAME IN PEACE FOR ALL MANKIND."
 
     "We shall not cease from exploration
      And the end of all our exploring
      Will be to arrive where we started
      And know the place for the first time."

        -- T. S. Eliot, 1888-1965

Article: 3105
From: enews@access.digex.net (enews)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: Discover
Date: 5 Jul 1994 13:26:46 -0400
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
 
The featured article from the July issue of Discover takes the 25th 
aniversary of the first moon landing to reflect on the space program.
Here is an excerpt from "Remembering Apollo."
_________________________________________________________________________
"Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed." Neil Armstrong's
terse message to NASA's control center--the first words ever uttered on
another world by an inhabitant of Earth--are now 25 years old. After the
historic Apollo 11 landing, on July 20, 1969, humans landed on the moon
five more times, with Apollo 17 making the last lunar touchdown, in
December 1972. Unquestionably these journeys to the moon rank as some of
the greatest adventures of all time, and the men who made these journeys
among this country's most revered. To celebrate their achievement of a
quarter-century ago, Discover asked some of the Apollo astronauts to recount 
their most vivid memories of the missions. The following interviews were 
conducted by Tim Folger, Sarah Richardson, and Carl Zimmer.
 
William Anders, along with James Lovell and Frank Borman, flew on Apollo
8 in December 1968. They were the first people able to see the entire
Earth at a glance, and the first to fly to the moon, although they did
not land on it.
 
DISCOVER: What part of the mission stands out most for you?
 
ANDERS: The biggest surprise of the mission was to see the first
Earthrise over the moon and to realize that the Earth was even more
interesting than the moon. I consider the moon voyages a technical feat,
a political feat. But looking at the Earth and seeing it floating like--
I thought, since it was Christmastime--a little Christmas-tree ornament
against an infinite black backdrop of space, the only color in the whole
universe that we could see, it seemed so very finite. It was this view
of the fragility and finiteness of the Earth that is the impression,
frankly, that I hold more in my head than any other.
 
I find it somewhat ironic that we went up there for the moon, but
probably it was the Earth and the perspective of it that impressed
hard-bitten test pilots like us--and I guess the rest of the world--the
most. Because the pictures of the first Earthrise and the first full
Earth floating in space, I think, have been a major contribution in
helping people get a better feeling for the Earth's place in our lives
and in the universe. You realize that the Earth is about as physically
significant as one grain of sand on a beach. But it's our only home.
It's funny, but the one thing we had not planned on or even thought
about was photographing the Earth from lunar orbit. And so when we were
in the position where we could actually see the first Earthrise, it
caught us all by surprise, and there was a mad scramble for the cameras
to take pictures of that historic event.
 
DISCOVER: What about the moon? What did that look like?
 
ANDERS:  Even though I had probably studied lunar geology more than
either Frank or Jim, both on field trips on the ground and through
telescopes, I must say that my mental image did not match the actual
moon. Maybe I'd been biased by the movie 2001. I expected more sharp
corners, more sharp edges, rugged mountain peaks. But the moon looked as
if it had been sandblasted through the centuries, smoothed out.
 
DISCOVER: What did it feel like when you were orbiting the far side of
the moon, cut off from all contact with Earth? Did you feel lonely?
 
ANDERS:  We knew we were by ourselves on one side of the moon, and the
other half of the universe was on the other side, including the Earth
and all of our human companions. That was kind of a sobering experience.
 
DISCOVER: Would you like to go back?
 
ANIERS: Yeah, I would go again if I had a chance to walk on it. I was
always disappointed I couldn't do that. But Apollo 8 was the first time
that mankind was able to get away from the planet on which we evolved,
so I feel lucky to have been on that.
 
DISCOVER: Do you think about the mission often?
 
ANDERS:  Well, I suppose now and then. I guess the thing that triggers
memories the most frequently is to look up at the moon, not when it's
full, because it wasn't full when we went--it was about as new as it can
get. When I see a little sliver of moon as the sun is going down or
after the sun has gone down, I will be reminded that that's how it
looked when we went.
 
You see, most of the back side of the moon was illuminated when we went.
And that was because we were to photograph and check lighting conditions
for a landing site. All the landings had to be with the sun low and
behind your back because a high sun would have heated up the lunar
surface. So people generally were landing and exploring in the mornings
of the moon. And so most of the back was illuminated, and that meant
that it was night on most of the front--there was just this little sliver.
____________________________________________________________________________
 
So begins this issue's featured article from Discover.
 
This article and others from Discover and additional publications
can be viewed at no charge on The Electronic Newsstand, a service which
collects articles, editorials, and table of contents from over 100
magazines and provides them to the Global Internet community.
 
Access to The Electronic Newsstand is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a 
week via Gopher, an information navigation and retrieval technology from the
University of Minnesota.
 
For those without a local Gopher client program, The Electronic Newsstand
provides a telnet account which will allow you to use a text based Gopher
client to access our service.
 
To access The Electronic Newsstand, 
 
	via Local Gopher Client:
 
		Hostname:	gopher.internet.com
		Port:		2100
 
	via the Gopher Home Menu at U of Minn:
 
		Other Gopher and Information Servers/
		  North America/
		    USA/
		      General/
			The Electronic Newsstand (tm)
 
	via Gopher Link Information:
 
		Name=The Electronic Newsstand
		Type=1
		Port=2100
		Path=1/
		Host=gopher.internet.com
 
	via Telnet:
 
		Hostname: 	gopher.internet.com
		Loginname:	enews
		Password:	<not required>
 
	via World Wide Web:
 
		URL:		gopher://gopher.internet.com/
 
If you have any suggestions on how we might improve this service, or
need more information, please email  staff@enews.com
 
	--The Electronic Newsstand Staff
 

Article: 63367
From: fredb72776@aol.com (FredB72776)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Apollo 11 PBS special
Date: 7 Jul 1994 13:39:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Sender: news@search01.news.aol.com
 
In article <2vf0kt$37p@tribune.usask.ca>, switenky@herald.usask.ca (Shawn
Elliot Switenky) writes:
 
>Five years ago during the 20th aniversary of Apollo 11, Detroit's PBS
>station aired three television specials.  These consisted of the launch,
>landing and splashdown of Apollo 11.  The neat thing was these specials
>were taped originally aired news specials from July 1969.  They were also
>broadcast at the proper time.  So in effect, it was like watching the
>event take place. 
>
>Does anyone know if this is planned for the upcoming 25th aniversary?  
>Did anyone tape this 5 years ago?
 
The local PBS affiliate here in San Diego, KPBS-TV/FM, has several Apollo
related television programs scheduled.  One of the shows is a rebroadcast
of the original footage.  The following are excerpts from a press release
concerning these programs:
 
"Apollo 11: As It Happened" features the 1969 news coverage of the first
moon landing and the blast-off on the return trip to earth. Although the
mission spanned 10 days, the original coverage will be edited into an
hour-and-a-half episode, enhancing the timing and suspense of the events
(7/17, noon). [Note: hosted by Walter Cronkite from CBS; actually, their
'On-Air' program guide lists it as being six hours long, not 1 and 1/2]
 
"To the Moon and Beyond" looks at the myths and legends that inspired
early scientists to launch space exploration programs.  Interviews with
Soviet cosmonauts and American astronauts such as John Glenn and Alan
Shepard are included.  The program features a debate on the pros and cons
of a manned mission to Mars and a computer-animated outline of plans for
an international space station (7/18, 2 p.m.)
 
"Missions to the Moon," narrated by Martin Sheen, traces the history of
the space program that led to the United States' 1969 moon landing.  The
program includes the 1967 launch pad fire that killed Apollo 1 astronauts
and a brief history of the space race between the United States and the
Soviet Union, including the first handshake between Soviet cosmonauts and
U.S. astronauts in 1975 (7/20, 8 p.m.)
 
"Apollo 13: To the Edge and Back"--Astronauts James Lovell and Fred Haise,
their families and mission control representatives, tells the story of
this ill-fated 1970 mission where the most basic resources--water, power
and oxygen--were in limited suppy because of an oxygen unit that exploded
when the spacecraft was still 200,000 miles away from earth (7/20, 9 p.m.).
 
"The Great Comet Crash"--Beginning July 16 and lasting for several days,
the comet "Shoemaker-Levy 9" will crash into Jupiter with the strength of
100 million megatons.  The program provides live coverage of the collision
and commentary from space experts on the impact the comet will have on the
largest planet in the solar system (7/20, 10:30 p.m.).
 
"Alan Bean: Art off This Earth" profiles Apollo 12 astronaut  Alan Bean,
the fourth man to walk on the moon.  Through his artwork, which focuses on
the moon and space, Bean expresses his feelings and shares his experienes
as an astronaut (7/23, 2:30 p.m.).
 
------
 
If you have a PBS affiliate in your area, they should be showing these
programs.  The times and dates will probably differ however- so check your
local listings.
 
Hope this helps anyone who has an interest in these shows.  If you
want/need more information on any of these shows, email me and I can
either answer the question myself or direct you to someone who can.
 
Fred Bruenjes
fredb72776@aol.com

Article: 3133
From: kjenks@sd-www.jsc.nasa.gov (Kenneth C. Jenks)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: Re: Discover
Date: 7 Jul 1994 23:10:33 GMT
Organization: NASA/JSC/SD5, Space Biomedical Research Institute
 
enews (enews@access.digex.net) wrote:

: The featured article from the July issue of Discover takes the 25th 
: aniversary of the first moon landing to reflect on the space program.
: Here is an excerpt from "Remembering Apollo."
: _________________________________________________________________________
: "Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed." Neil Armstrong's
: terse message to NASA's control center--the first words ever uttered on
: another world by an inhabitant of Earth--are now 25 years old. [...]
 
This always bugs me.  I know, I know, the City of Houston likes to
say that "Houston" was the first word uttered from the moon.  But
the way it really went was:
 
     Aldrin: "Contact light.  Okay, engine stop.  ACA out of detent."
     Armstrong: "Got it."
     Aldrin: "Mode controls, both auto.  Descent engine command override,
       off.  Engine arm off...."
     CAPCOM: "We copy you down, Eagle."
     Armstrong: "Houston, Tranquility Base here.  The Eagle has landed."
 
It doesn't take a lot of research to get the facts, but some folks
either don't care about the facts or don't want to do the research.
 
Sigh.  It's late, and I'm getting cranky.  I'm going home to mow the lawn.
 
-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/SD5, Space Biomedical Research Institute
      kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368
 
                  "HERE MEN FROM THE PLANET EARTH
                    FIRST SET FOOT UPON THE MOON
                           JULY 1969, A.D.
                  WE CAME IN PEACE FOR ALL MANKIND."

--------------------------------------------------------
"...a wise and frugal government, which shall refrain men from injuring
one another, which will leave them otherwise free to regulate their
own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from
the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.  This is the sum of good
government." - Thomas Jefferson

From:	US4RMC::"Admin@ccmail.Jpl.Nasa.Gov" "MAIL-11 Daemon"  8-JUL-1994 
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	JPL/Apollo's robotic precursors

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011

Contact: Diane Ainsworth

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                          June 29, 1994

The Legacy of Apollo: First in a two-part series

ROBOTIC EXPLORATION OF THE MOON SETS STAGE FOR APOLLO ERA

     In the decade leading up to astronaut Neil Armstrong's
historic moon walk, NASA's newly acquired Jet Propulsion
Laboratory was setting the pace for the first modern, post-
telescopic phase of lunar exploration.

     The launching of the Russian Lunik I on Jan. 2, 1959, and of
JPL's Pioneer 4 on March 3, 1959, opened the curtain on moon
exploration for the world. Those two spacecraft flew past the
moon and into an orbit about the sun, carrying instruments that
would have detected lunar radiation belts had the moon had a
magnetic field strong enough to generate them.

     No radiation belts were detected and the two flights went
down in history primarily for their contribution to the nature of
the outer portions of Earth's magnetosphere. Nevertheless, Lunik
and Pioneer represented the first attempts to use automated
spacecraft for the study of other worlds.

     JPL's robotic moon explorers -- the Rangers and Surveyors --
followed.  Conceived in 1960-1961, they were designed as purely
scientific missions, but were refocused as the Apollo program
jelled and took hold. Once Apollo was firmly in place, the Ranger
and Surveyor programs were redirected to provide the
environmental information needed to test the design
specifications of the Apollo spacecraft.  Science was blended
into the primary goal of putting humans on the lunar surface and
returning them safely to Earth.

     The first two Ranger spacecraft were not targeted for impact
on the moon, but rather designed to test such innovations as
temporarily parking a spacecraft in an Earth orbit, stabilizing
spacecraft attitude control rather than spinning, and carrying
scientific instruments to study the fields and particles of
interplanetary space, said Dr. Albert Metzger, a JPL scientist
who worked on the Ranger missions.

     The Rangers that followed were intended to crash into the
moon's surface while taking an impressive amount of data and
pictures before impact.  They also delivered an instrument to
operate on the surface.

     The first pair of Rangers carrying science instruments
failed in August and November of 1961, when their Agena boosters
did not fire in low Earth orbit.

     The second series of Rangers, 3, 4 and 5, each carried a
gamma-ray spectrometer, television cameras and a balsa-wood
capsule containing a seismometer that was intended to roll off
the spacecraft on impact, open up and measure moonquakes.  This
series, at least, got off the ground.

     "Ranger 3 made the first observation of the celestial gamma
ray flux, radiation similar to but more penetrating than X-rays,
which opened up a new portion of the electromagnetic spectrum to
astronomical observation," Metzger said.

     "And Ranger 4, in fact, reached the backside of the moon,
although it was in a non-functional condition by that time and we
never recovered any telemetry from the craft," he continued.
"The last of that series, Ranger 5, also failed to carry out its
mission due to a failure in the power system."

     Apollo's future, by then, was being driven by another series
of spacecraft, called the Lunar Orbiters.  While they were under
development, though, the third series of Rangers, 6 through 9,
were prepared to carry high-resolution cameras to photograph in
rapid succession the lunar surface as the spacecraft headed for
their doom.  Scientists hoped that the close-up shots would
reveal boulders, slopes, debris and other surface details that
would be important to Apollo and its soft-landing precursor, Surveyor.

     Ranger's first unqualified success came on July 31, 1964,
when Ranger 7's six cameras returned 4,316 pictures of the Sea of
Clouds, Mare Nubium, 600 kilometers (372 miles) south of the
Copernicus crater.

     The photographs, shared with the world press less than 15
hours after the crash landing, assured the world that the moon's
surface was solid rather than a sea of low-density dust, as some
had feared. The photographs showed sloping hills and valleys that
could become suitable sites for the new Surveyor soft-landers
and, eventually, for humans.  Ranger 7's impact site was renamed
shortly thereafter as Mare Cognitum, the Known Sea, in honor of
all the new knowledge gained from the mission.

     Rangers 8 and 9 were launched in February and March of 1965,
respectively, and successfully impacted other regions of the
moon's equatorial zone.  Ranger 8 crashed into the southwestern
portion of Mare Tranquillitatis, less than 70 kilometers (43
miles) from where Apollo's Tranquility Base would be established
four and a half years later.  Ranger 9 smashed into the center of
a highland crater known as Alphonsus.

     In all, the Ranger project culminated in three successive,
near-perfect photographic missions, yielding more than 17,000
pictures of the moon, Metzger said.  The spacecraft resolved the
surface features of the moon up to 2,000 times better than the
best pictures taken from Earth by telescope.  The Rangers sighted
volcanoes, "dimple" craters, and found a surface deeply carpeted
with pulverized rock.  Collectively they had fulfilled their primary 
goal of proving that the moon was well within mankind's grasp.

     But by mid-1965, interest in the Rangers was waning. A
better mission to photograph the lunar surface from space had
been conceived and named Lunar Orbiter.  Meanwhile, the
scientific community was becoming eager to study geological
features of the moon's surface.  To do this, they needed in situ
sampling of lunar surface material, which could only be obtained
by a robotic lander.

     NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory debuted its next
brainchild, the Surveyor soft-landers, in May of 1966.  Between
May 30, 1966 and January 7, 1968, seven Surveyors were launched
toward the moon, five of which made successful landings and sent
back extensive data.

     The first two Surveyor landers were considered developmental
and carried no science instruments to speak of.  But Surveyor 1's
remarkable success in setting down on the lunar surface exactly
as planned electrified the scientific community and sparked
worldwide acclaim.

     Surveyors 1, 3, 5 and 6 landed on mare (bay) surfaces near
the moon's equator.  Surveyor 7 landed in the highlands just
north of Tycho's crater.  The science instruments on the
spacecraft varied somewhat from flight to flight, but included
cameras, surface samplers and soil analyzers.

     In all, the Surveyors returned nearly 88,000 high-resolution
pictures of the moon's surface and performed the first soil
analysis of the moon's ashen carpet of dust. Surveyor's alpha
scattering spectrometer soil analyzer also was able to contrast,
for the first time, highland and mare material.  The results of
these experiments were later verified with the samples returned
from the moon by the Apollo astronauts.

     On June 2, 1966, Surveyor 3 touched down 56 kilometers (35
miles) north of the crater Flamsteed in the Ocean of Storms,
jumping twice before its control engines shut off and allowed the
landing.  The site was to be visited over two years later by the
Apollo 12 astronauts Pete Conrad and Alan Bean, when they
returned to remove Surveyor's camera, soil scoop and aluminum
struts.  The components were returned to Earth so that scientists
could study the effects of exposure to space.

     Surveyor 3 brought a new tool into use on the moon, called
the "scratcher arm."  This was a scoop mounted on a rotating arm
that could reach out about 1.5 meters (5 feet) and dig trenches,
break rocks or shove material around as a way of measuring the
hardness of the lunar surface.  Surveyor's sometimes jocular
acrobatics were appreciated, to say the least, by its audience at
the JPL mission control center in Pasadena, Calif.

     The Surveyor missions found a geologically active surface
and clear evidence of downslope motion of fine material.  The
surface material at the mare landing sites had a chemical
composition that was similar to basaltic rocks on Earth.
Highland and mare material differed in two ways: the mare
material was significantly richer in iron than the highland soil,
whereas the highland soil was significantly richer in aluminum
and calcium.  The highland soil also had a higher albedo, or
brightness, than the mare material.

     The Surveyor science team concluded that:

     1) The moon had undergone significant chemical
differentiation during its history, and its surface had been
subjected to basaltic lava flows;

     2) The surface material was continually being churned and
pulverized by meteorite impacts, with the depth of each layer
depending on the age of the surface.  The pulverized material had
been swept down along slopes, like landslides on Earth;

     3) Some process, at the time unknown, had lightened the
optical surface of the moon and darkened buried material;

     4) Mare areas were surprisingly similar and offered numerous
safe landing zones for future lunar missions.

     While the Surveyor missions were under way, so too were the
Lunar Orbiter missions, managed by NASA's Langley Research Center
in Hampton, Va.  The Lunar Orbiter series evolved out of the
Surveyor orbiters that were originally going to accompany the
Surveyor landers but which never materialized.

     The spacecraft was a new class of lightweight orbiter
requiring a less powerful Atlas-Agena launch combination.  Lunar
Orbiter's five successful photographic missions covered almost
all of the moon's surface and blazed the trail for locating
smooth landing sites for the Apollo missions.

     Lunar Orbiter 1 was launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla., on
Aug. 10, 1966, to investigate promising Apollo landing sites on
the south side of the moon's equator.  Lunar Orbiter 2, launched
on Nov. 6, 1966, investigated possible landing sites north of the
lunar equator.  The Apollo program defined a zone 30 degrees
north and south of the equator as accessible for the Apollo
landing sites, based primarily on the capability of the Saturn V
launch vehicles.

     Orbiters 3, 4 and 5 followed, culminating in the
identification of  32 prime Apollo landing sites located in 11
regions along the Apollo equatorial zone of the moon.

     By early 1968, the U.S. space program was ready to send its
first team of astronauts to the moon.  Following in the footsteps
of Lunar Orbiter 4, Orbiter 5 was deliberately crashed on Jan.
31, 1968, to clear the lunar airways for the flights of Apollo.

                             #####

6/29/94 DEA #9434

From:	US4RMC::"Admin@ccmail.Jpl.Nasa.Gov" "MAIL-11 Daemon"  8-JUL-1994 
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	JPL/Lab's DSN supported Apollo

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011

Contact: Diane Ainsworth

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                               June 30, 1994

The Legacy of Apollo: Second in a two-part series

NASA/JPL DEEP SPACE NETWORK BRINGS MOON WALK TO TELEVISION

     In a remote corner of the wind-swept Mojave Desert,  JPL's
64-meter (210-foot) antenna dish was pointed at the sky on July
20, 1969 -- along with a network of communications antennas in
the U.S., Australia and across the Pacific -- as Apollo astronaut
Neil Armstrong lowered his foot onto the ashen surface of the moon.

     Armstrong was not sure how far his foot would sink into the
powdery material or how well his thermally controlled spacesuit
would shield him from the 82-degree Celsius (180-degree
Fahrenheit) heat of the lunar day.  His heart beat, monitored via
this 64-meter guardian of the worldwide Deep Space Network, raced
from its normal 77 beats per minute to 168.

     Without this vital communications link at Goldstone, Calif.,
and at facilities around the globe that were providing
communications during the Apollo 11 lunar landing, high
resolution televised coverage of Armstrong's first steps on the
moon -- perhaps the greatest shared adventure in all of human
history -- would not have been possible.

     "In those days, the moon was a very long way away, and
communicating with the Apollo astronauts was no easy feat," said
Raymond Amorose, manager of the JPL Telecommunications and Data
Acquisition Operations Office, which manages the day-to-day
operations of NASA's worldwide network of deep space
communications complexes.

     "The communications stations at Goldstone and Honeysuckle
Creek, Australia, made it possible for all Americans, in fact, for 
the world, to watch the most historic moment of the space program."

     JPL's experience in communicating with unmanned lunar
spacecraft was well under way when then-President John F. Kennedy
issued his challenge to the nation in May of 1961 to put
astronauts on the moon and return them safely to Earth before the
end of the decade.

     The first of these projects was JPL's Ranger series, which
demonstrated the accuracy and feasibility of precise radio
guidance to the moon, and the value of continuous
telecommunications between a distant spacecraft and a network of
Earth-based communications stations.

     The Ranger project was followed by the NASA Langley Research
Center's Lunar Orbiter and JPL's Surveyor projects.  All three
contributed valuable knowledge about the moon and its
environment, which laid the groundwork for many of the decisions
made in the Apollo era.

     Two of the most critical decisions during the evolution of
the Apollo network involved JPL.  These were the decision to use
the so-called "S-band" for communication with the Apollo
spacecraft and the decision to capitalize on JPL's existing deep
space communications expertise and tracking facilities.

     The S-band technology represented a major advance in
spacecraft technology, said Dr. Nicholas A. Renzetti, who
oversees science operations for the Telecommunications and Data
Acquisition Office. Signals for voice, data communications,
television and commanding were integrated into a single radio carrier.

     "In a single stroke, the many various separate transmitters,
receivers and antennas of Mercury and Gemini were consolidated,"
Renzetti said.  "The S-band meant economy and simplicity on the
spacecraft and on the ground."

     In the early 1960s, JPL was operating three deep space
complexes using 26-meter (85-foot) antennas at Goldstone,
Woomera, Australia and near Johannesburg, South Africa.

     "The locations of these deep space stations around the globe
assured communications with spacecraft by at least one facility
at all times," Amorose added.  "A ground communications facility
and  space flight operations facility, located at JPL, completed
the requirements to provide an integrated capability designed to
communicate with lunar and planetary probes in deep space."

     But with the inception of Apollo, larger antennas were
needed to maintain radio communications in the vicinity of the
moon, some 403,000 kilometers (250,000 miles) away.  In addition,
the Deep Space Network would have to maintain contact with two
vehicles and three men in each Apollo flight: the command module,
which would orbit the moon carrying one astronaut, and the lunar
module, which would land the other two astronauts on the moon and
later launch them to dock once again with the mothership.

     New antennas were added to meet the communications needs of
the Apollo program. JPL dedicated the Goldstone Pioneer 26-meter
antenna, now an historical monument, to the Apollo flights.
NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center named a newly built 26-meter
antenna Apollo.

     Additionally, new communications wings housing special
Apollo transmitting and receiving equipment, plus switching
connections, were built at the deep space communications stations
to augment the Manned Spaceflight Network facilities at
Goldstone, the Robledo complex near Madrid, Spain and the
Tidbinbilla complex near Canberra, Australia.

     The Deep Space Network 64-meter antenna at Goldstone, called
the Mars site, was later added to the Apollo network during lunar
operations for two important reasons: it would provide reception
of color television signals and a high data flow from space to
Earth during the descent of the lunar module, in case the
spacecraft's steerable S-band antenna faltered.

     During preparations for the Apollo 11 flight, though, it
became apparent that the Goldstone antenna dish would not be able
to see the lunar module during the critical walk on the moon,
said John Saxon, currently on assignment to JPL from the
Australian Deep Space Communications Complex.  The moon would be
setting on Goldstone's horizon and another facility would have to
be used, said Saxon, who was stationed at the Manned Space Flight
Network prime station at Honeysuckle Creek, Australia, during Apollo 11.

     "The schedule called for the moon walk to begin when the
spacecraft was in view from Australia, but the Manned Spaceflight
Network had only one 26-meter antenna in Australia," Saxon said.
 However, west of Sydney, at Parkes, the Australians operated a
64-meter antenna as part of their radio astronomy research
program.  By using this antenna through various microwave links,
televised coverage of the moon walk could be improved.

     NASA negotiated an agreement with the Australian government
whereby the Parkes antenna could be used to augment the Manned
Spaceflight Network for the televised portions of the moon walk.

     "As it turned out, the moon walk began early," Saxon said.
"The astronauts just wanted to get out there once they landed.
The walk was moved up by about two hours.  But the moon was low
on Goldstone's horizon, so Honeysuckle's TV link was used for
Armstrong's first steps.  Then, later, the Parkes antenna in
Australia was brought on line to provide most of the television
coverage of Armstrong and Aldrin's walk."

     The Apollo 11 lunar module carried a special transmitter
designed to beam television images of the moon to the
communications facilities. The technology, which had to operate
in the vacuum of space and in the absence of an atmosphere, was
cutting-edge at the time.  And it worked like a charm.

     Hundreds of millions of people around the world watched the
astronauts step out onto the lunar surface and followed their
activities on the barren moonscape.  Historians and broadcast
anchors alike commented that those ghostly television images were
etched indeliby in the minds of every witness to the event.

     During lunar operations, there were four sources of
communication signals: the two astronauts, the lunar module and
the command module that was orbiting the moon, Saxon said.

     "It was a complicated business, because each communications
facility was receiving all of the data streams at the same time,
from the command module, the lunar module, the astronauts'
backpacks and, in the later years, the lunar rovers," he said.

     "There were all sorts of weird and wonderful modes which
were used to communicate with the astronauts and lunar module,
and they all took a lot of simulation on the ground," he said.
"We rehearsed endlessly before every mission.  The simulations
were generally much tougher than the real thing. By the time
Apollo 11 was in progress, tracking was a pretty well-oiled machine."

     Voice communication was crucial to the Apollo landing
missions. Two-way voice communication was established using
microwave frequencies from the astronaut crews to the deep space
viewing stations and then to mission control at Houston. During
landing of the Apollo 11 module, Armstrong flew the command
module manually, explaining over the voice link to Houston that
he was searching for the best place to land.

     "I think Armstrong landed about a hundred yards from where
they had planned to land because there were a lot of boulders in
the way," said Saxon, who was monitoring the voice net at the
time. "It was a tense moment, needless to say, because Armstrong
was really down to the last 10 percent of fuel. They had about 20
seconds of fuel left and they almost ran out."

     During their brief, two-hour moon walk, Armstrong and Aldrin
planted an American flag in the fine moon sand of Tranquility
Base, talked to then-President Richard Nixon, gathered geologic
samples and set up the first two science experiments to be left
on the lunar surface.

     One of the instruments, designed by JPL scientists, measured
moonquakes, meteoroid impacts and volcanic eruptions on the lunar
surface.  The other, a JPL laser reflector array, continues to
operate today, enabling highly accurate measurements of the
moon's orbit around Earth by way of laser ranging.

     An exhibit of JPL's role in the Apollo era will be part of
Space Week activities, being sponsored in part by NASA, the week
of  July 18-22 in Washington, D.C.  The JPL exhibit will showcase
the Laboratory's robotic missions to the moon, the Deep Space
Network's role in the Apollo program and computer simulated
flights over other planets of the solar system.

                             #####

6/30/94 DEA #9435

From:	US4RMC::"lhsastro@garnet.berkeley.edu" "MAIL-11 Daemon" 11-JUL-1994 
To:	Multiple recipients of list <dome-l@gibbs.oit.unc.edu>
CC:	
Subj:	Planetarians Calendar

_____________________________________________________
PLANETARIANS' CALENDAR 

Please send any additions/corrections to 
Alan Gould  <LHSastro@garnet.berkeley.edu>

We especially need info on planetarium society conferences

An acronym legend is at the end of the calendar.
_______   _______   _______   _______   _______   _______   
_______   _______   _______   _______   _______   _______   

1994

July 10-16 IPS '94 CONFERENCE at Cocoa Beach (Mike Hutton host). 25th
anniverary of Apollo 11. The theme will be Reflections. IPS Silver
Anniversary and Apollo Silver Anniversary. Brevard Community College
sports a planetarium with Infinium and Digistar. This will also be a
60s type affair so dig out your Nehru jackets and bell- bottom pants.
We will probably spend some time at Cape Kennedy/Canaveral. It will be
like no other IPS Conference ever held! For info, call 407-631-7889,
fax 407-633-4564, or write Mike Hutton, Brevard Community College,
1519 Clearlake Rd., Cocoa, FL 32922. 

--------------------Abbreviations--------------------

AAPT: American Association of Physics Teachers
BAP:  British Association of Planetaria
GLPA: Great Lakes Planetarium Association
GPPA: Great Plains Planetarium Association
ILDA: International Laser Display Association
IPS:  Internation Planetarium Society
MAPS: Middle Atlantic Planetarium Society
NSTA: National Science Teachers Association
PPA:  Pacific Planetarium Association
RMPA: Rocky Mountain Planetarium Association
SWAP: Southwest Association of Planetariums
SEPA: Southeast Planetarium Association

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 11:10:52 -0400
% Errors-To: starman@gibbs.oit.unc.edu
% Reply-To: lhsastro@garnet.berkeley.edu
% Originator: dome-l@gibbs.oit.unc.edu
% Sender: dome-l@gibbs.oit.unc.edu
% From: lhsastro@garnet.berkeley.edu
% To: Multiple recipients of list <dome-l@gibbs.oit.unc.edu>
% Subject: Planetarians Calendar
% X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

        Moon Shot (TBS) - July 11-12 at 8 p.m. EDT

        CBS Reports - Space: The Last Frontier? - July 14 at 9 p.m. EDT
                      Examines the history and uncertain future of the 
                      U.S. space program with the help of interviews 
                      and archival footage.

        A&E's Biography - July 15, 8 p.m.  Wernher von Braun and John Glenn.

        A&E's Investigative Reports: Can We Still Trust NASA? - July 15, 
                                     9 p.m. EDT

        The Sci-Fi Channel: "25 Years on the Moon with "Buzz" Aldrin -
                            July 16, 7 p.m. EDT.  Hosted by Aldrin.

        The Discovery Channel: One Giant Leap - July 16, 8 p.m.  Interviews
                               with astronauts, their families, builders
                               of Apollo and members of the Cape Canaveral
                               ground crew.

From:	US4RMC::"n4zr@netcom.com" "Peter G. Smith" 13-JUL-1994 04:57:40.14
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	Apollo 11 Anniversary

Apollo 11 25th Anniversary Amateur Radio Special Event Station Activity

At 1627 EDT, Sunday afternoon, July 20, 1969, astronaut Neil A. Armstrong
spoke the words "Houston, Tranquility Base here.  The Eagle has landed."
At 2256 EDT, later the same day,  Armstrong stepped down from the ladder
of the Lunar Module onto the Moon's surface and spoke the words, "That's
one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind."

To commemorate that historic event twenty-five years ago next week, amateur
radio clubs and groups at NASA Headquarters and the various NASA field
centers will be on the air as "Special Event Stations", contacting amateur
radio operators around the world.

Amateur Radio clubs or groups from twelve NASA locations are currently
preparing for the 60-hour special event operating period from their
respective facilities.  Ham groups from other NASA locations may also be
on-line to participate by the time the special event period arrives.  This
is the first time so many NASA stations will be represented on the air at
one time.  Contacts with these stations during the special event period
will be confirmed on request with a certificate to commemorate man's first
steps on the Moon and the special event activity.

Details:

Event Name:
     Apollo 11 Moon Landing 25th Anniversary

Date/Time Period:
     1700Z, July 19 through 0500Z, July 22
     (1300 EDT, July 19 through 0100, July 22)

Modes:
     CW, SSB, FM, Packet, Pactor, Amtor, RTTY, SSTV, ATV, Satellites.

Frequencies:
     HF CW/SSB:  Check 11 (as in Apollo 11) kHz up from the bottom of
the General Class portion of the amateur radio bands (except 10m SSB:
28.411+ MHz).

Other Modes:
     Check modes/frequencies as indicated by the individual stations below.

QSL Information:
     A certificate is being designed to commemorate this special event
     activity, which will be individualized for each special event station.

     Domestic Stations:  Send a 9" x 12" self-addressed, stamped envelope to
     the callbook address (CBA) of the station worked or to the address
     specified by the station worked.  Attach $0.52 postage to cover
     return mailing.

     DX Stations:  Send a 9" x 12" self-addressed envelope to the
     appropriate address, with sufficient IRC's or U.S. Postage for return
     mailing of up to 1.5 oz (42.52 grams).
     Europe = $1.40US postage (3 IRC);
     Mexico = $0.63US postage (2 IRC);
     Canada = $0.55US (2 IRC).

Individual Station Specifics:
=====================

Ames Amateur Radio Club,
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
          Callsign:      K6MF
          Bands:         40-10m (excl. WARC), 2m
          Modes:         CW, SSB, FM
          Special Freqs: 145.585 MHz
          QSL Address:   AARC
               Box 73
               Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000


Dryden Amateur Radio Club,
NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA
          Callsign:      KF7GD
          Bands:         80-10m (incl WARC), 2m
          Modes:         CW, SSB
          Special Freqs: 2m SSB: 144.25 MHz; FM: 146.55 MHz
          QSL Address:   NASA DFRC
               Attn: Dryden ARC
               POB 273
               Edwards, CA  93523


Goddard Amateur Radio Club, Inc.,
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD
          Callsign:      WA3NAN
          Bands:         160-10m (incl WARC), 2m
          Modes:         CW, SSB
          Special Freqs: 2m: 146.58 FM Simplex
          QSL Address:   Callbook Address, or
               GARC
               P.O. Box 86
               Greenbelt, MD  20768-0086


Guam Contingency Landing Site Amateur Radio Group
Guam
     Callsign:      KC4YDP/KH2
     Bands:         80-10m (incl WARC)
     Modes:         CW, SSB
     Special Freqs:
     QSL Address:        NASA
               RADIO
               Kennedy Space Center, Florida  32899


NASA Headquarters Amateur Radio Group
Washington, D.C.
          Callsign:      N4ZR
          Bands:         80-10 (incl WARC)
          Modes:         CW, SSB
          Special Freqs:
          QSL Address:   CBA
               N4ZR
               2003 Sarazen Place
               Reston, VA     22091-3809


Jet Propulsion Laboratory Amateur Radio Club and
Goldstone Amateur Radio Club
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
          Callsign:      W6VIO
          Bands:         80-10 (incl WARC), 2m
          Modes:         CW, SSB, Amtor, Packet, RTTY, Pactor
          Special Freqs: SSTV: 14.230 MHz
               Packet Node/BBS (W6VIO-1):
                    144.090/223.540 MHz
               2m Repeaters (freq in MHz):
                    (W6VIO) 147.15+/224.72-
                    (WB6TZS)145.28-/223.96-/447.325-
               Satellites: AO10/13/LEOS SSB/CW
          QSL Address:   Jet Propulsion Laboratory Amateur Radio Club
               M/S 168-327
               4800 Oak Grove Dr.
               Pasadena, Ca. 91109


Johnson Space Center Amateur Radio Club
NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX
          Callsign:      W5RRR
          Bands:         80-10 (incl WARC), 2m, 70cm
          Modes:         CW, SSB, FM, Digital Modes,
               SSTV, ATV, Satellites
          Special Freqs:      2m repeaters
          QSL Address:   JSC ARC/W5RRR
               Johnson Space Center
               Houston, Texas 77058
          BBS:      (713)244-5625


Kennedy Space Center Amateur Radio Group
Kennedy Space Center, FL
          Callsign:      KC4TCV (SSB) / AD4NA (CW)
          Bands:         160-10m (incl WARC)
          Modes:         CW, SSB, Pactor, RTTY, Satellites
          Special Freqs: Packet: 145.09 MHz;
               2m Repeater 146.34/.94, 146.31/.91, 146.96/.36
          QSL Address:   NASA
               RADIO
               Kennedy Space Center, Florida  32899


NASA Lewis Amateur Radio Club (NLARC)
NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH
          Callsign:      AK8Y
          Bands:         80-10m
          Modes:         CW, SSB, RTTY, Amtor, Pactor, FM, Satellites
          Special Freqs: Repeaters: 147.195+/444.1 MHz
               RTTY: 14.080-90MHz
               Amtor/Pactor: 14.060-80MHz.
               Packet: 145.01MHz (call: AK8Y-8)
          QSL Address:   NASA Lewis Amateur Radio Club
               21000 Brookpark Rd, MS 54-6
               Cleveland, OH 44135
               Attn: Don Hilderman


Marshall Amateur Radio Club
NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL
          Callsign:      WA4NZD
          Bands:         160-6m  (incl WARC)
          Modes:         Primarily SSB
          Special Freqs: 6m: 50.130 MHz; Oscar 13, Mode B
     QSL Address:        Marshall Amateur Radio Club
               CM21X
               MSFC, AL   35812
          Phone Message: (205)544-7568


Stennis Space Center Amateur Radio Club
NASA Stennis Space Center, MS
          Callsign:      K5GY
          Bands:         40-10m (no WARC), 2m
          Modes:         CW, SSB, Novice Bands, Packet
          Special Freqs: 2m repeater: 146.70 MHz
          QSL Address:   Stennis Space Center Amateur Radio Club
               Bldg 1201
               Stennis Space Center, MS 39529


Wallops Island Amateur Radio Club
NASA Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island, VA
          Callsign:      KE3ND
          Bands:         80-10m (incl WARC)
          Modes:         CW/SSB
          Special Freqs: 2m: 147.55MHz simplex
          QSL Address:   Wallops Island ARC
               NASA Wallops Flight Facility
               Building E-134
               Wallops Island, VA  23337


White Sands Complex Amateur Radio Group
NASA White Sands Test Facility, Las Cruces, NM
          Callsign:      KF7E
          Bands:         80-10m (incl WARC)
          Modes:         CW/SSB
          Special Freqs:
          QSL Address:        KF7E
                              P.O. Box 627
                              Organ, NM 88052

--
73, Pete
N4ZR@netcom.com

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.space,rec.radio.info,sci.space.news
% Followup-To: rec.radio.amateur.space
% From: n4zr@netcom.com (Peter G. Smith)
% Subject: Apollo 11 Anniversary
% Message-Id: <n4zrCsnHsA.B3v@netcom.com>
% Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
% Date: Fri, 8 Jul 1994 20:04:57 -0600
% Approved: rec-radio-info@ve6mgs.ampr.ab.ca
% Apparently-To: usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov

From:	US4RMC::"TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu" "Late Show Top Ten List mailing list" 
        19-JUL-1994 01:23:31.28
To:	Multiple recipients of list TOP-TEN <TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu>
CC:	
Subj:	David Letterman's Top Ten List for 07/18/94

-----> Monday, July 18, 1994 <-----

========
Opening:
========

  From New York, easy on the starch, it's the Late Show with David
Letterman.  Tonight - Susan Sarandon, musical group Midnight Oil, and
Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin.  Plus Paul Shaffer and the CBS Orchestra.
And now, Michael Jackson's best man, David Letterman.

==================================================
Top Ten Rejected Neil Armstrong Moon Landing Lines
==================================================

10.  "One small step for man.  10 million frequent flyer miles for me"

 9.  "When I spit, it floats upward"

 8.  "This is the most corniest thing I've ever done"

 7.  "A special Thank You to a youngster named Dave Letterman who knit us
      the special space socks"

 6.  "Hey!  I can see Rush Limbaugh from here!"

 5.  "Are you watching Dorothy Shinbach?  Would you go to the prom with
      me now, Dorothy Shinbach?"

 4.  "I'm taking one giant leak for mankind"

 3.  "Goooaalllll!" [followed by clip of Soccer World Cup Announcer 
      screaming the same phrase]

 2.  "I'm Mr. Galakawitz.  You mean Dr. Galakawitz?  Yes I am"  [think Bud
      Light commercials]

 1.  "Aieee!  Moon Weasels!"

--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| This Late Show with David Letterman Top Ten list copyright 1994 World Wide |
| Pants. Lists are contributed by Bob Lennard and Rick Nebel.                |
|                                                                            |
| To subscribe or unsubscribe to the list send your request to               |
| listserv@tamvm1.tamu.edu. In the BODY of your message put:                 |
|    subscribe top-ten first last                                            |
| Replace first and last with your name. To unsubscribe, put:                |
|    signoff top-ten                                                         |
|                                                                            |
| If you have any questions or comments send them to top-ten@tamvm1.tamu.edu |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Date:         Mon, 18 Jul 1994 21:24:06 -0700
% Reply-To: Late Show Top Ten List mailing list <TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu>
% Sender: Late Show Top Ten List mailing list <TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu>
% From: Bob Lennard <blennard@netcom.com>
% Subject:      David Letterman's Top Ten List for 07/18/94
% To: Multiple recipients of list TOP-TEN <TOP-TEN@tamvm1.tamu.edu>

        From the Monday, July 18 edition of The Boston Globe, page 29:

        "Revisiting 'One Giant Leap': Apollo 11's Silver Anniversary"

        Talk by Jonathan McDowell.  Includes short film or video and
    telescopic observing, weather permitting.  Harvard-Smithsonian 
    Center for Astrophysics.  Thursday, July 21, 8 p.m.  Doors open
    at 7:30 p.m.  CFA, Phillips Auditorium, 60 Garden Street, 
    Cambridge, MA.  Free admission.  Telephone: 617-495-7461

Article: 2467
From: davidd@lmsmgr.lerc.nasa.gov (David DeFelice, 3-6186)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Historic Perspective of Apollo Technology
Date: 7 Jul 1994 12:57 EDT
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
 
I thought that you all might enjoy reading the original 1969 Press
Release issued by the NASA Lewis Research Center chronicling our
contributions to the Apollo mission.  There are some interesting
perspectives into the technical and programmatic issues of that era. 
I hope that you do enjoy this and remember all of those who labored to
make the vision of Apollo a reality. 
 
                  * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
 
                                     FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Release 69-36
Charles E. Kelsey
 
      CLEVELAND, Ohio, July 14 -- The Apollo program has been
described at various times by astronauts, engineers, space agency
officials and newspaper editorials as a magnificent "team effort."
Indeed, the team which is accomplishing this complex program to
explore the Moon comprises hundreds of thousands of government and
contractor employees throughout the nation. 
 
      One member of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
team, the Lewis Research Center, provided important early research as
well as subsequent direct technical support to the Apollo program. 
 
The Center's contributions included: 

      -- Pioneer research in rocket tests with liquid
hydrogen and liquid oxygen systems;

      -- Engineering studies of tanks, lines, and liquefiers
for liquid hydrogen; 

      -- Wind tunnel tests of Saturn vehicles and of the
Launch Escape Subsystem; 

      -- Studies in the Zero Gravity Research Facility for
settling propellants in fuel tanks;

      -- Technical consultation and advice in such areas as
safety, fuel cell performance, rocket engine combustion,
propellant pump design, and thrust chamber fabrication.
 
      Among the shapers of history in the early years of the space
program was Lewis' present Director, Dr. Abe Silverstein.  In 1958,
when he was Associate Director of Lewis, Dr. Silverstein was called to
Washington to help organize NASA, which was, as the Successor of
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), to be the nation's
civilian agency for meeting the challenge of space. 
 
      Within the new agency, Dr. Silverstein was appointed the
Headquarters Director of Space Flight Programs with responsibility for
developing and initiating all space missions.  Many of those missions
are going on today, others such as Ranger and Mercury have ended. 
 
      Among the many missions conceived at that time was a manned
journey to the Moon and back.  Dr. Silverstein himself named it
Apollo' after one of the most versatile of the Greek gods.  Dr.
Silverstein recalls he chose the name after perusing a book of
mythology at home one evening, early in 1960.  He thought that the
image of "Apollo riding his chariot across the Sun was appropriate to
the grand scale of the proposed program." 
 
      When did the program originate?  The idea of a lunar mission was
first officially introduced at a meeting of NASA program planners in
Nov. 1959 at Wallops Island, Va.  However between that time and
President John F. Kennedy's historic space commitment of 1961, much of
the basic mission remained to be worked out.  During this time Dr.
Silverstein chaired the committee that determined the characteristics
of the Saturn family of launch vehicles, including the use of liquid
hydrogen-oxygen propellants. 
 
      Long before Apollo was ever planned or named, the Lewis Research
Center in Cleveland was advancing the propulsion technology which
would help make the mission possible. 
 
      As early as the later part of the 1940's Lewis had begun
research on high energy liquid rocket propellants under the direction
of Dr. Walter T. Olson, now an Assistant Director of Lewis, and by
1952 this work included studies of liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen. 
 
      Initial Lewis investigations used very small thrust chambers in
the range of 100 to 1000-lbs. thrust.  Over the course of the next
decade, rocket engineers and scientists experimented with a variety of
thrust chamber designs to achieve high combustion efficiency and
smooth burning; and they measured heat transfer rates within the
thrust chamber and demonstrated how to cool the chamber and nozzle
with liquid hydrogen.  Since hydrogen, the lightest of the elements,
in its liquid state boils at -423 deg F, and the oxidizer, liquid
oxygen, is stored at -297 deg F, another major concern was how to
handle the cryogenic propellants themselves. 
 
      By 1958, as the United States entered the space business the
Lewis Research Center had tested a fully cooled, liquid
hydrogen-liquid oxygen thrust chamber at the, then large scale of
20,000 lbs. thrust. 
 
      The experience Lewis propulsion experts gained in the field of
high energy propellants later led to the development of the 15,000 lb.
liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen engine designated RL-10.  Two of these
engines power the upper stage of the Atlas-Centaur launch vehicle that
has been under Lewis management since 1962.  (Atlas- Centaur launched
the Surveyor spacecraft that landed on the moon, and the Mariner space
craft that will fly by Mars on July 31 and Aug. 5.) 
 
      Much of the same technology developed by Lewis for Centaur was
particularly applicable to the J-2 liquid hydrogen-oxygen engines of
the Saturn second stage (S-II). 
 
      Consequently a number of Lewis staff members -- men by then well
experienced in high energy propulsion systems -- were called upon by
NASA Headquarters to serve on the technical assessment teams which
recommended the contractor to build the F-l and J-2 engines.  Dr.
Silverstein chaired the Source Board which made the final selection of
the F-l contractor.  Work began on the F-l engine, the nation's
largest, in 1958 and on the J-2 in 1960. 
 
      During the course of development of these engines, Lewis
continued its technical support in the form of consultation with
NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala.  Melvin Hartmann
and Ambrose Ginsburg, Lewis fluid systems engineers, served on a
Marshall committee to review problems being experienced by the F-l
turbopump. These and other specialists served as consultants on a J-2
review committee. Among the topics discussed and of particular
interest to the Lewis men was the inducer, that component which draws
the boiling cold hydrogen into the pumps.  Previous research conducted
on this component at Lewis' Plum Brook Station near Sandusky, O.,
helped verify data of the Marshall Center that showed the inducers
would permit a desired low pressure in the fuel tank. 
 
      Lewis also assisted a Marshall task group in achieving
combustion stability in the F-l engine.  Dr. Richard Priem,
experienced in advanced rocket combustion, was one of this group
studying the "rocket screaming", a phenomenon caused by strong
resonant pressure waves and which can destroy a rocket engine in
seconds.  One other area of consultation with Marshall during the F-1
develop- ment was on fabrication of the thrust chamber.  Walter
Russell, a fabrication specialist served on the committee to review
the materials and processes for the fabrication of the furnace-brazed
thrust chamber and its jacket. 
 
      Staff members also lent their technical knowledge to other areas
of the Apollo propulsion systems.  Early studies were conducted at
Lewis on the type of storable propellants to be carried on the upper
stage of the Saturn V vehicle and on the spacecraft. 
 
      The Center's unique Zero-Gravity Facility was called upon to do
two jobs for the Apollo program.  In mid-1960, engineers used this
facility to help solve the problem of re- starting the Service
Module's propulsion system in space. Using surface tension phenomena
observed during these studies, Lewis engineers assisted in designing a
retainer for the propellant in the fuel tank.  This retainer would
keep enough propellant at the bottom of the tank to ensure that
propellant would enter the pump and re-start the engine. 
 
      The Zero-Gravity Facility was used to help solve a similar
problem in the SIVB third stage of the Saturn V for the Marshall
Center.  In flight when the SIVB engine shuts down, auxiliary
hydrogen-peroxide thrusters are turned on to settle the sloshing
propellants.  During the coast phase the propellants are maintained in
the bottom of the fuel tank by the thrust obtained when boiled off
hydrogen gas is ducted through a small thruster system.  Studies in
the Zero- G Facility were able to determine the proper size of these
various thrusters. 
 
      One of the astronaut's concerns about how weightlessness in
space might affect fuel cell performance drew helpful information from
Lewis too.  Fuel cells are carried aboard the Service Module to
provide electric power to spacecraft systems.  Consequently, Lewis
researchers investigated this area and made known to the Manned
Spacecraft Center that the condenser of the fuel cell did not depend
on gravity to operate properly.  Lewis also was asked by MSC to
determine the heat transfer characteristics of the condenser; this
information was used in a computer simulation of the spacecraft's
electrical power subsystem. 
 
      During 1967 Lewis engineers were consulting on the overall
combustion and system stability of the Lunar module ascent engine, the
critical propulsion system for the Ascent Stage which returns the
astronauts from the moon to lunar orbit.  John Wanhainen, a chemical
rocket expert, was part of a task group to overcome the high frequency
combustion instability noted in the engine.  Two other engineers,
Robert Dorsch and Leon Wenzel, ran analog computer analyses of low
frequency combustion instability characteristics. 
 
      The Center's 8 x 6-foot transonic and 10 x 10-foot supersonic
wind tunnels were used in extensive tests on models of Saturn booster
stages. The first such tests were made in the late 1950's when
engineers studied base flow and heating tests on the SIB booster, the
eight-engine first stage of the Saturn I.  The 1/45th scale model had
real, working rocket engines of 250 lbs. thrust each.  Data were taken
over a range of speeds from takeoff to Mach 3.5 and of altitudes from
sea level to 150,000 feet.  This simulation of actual flight
conditions provided valuable information on the pressure and heat
loads experienced on the base and engines' compartment of the SI
vehicle.  By varying the size and location of flow deflectors and
shroud air scoops-- devices to channel the air to best
advantage--engineers were able to minimize the pressure and heating
loads.  Another study on the SI helped optimize vehicle flight
stability and air pressure distribution. 
 
      In the 1964-1966 period base flow and heating also were studied
in both wind tunnels for the SI C first stage of the Saturn V.  Also,
the force required to move the engine nozzles for directional control
had to be measured.  These measurements helped determine the size of
the actuators required to gimbal the engines.  In all manned missions,
safety of the public, the astronauts, and the operating crew, is a
major concern to the NASA.  In case a mission must be terminated
early, one of the first options the astronauts have is to employ the
Launch Escape Vehicle and Tower which stands atop the Command Module.
This escape system propels the Command Module out and away from the
Saturn V.  During 1964 tests were made on the system in the Lewis
Research Center's 8 x 6 tunnel at the request of the Manned Spacecraft
Center.  In the tunnel, a model of the escape system attached to the
Command Module was released at various angles to determine its
stability under simulated flight conditions. 
 
      Safety was the subject that brought I. Irving Pinkel, now Lewis'
Assistant Director for Aerospace Safety, to serve as a consultant to
the Apollo 204 Review Board.  In that capacity and as a member of the
team which investigated the causes of the spacecraft fire which took
the lives of three astronauts early in 1967, Pinkel helped to
recommend changes in the capsule to prevent a future tragedy. 
 
      Through extensive consulting on fracture mechanics, Lewis
professionals have assisted in improving both the more than 140
pressure vessels of the Saturn V, and the SII fuel tank.  Particular
contributions by Lewis materials scientists to the construction of
pressure vessels included improved test methods, and methods of design
and analyses used on new concepts in fracture mechanics technology.
Other materials scientists and engineers provided fracture research
data on the critical weldments of the SII fuel and on the tank
material itself; they also recommended cryogenic proof tests, and
suggested flight conditions to reduce wind loads on the vehicle. 
 
      Thus, Lewis scientists and engineers, like thousands of others
who have served the Apollo team, have their hopes riding high with
Apollo 11. 
 
                           #
 
***************************************************************************
David M. DeFelice - NASA Lewis Research Center - Community Relations Office
(216) 433-6186            Cleveland, Ohio       davidd@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov
___________________________________________________________________________
 
    "Why can't life be menu driven or at least have an 'undo' feature?"
***************************************************************************


Article: 2465
From: gregb@everest.den.mmc.com (gregb)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Apollo Capsule Locations
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 14:41:09 GMT
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics, Denver
 
Some of this may be a little dated, but try this list:
 
Apollo Capsules
 
Capsule number, mission number, launch vehicle & number, capsule location
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apollo 1 (AS-204), NASA Langley (storage), Hampton VA
Apollo 2, Kansas Cosmosphere, Hutchinson KA
Apollo 4, North Carolina Museum of Life & Science, Durham NC
Apollo 6, Fernbank Science Center, Atlanta GA
Apollo 7 (AS-205), Saturn IB (SA-205), National Museum Science, Ottawa, Canada
Apollo 8 (AS-503), Saturn V (SA-503), Museum of Science & Industry, Chicago
Apollo 9 (AS-504), Saturn V (SA-504), Norwegian Technical Museum, Oslo
Apollo 10 (AS-505), Saturn V (SA-505), Science Museum, London
Apollo 11 (AS-506), Saturn V (SA-506), NASM
Apollo 12 (AS-507), Saturn V (SA-507), Virginia Air & Space Center, Hampton VA
Apollo 13 (AS-508), Saturn V (SA-508), Musee de l'Air, Le Bourget, France
Apollo 14 (AS-509), Saturn V (SA-509), LA County Museum, Los Angeles CA
Apollo 15 (AS-510), Saturn V (SA-510), USAF Museum, Dayton OH
Apollo 16 (AS-511), Saturn V (SA-511), Space and Rocket Center, Huntsville AL
Apollo 17 CSM-114 (AS-512), Saturn V (SA-512), NASA JSC, Houston
CSM-115 (Not flown)
Skylab 1B, NASM
Skylab ?, Scrapyard near KSC
Skylab 1 (AS-513), Saturn V (SA-???)
Skylab 2 CSM-116 (AS-206), Saturn IB (SA-206), Naval Aviation Museum, Pensacola
Skylab 3 CSM-117 (AS-207), Saturn IB (SA-207), NASA Ames, Mountain View CA
Skylab 4 CSM-118 (AS-208), Saturn IB (SA-208), NASA Lewis Research Center OH
CSM-119 (AS-209), Unflown "Rescue Mission"
ASTP CSM-111 (was Apollo 18) (AS-210), Saturn IB (SA-210), NASA KSC
ASTP 1B, NASM
 
Apollo Landers
 
Lander number, mission number, launch vehicle & number, lander location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LTA-1, Cradle of Aviation Museum, Garden City NY
TM-3, Scrapyard near KSC
LM-2, NASM
LTA-3, NASA Alabama Space & Rocket Center, Huntsville AL
LTA-8, NASA JSC
LM-1,
LM-3,
LM-4,
LM-5,
LM-6,
LM-7,
LM-8,
LM-9, NASA KSC
LM-10,
LM-11,
LM-12,
LM-13 (for Apollo 18), Cradle of Aviation Museum, Garden City NY
LM-14 (for Apollo 19), Franklin Institute, Philadelphia PA
 
Apollo 10
    LM and Lander       Unknown          (Crash)
Apollo 11
    Lander      0.69N, 23.81E (Landing)
    LM..........Unknown          (Crash)
Apollo 12
    Lander      3.20N, 23.34W (Landing)
    LM.......... 3.94S, 21.20W (Impact)
Apollo 13
    SIVB........ 2.75S, 27.86W (Impact)
Apollo 14
    SIVB........ 8.09S, 26.02W (Impact)
    Lander      3.66S, 17.46W (Landing)
    LM.......... 3.42S, 19.67W (Impact)
Apollo 15
    SIVB........ 1.51N, 11.81W (Impact)
    Lander      26.10N,  3.65E (Landing)
    LM..........26.36N,  0.25W (Impact)
    F&P SubSat..Unknown          (Crash)
Apollo 16
    SIVB........  1.3N 10.7, 23.8W 10.2 (Impact)
    Lander      8.60S, 15.51E (Landing)
    LM..........Unknown          (Crash)
    F&P Subsat.. 10.2N,   112E (Impact)
Apollo 17
    SIVB........ 4.21S, 12.31W (Impact)
    Lander      20.16N, 30.76E (Landing)
    LM..........19.96N, 30.50E (Impact)
 
Apollo Rovers
 
Rover number, mission number, launch vehicle & number, rover location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
, NASM
 
ACRONYMS
 
ASTP - Apollo Soyuz Test Project
JPL - Jet Propulsion Labratory, Pasadena CA
JSC - Johnson Space Flight Center, Houston TX
KSC - Kennedy Space Center, Titusville FL
WPAFB - Wright Patrick AFB
NASM - Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum, Washington DC
 
--
 
REFERENCES
 
"Spaceworld", October 1985
 
Thanks to:
	David DeFelice (davidd@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov)
	T. Hancock (hancock@kiwi.msfc.nasa.gov)
	Dave Sharp (dsharp@netcom.com)
	David DeFelice (davidd@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov)
	Bob Cmar (bcmar@panix.com)
	Tom Frieling (tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu)
	Eric Jones (honais@vega.lanl.gov)
	tim harincar (soc1070@vx.cis.umn.edu)
	Hartmut Frommert (phfrom@nyx.uni-konstanz.de)
	Mike "Gator" Whaley (whaley@hibiscus.gatech.edu)
	Ross Finlayson (finlayson@cs.stanford.edu, finlayson@eng.sun.com)
	Curtis W. Roelle (dg651@cleveland.Freenet.Edu)
	Sarah R. Yoffa (yoffa@ecs.umass.edu, sarahr.yoffa@bbs.oil.unc.edu)
 

From:	DECPA::"Admin@ccmail.Jpl.Nasa.Gov" "MAIL-11 Daemon" 22-JUL-1994 
To:	usenet-space-news@arc.nasa.gov
CC:	
Subj:	JPL/Lunar laser ranging experiment

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
PASADENA, CALIF. 91109. TELEPHONE (818) 354-5011

Contact: Diane Ainsworth

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                        July 21, 1994

     During their brief moon walk 25 years ago, the Apollo 11
astronauts deployed a variety of scientific experiments, including a
reflector array left in the fine powder of the Sea of Tranquility that
continues to measure the moon's orbit around Earth to unprecedented
accuracy. 

     Scientists who analyze data from the Lunar Laser Ranging
Experiment have reported some watershed results from these long-term
experiments, said Jet Propulsion Laboratory team investigator Dr. Jean
Dickey.  The team's findings appear in this week's issue of Science
magazine, which commemorates the silver anniversary of the Apollo 11
lunar landing. 

     "Using the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment, we have been able to
improve, by orders of magnitude, measurements of the moon's rotation,"
Dickey said.  "We also have strong evidence that the moon has a liquid
core, and laser ranging has allowed us to determine with great accuracy 
the rate at which the moon is gradually receding from the Earth." 

     The laser ranging retroreflector was positioned on the moon in
1969 by the Apollo 11 astronauts so that it would point toward Earth
and be able to reflect pulses of laser light fired from the ground. 
By beaming laser pulses at the reflector, scientists have been able to
determine the round- trip travel time of a laser pulse and provide the
distance between these two bodies at any given time down to an
accuracy of about 3 centimeters (about 1 inch). 

     The laser reflector consists of 100 fused silica half- cubes,
called corner cubes, mounted in a 46-centimeter (18- inch) square
aluminum panel.  Each corner cube is 3.8 centimeters (1.5 inches) in
diameter.  Corner cubes reflect a beam of light directly back toward
the point of origin and, thus, allow scientists to measure the
Earth-moon separation and study the dynamics of the Earth, the moon
and the Earth-moon system. 

     Once the laser ranging experiments began to yield valuable
results, more reflectors were left on the moon.  A reflector identical
to the Apollo 11 mission reflector was left by the Apollo 14 crew, and
a larger reflector using 300 corner cubes was placed on the moon by
the Apollo 15 astronauts.  French-built reflectors were also left on
the moon by the unmanned Russian Lunakhod 2 mission. 

     Several observatories have regularly ranged the moon with these
reflectors: one is located at McDonald Observatory near Fort Davis,
Texas; another is located atop the extinct Haleakala volcano on the
island of Maui in Hawaii; another is located in southern France near
Grasse. 

     The Lick Observatory in northern California also has been used in
the past for the lunar laser ranging experiments and ranging programs
have been carried out in Australia, Russia and Germany.  Despite the
difficulty of detecting reflected laser light from the moon, Dickey
said, more than 8,300 ranges have been measured over the last 25 years. 

     "Lunar ranging involves sending a laser beam through an optical
telescope," Dickey said.  "The beam enters the telescope where the eye
piece would be, and the transmitted beam is expanded to become the
diameter of the main mirror, then bounced off the surface toward the
reflector on the moon." 

     The reflectors are too small to be seen from Earth, so even when
the beam is precisely aligned in the telescope, actually hitting a
lunar retroreflector array is technically challenging.  At the moon's
surface the beam is roughly four miles wide.  Scientists liken the
task of aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime two
miles away. 

     Once the laser beam hits a reflector, scientists at the ranging
observatories use extremely sensitive filtering and amplification
equipment to detect the return signal, which is far too weak to be
seen with the human eye.  Even under good atmospheric viewing
conditions, only one photon -- the fundamental particle of light --
will be received every few seconds. 

     The range accuracy of these reflectors has been improved over the
lifetime of the lunar laser ranging experiments, the team noted in
Science. While the earliest ranges had accuracies of several meters
(or several yards), continuing improvements in the lasers and the
detection electronics have led to recent measurements that are
accurate to about 3 centimeters (about 1 inch). 

     From the ranging experiments, scientists know that the average
distance between the centers of the Earth and the moon is 385,000
kilometers (239,000 miles), showing that modern lunar ranges have
relative accuracies of better than one part in 10 billion. 

     "This level of accuracy represents one of the most precise
distance measurements ever made," Dickey said.  "The degree of
accuracy is equivalent to determining the distance between Los Angeles
and New York to one fiftieth of an inch." 

     Laser ranging has also made possible a wealth of new information
about the dynamics and structure of the moon. Among many new
observations, scientists now believe that the moon may harbor a liquid
core.  The theory has been proposed from data  on the moon's rate of
rotation and very slight bobbing motions caused by gravitational
forces from the sun and Earth. 

     Other recent findings from the laser ranging experiments include:

     -- Verification of Einstein's theory of relativity, which states
that all bodies fall with the same acceleration regardless of their mass. 

     -- The length of an Earth day has distinct small-scale
variations, changing by about one thousandth of a second over the
course of a year.  These changes are caused by the atmosphere, tides
and the Earth's core. 

     -- Precise positions of the laser ranging observatories on Earth
are slowly drifting as the crustal plates on Earth drift.  The observatory 
on Maui is seen to be drifting away from the observatory in Texas. 

     -- Ocean tides on Earth have a direct influence on the moon's
orbit.  Measurements show that the moon is receding from Earth at a
rate of about 3.8 centimeters (1.5 inches) per year. 

     -- Lunar ranging has greatly improved scientists' knowledge of
the moon's orbit, enough to permit accurate analyses of solar eclipses
as far back as 1400 BC. 

     Continued improvements in range determinations and the need for
monitoring the details of the Earth's rotation will keep the lunar
reflector experiments in service for years to come, Dickey stated in
her article. 

     "For the immediate future, we have under way the implementation
of dramatically increased station computing power, offset guiding
capability and hands-off auto guiding," she reported. "The benefits
from these improvements will not only be an increased number of normal
points spread over significantly more of the lunar phase, but also a
significantly increased number of photons within a given normal range.

     "Farther down the road, we foresee the availability of more
precise and more efficient photon detectors, such as micro-channel
plates, significantly improved timing systems and shorter-pulse, more
powerful lasers," she added. "This will increase data, provide higher
accuracy ranging and improve sensitivity to lunar signatures, or
conditions brought about by the phases of the moon." 

     At JPL the lunar ranging analysis is carried out by JPL
scientists Drs. Jean Dickey, James G. Williams, X X Newhall and
Charles F. Yoder.  The work is sponsored jointly by the Astrophysics
Division of  NASA's Office of Space Science and the Solid Earth Science 
Branch of NASA's Mission to Planet Earth Office, Washington, D.C. 

     Additional work is done at the Joint Institute for Laboratory
Astrophysics at the University of Colorado at Boulder; at the University 
of Texas in Austin; and at Observatoire de la Cote d'Azur, Grasse, France. 

                          #####

7/22/94 DEA
#9441

Article: 20961
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Apollo in IEEE Spectrum magazine
Sender: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 1994 13:43:26 GMT
 
There is a terriffc article dealing with Apollo in the IEEE Spectrum
magazine (July 1994, Vol 31, No 7).  Of all the magazines that I've
picked up this month dealing with the 25th anniversary, this is by far
the most interesting and informative.  Being in an IEEE publication,
it's geared towards the engineering crowd, so it's filled with
interesting little facts about the Apollo hardware (and all that
computer equipment that everyone keeps talking about!)  As a solid and
lengthy 13 page article, it beats the pants off of "gee, I was in the
kitchen making a BLT when the landing occurred..." stories of the type
likely to be found in "Time". 
 
Here's a few of the interesting bits contained in it:
 
- sidebars dealing with Ernst Stuhlinger, Norman Seras, John Houbolt,
  and Tom Kelly.
 
- diagrams of the proposed Soviet Lunova Orbitalny Korobly lander
 
- software sample rates for all control inputs (it sampled the two 
  attitude hand controllers every 0.00125 sec!), details of LM landing
  gear design, fuel cell performance, and inertial measurement units 
 
- an excellent list of Apollo reference books.
 
The article lists a couple of books that I was wondering if anyone had
seen yet:
 
"Blueprint for Space", edited by Frederick Ordway III and Randy
Lieberman (Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C., 1992)      
 
"Wernher von Braun, Crusader for Space", by Ernst Stuhlinger and
Frederick Ordway III (Krieger, Malabar, Fla., 1994)
  
"Blueprint" is described as "various authors discuss aspects of turning
space flight from dream into reality".  Sounds very interesting.
 
-- 
--------------
Gary Schroeder  		
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov        
Brookhaven National Laboratory 

Article: 21018
From: tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu (Thomas J. Frieling)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Apollo in IEEE Spectrum magazine
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 1994 23:56:07
Organization: Bainbridge College
 
In article <1994Jul15.134326.27853@bnlux1.bnl.gov>
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder) writes: 

>From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
>Subject: Apollo in IEEE Spectrum magazine
>Date: Fri, 15 Jul 1994 13:43:26 GMT
>The article lists a couple of books that I was wondering if anyone had
>seen yet:
 
>"Blueprint for Space", edited by Frederick Ordway III and Randy
>Lieberman (Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C., 1992)      
 
Yes I reviewed this title when it came out a couple of years ago. It is
kind of a pre-history of space exploration. It is the companion book
to a travelling exhibit of the same name. I believe it is currently in
Virginia at the museum associated with Langley. It's handsomely done
and I recommend it. 
 
>"Wernher von Braun, Crusader for Space", by Ernst Stuhlinger and
 
Don't know this one. 

Article: 20734
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: gmarfoe@eng.auburn.edu (Gerald G. Marfoe)
Subject: "For All Mankind" CD/VHS/LaserDisc info
Sender: usenet@mail.auburn.edu (Usenet Administrator)
Organization: Auburn University Engineering
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 1994 08:36:26 GMT
 
If anyone else has seen the Al Reinart documentary "For All Mankind",
containing some of the most memorable footage from the more than
six million feet of film shot during the Apollo program, and also really 
liked the music, I thought the following information on the soundtracks
and the video/laserdisc might be helpful.
 
I was surprised to find out that "Apollo: Atmospheres & Soundtracks"
by Brian Eno, Roger Eno and Daniel Lanois didn't contain all the music
featured in the movie. "Music for Films Volume III" is the other CD 
which contains tracks from the movie "For All Mankind" (and others),
by artists other than Brian Eno and Roger Eno. 
 
Two tracks from "Music For Films Volume III" that were prominently
featured in "For All Mankind" were "Quixote" by Roger Eno (heard during
the sequence when the Command/Service Module was gracefully maneuvering
to dock with the Lunar Excursion Module); and a piece called 
"For Her Atoms", which was the very first "atmosphere" heard in the
film, when the floodlights were being turned on at the launch pad, 
illuminating the massive Saturn V, and the astronauts were going up
in the elevator to the gantry. That piece is by a couple of Russian
musicians - Misha Mahlin and Lydia Kavina. Ironically, their music was
used in a film about how the U.S. got to the Moon first! Another track
from "Music For Films Volume III" that may have been in "For All Mankind"
is Brian Eno's "Theme From Creation".
 
I'm not associated with Bose Music Express, but I'm posting this info
just in case anyone wants to know of a source for obtaining these
two CDs by mail or phone-order. "Apollo: Atmospheres & Soundtracks"
is $9.98 on cassete or $15.98 for the CD, while "Music For Films
Volume III" is available on CD only, for $15.98. Bose charges $4.45
for shipping and handling for orders up to $60. One caveat - they
also charge you the local sales tax in your town (on both the order
and S & H) even though it's mail-order. Their phone number is
1-800-451-2673. (Those prices were from May 1994).
 
If you want to get the documentary "For All Mankind", Bose is also
selling it as part of the National Geographic video library. It's
$19.95 on VHS and $29.95 for the laserdisc. 
 
Happy 25th Anniversary of Apollo 11 to all!
 
Gerald G. Marfoe
gmarfoe@eng.auburn.edu
 
---
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerald G. Marfoe                 |"Mirabile visu. Mirabilia/Et itur ad astra
Internet: gmarfoe@eng.auburn.edu |... Suus cuique mos. Suum cuique.../
Auburn, AL 36830-5458            |Memento, terrigena./Memento, vita brevis."
                                 |- "Afer Ventus", Enya, "Shepherd Moons"
 

Article: 65027
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy,sci.astro
From: billa@netcom.com (William Arnett)
Subject: The Sound of One Hand Clapping
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 1994 17:35:33 GMT
 
The opinion page of this morning's Wall Street Journal, in contrast to
the front page drivel about how Apollo wasn't worth the cost, prints
several brief comments by the Apollo astronauts themselves.  I was
most impressed by Buzz Adrin's remarks part of which read: 
 
Yet an eerie apathy now seems to afflict the very generations who
witnessed and were inspired by those events [the Apollo landings].
The past quarter-century has seen a withered capacity for wonder, and
a growing retreat to delusions of risk-free societies. Ironically, the
view of the whole Earth from space has given many the feeling that we
should make our pilgramages not outward to the stars but rather only
inward to the ever-demanding needs of humanity. I believe a whole
people must have the humility to nurture the Earth AND the pride to
go to Mars. Neither goal is finite; and either alone is the proverbial
sound of one hand clapping.
 
------------
That famous picture of Earth can be found at
	ftp://explorer.arc.nasa.gov/pub/SPACE/GIF/earth.gif
 
-- 
---
Bill Arnett                  billa@netcom.com             San Jose, CA

    Today's trivia question:
    
    Has any human being ever left Earth orbit?
    
    My guess is "no" because I guess that at no stage during an Apollo
    mission was the craft on a hyperbolic trajectory with respect to Earth.
    
    Anyone got some facts?

  I don't know for sure but I would guess yes. There were times when during
lunar transfer they were not in a "free return" trajectory. Theoretically if
they had not changed their trajectory they may have flown past the moon, flown
past earth, then headed out into the cosmos (or at least solar orbit). 

  Of course, we are all in solar orbit already so I guess that wouldn't be such
a big deal. 

  George 

        The following are some rather timely words written in 1970
    by author Allen Drury in his book THE THRONE OF SATURN: A NOVEL
    OF SPACE AND POLITICS, a fictional account of the first manned
    mission to the planet Mars.  Doubleday & Company, Inc., Garden 
    City, New York.  Pages 7-8.  Hardcover.  No ISBN number.

        "'The program,' they called it without other identification,
    as though after all, what other program could there be, worthy of
    men's deepest dedication and concern?

        "In that spirit they had carried America to the gates of the 
    planets - and there they had stopped.  Or if not stopped, at least
    slowed to a pace that to many of them seemed the equivalent of
    stopping, so drastically had it reduced their resources, caused the 
    inevitable attrition of many of their major talents, substituted
    for one clear-cut and shining aim a slow, methodical, inch-by-inch
    progression toward what might or might not be a valid and viable 
    triumph when it was finally achieved.

        "He [Bob Hertz] could give the President's predecessor high 
    credit for doing the best he could with the funds and the political
    climate he had to deal with, but a space station for an immediate
    goal, and Mars off in the distance at some less controversial and 
    more easily funded time, did not strike Bob Hertz as worthy of what 
    America had done in the past or equal to what she could do now if
    all her potentials were once again unleashed.  The goal of a Moon
    landing in a decade had grown out of a dismayed Executive's desperate
    search for some bauble to distract his increasingly critical countrymen
    from the disaster of his foreign policy at the Bay of Pigs, but still
    it had contained within itself the sort of inspiration that far
    transcended its initial rather hapless and forlorn motivation.  It
    proved to be one of those quick decisions, based upon desperate
    political need, which amazingly transform both those who initiate
    and those who fulfill.  The Moon, riding pure and high in the eyes
    and imaginations of mankind, imparted some of its purity to the
    program: and while (carefully shielded from public view) there had
    been impurities, uncertainties, faulty decisions, waste, incompetence
    and sheer, inexcusable stupidity in many aspects of Project Apollo,
    there had also been sufficient purity, dedication, skill, devotion
    and fine, unassailable genius at work to give the nation not only
    a triumph unsurpassed in history but a spirit of accomplishment and
    national unity sorely needed in a trying time.

        "This no Space Station MAYFLOWER, vital though it was to future
    planetary explorations, could quite provide.  Nor could a careful,
    cautious, step-by-step approach to Mars ever match that first dramatic,
    heart-lifting, mind-soaring goal of a landing on the Moon.  Perhaps
    there could only be one such leap across space capable of seizing the
    spirits of men; perhaps inevitably all else, no matter how far the
    voyagers from Earth might travel down the distant highways of the
    galaxies, could only be, in some indefinable way, anticlimax.  
    Perhaps nothing could ever again match the Moon."

Article: 4640
From: mmarshal@ix.netcom.com (matthew marshall)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: What Clinton Said for Apollo's 25th
Date: 10 Aug 1994 05:15:42 GMT
Organization: Netcom
 
There was some discussion earlier about Clinton and the Apollo 25th
anniversary, but no-one posted anything that Clinton said. So ...
herewith is what I found (Telnet to sunsite.unc.edu and login in as
SWAIS, and hunt around in the political databases for the whitehouse
papers -- or browse their gopher). 
 
I also have an electronic copy of Bush's Apollo 20th Anniversary speech 
if anyone is interested.  It makes for an interesting comparison. 
 
     Regards,

     Matthew Marshall, mmarshal@ix.netcom.com
 
 ===============================================================
 
                           THE WHITE HOUSE
  
                    Office of the Press Secretary
  
  _______________________________________________________________
  
  For Immediate Release                             July 19, 1994
  
  
  
  
               NATIONAL APOLLO ANNIVERSARY OBSERVANCE
  
                            - - - - - - -
  
          BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
  
                           A PROCLAMATION
  
  
       When John F. Kennedy called upon our Nation to join him in 
  a journey to the unknown frontier of space, Americans eagerly 
  accepted the challenge.  Propelled by the fire that President 
  Kennedy sparked in our imaginations, the pioneering scientists 
  of our country's emerging space program sent the Apollo 11 
  astronauts on the greatest adventure humankind has ever known.  
  As the first extraordinary images of the moon's surface were 
  transmitted to Earth for all to see, we began to recognize, as 
  never before, how far the human race had traveled -- and how far 
  we have yet to go.
  
       Today, more than 30 years after President Kennedy's 
  historic vision, America's gaze remains drawn to the heavens.  
  Space exploration has become an integral part of our national 
  character, capturing the spirit of optimism and adventure that 
  has defined this country from its beginnings.  
  
       On this 25th anniversary of the historic Apollo mission to 
  the moon, our tradition of bold discovery compels us to embrace 
  the opportunities of the dawning 21st century.  Although ours 
  is a very different world than that of the 1960s -- one of 
  tightening resources and expanding international competition -- 
  our determination to meet the future with courage guides us still.  
  
       By advancing a program in robotic exploration using 
  smaller, less costly spacecraft, we can further expand our 
  understanding of the origins of our solar system and of the 
  universe beyond it.  By renewing our commitment to human space 
  flight in concert with other nations, we can strengthen the 
  bonds of international friendship, while fostering the 
  technological development that holds the key to long-term 
  economic growth.  By investing in space transportation, we will 
  ensure affordable access to space for our posterity.  By 
  supporting the communications and navigational systems that have 
  maintained our Nation's security, we help to promote stability 
  around the globe.  By completing our "Mission to Planet Earth," 
  we will gain unique insight into our planet's dynamic 
  environment.  We have one chance to keep our covenant with the 
  generations to come -- safeguarding the thin blue shield that 
  sustains all of Earth's inhabitants.
  
       For when our children see tomorrow's satellite image of our 
  world from space, these are the visions we want them to see -- 
  visions of communication and cooperation, visions of permanence 
  and peace.  We must empower our young people to venture farther 
  into the limitless frontier of space.  We must encourage them 
  to recognize the vast possibilities of science and mathematics, 
  instilling in their generation the same faith in self that 
  enabled explorers of our generation to stand on the soil of 
  another world.  Today's children do not, of course, remember the 
  way the world held its breath as Neil Armstrong took his "one 
  small step."  But they do see the magic and enjoy the benefits 
  of that journey every day, from the computers they use in 
  schools to the electronic highways that connect them to friends 
  around the world.
  
       As we celebrate this important anniversary, our eyes again 
  turn to the horizon.  We look to the future of new technologies 
  that we may better provide for our people.  We look to the 
  atmospheres of distant worlds that we may better protect the 
  life's breath of our own fragile planet.  We aim toward the 
  farthest reaches of our universe that we may better understand 
  ourselves.  These are the challenges that await us.  Today, let 
  us chart a course to meet them.
  
       In recognition of our achievements, the Congress, by Senate 
  Joint Resolution 187, has designated July 16 through July 24, 
  1994, as "National Apollo Anniversary Observance," and has 
  authorized and requested the President to issue a proclamation 
  in observance of this week.
  
       NOW, THEREFORE, I, WILLIAM J. CLINTON, President of the 
  United States of America, do hereby proclaim July 16 through 
  July 24, 1994, as National Apollo Anniversary Observance to be 
  celebrated with appropriate ceremonies and activities.  I also 
  call upon the people of the United States to observe this 
  occasion by honoring the Apollo 11 mission and all of the men 
  and women who have served in our Nation's space program.
  
       IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this
  nineteenth day of July, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred 
  and ninety-four, and of the Independence of the United States of 
  America the two hundred and nineteenth.
     
  
                                     WILLIAM J. CLINTON
  

    re .143
    
    What exactly is a "free return" trajectory? My understanding is that on
    a free return trajectory, if no "retro" were fired to go into lunar orbit
    then the craft would go once around the moon and back to Earth.
    
    Flying past the moon is not the same as being gravitationally free of
    the Earth i.e. failure to go into a "free return" trajectory could
    perhaps have resulted in the craft being in an Earth orbit with an
    apogee beyond the moon's.
    
    Of course this question is not of much practical or technical significance
    but we can't really be said to have "slipped the surly bonds of gravity"
    (misquote?) until we leave Earth orbit. As for the first humans to
    leave solar orbit...sigh...I'll just dream on.

RE: <<< Note 459.146 by AUSSIE::GARSON "achtentachtig kacheltjes" >>>
    
>    Of course this question is not of much practical or technical significance
>    but we can't really be said to have "slipped the surly bonds of gravity"
>    (misquote?) until we leave Earth orbit.

No matter where you go in the universe, you will never escape the influence of
Earth's gravity. Of course the influence gets might small fairly fast, but if
you're discussing a theoretical point then anything non-zero matters.
						-- Tom

Well, once they made the lunar insertion burn they were no longer in the Earth's
gravity well. If you use the rubber sheet with marbles analogy, you can
vuisualize it. They then had to escape the Lunar gravity well to be "captured"
by the Earth's influence.

RE        <<< Note 459.146 by AUSSIE::GARSON "achtentachtig kacheltjes" >>>

>    What exactly is a "free return" trajectory? My understanding is that on
>    a free return trajectory, if no "retro" were fired to go into lunar orbit
>    then the craft would go once around the moon and back to Earth.
    
  That's the way I understood it as well. On some of the later missions they
would start out in a free return trajectory but then they would do a burn part
way out changing that trajectory to allow them to go to a site on the moon
not possible with the free return trajectory.

  One problem faced by the Apollo 13 crew was that they had done that burn
before the explosion. When they were around behind the moon they had to do
a burn with the LEM to get back safely to Earth.

  So in theory if one of the crews in one of those non free return trajectories
had not done any more burns, they may have flown past the moon, flown past
the Earth, then out into solar orbit.

  Then again, maybe not, they might have impacted the earth or moon or ended
up in a very eccentric orbit of Earth.

  George

Though it may be true, I'm not convinced that the non-free-return trajectory
gets you out of earth orbit.  I was under the impression that it put you on a
path which simply did not intersect the Earth's atmosphere (or did not intersect
at the right angle for a successful re-entry).

OTOH, if one defined "left earth orbit" to mean "travelled at greater than
escape velocity", then I would have to agree with a previous writer who said
that they left orbit as soon as they did the TLI.  It's just that the moon kept
them from going too far!

Burns

(Notice that this is a typical newsgroup/conference question format:  Ask a
question without completely defining the parameters and then argue for 2 weeks
about what the right definition is)

    >(Notice that this is a typical newsgroup/conference question format: 
    >Ask a question without completely defining the parameters and then 
    >argue for 2 weeks about what the right definition is)
    
    Exactly. Technically spaeking, once one of the Apollo crews which
    physically landed on the moon, executed their landing approach and
    landed, they were out of earth orbit. But....because they were 
    physically on another body (which happened to be orbiting the earth),
    they were still in earth orbit. So it really depends on who agrees
    with what the correct definition of earth orbit is.
    
    bob

  That's true, the term "earth orbit" is a bit of a generalization. 

  As I understand they did go past escape velocity so except for the fact that
the moon was in the way they were out of earth orbit. 

  Except for the fact that the atmosphere was in the way the "free return"
trajectory would probably have taken them out of orbit the 2nd time around. 

  To me the question is where would they have ended up on those occasions where
they had taken themselves out of the free return trajectory? In those cases
they may have been out of earth orbit even when you consider the moon and earth
because their path may have taken them away from earth if not corrected. 

  Then again, maybe not, maybe they would have hit the Earth or moon. 

  George 

I wouldn't think they'd need to reach full escape velocity, just reach an apogee
beyond the point where the moon's influence is stronger than the earth's (over
the lip of the gravity well) so they start falling moonward.

  They didn't have to but they did anyway. Using an orbit with an apogee near
the moon would have taken a lot longer. They wanted the trip to take about 3
days so they used a more hyperbolic trajectory that involved going above
escape velocity.

  George

re .147
    
>No matter where you go in the universe, you will never escape the influence of
>Earth's gravity.
    
    Yeah, I understand that.
    
    Realising that my original question was fairly ill defined, my
    interpretation of the line from the poem was not that Earth's gravity
    was no longer having an effect but that it had been overcome i.e.
    something like whether escape velocity was reached.
    
re .148
    
>Well, once they made the lunar insertion burn they were no longer in the
>Earth's gravity well. If you use the rubber sheet with marbles analogy, you
>can visualize it.
    
    Except that when I visualise it, the moon's "entire" gravity well is
    just part of the "slope" of the Earth's gravity well. I don't know
    whether that is right (within the limits of the conceptual model) though.
    
re .154
    
    Yes, thinking about it some more, that is probably right.
    
    The Hohmann (sp?) minimum energy transfer from, say, LEO to the moon's
    orbit would have been much too slow.

Article: 4807
From: tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu (Thomas J. Frieling)
Newsgroups: sci.space.policy
Subject: Lost Moon:  The Movie
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 1994 04:39:00
Organization: Bainbridge College
 
Eric Jones, who expects to be back posting his own self soon asked me
to post the following tidbit about Ron Howard's upcoming movie about
Apollo 13. 
 
Ed Harris as Gene Kranz? I can see it already.
 
From: honais@vega.lanl.gov (Eric M. Jones)
Message-Id: <9408151946.AA01720@vega.lanl.gov>
To: tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu
Subject: Lost Moon
 
Tom,
 
	Had a pleasant chat this morning with Dave Scott, the Apollo
15 Commander, who reports that he has been recruited by Jim Lovell to
help as a technical advisor on the Ron Howard film about Apollo 13. 
Dave is very impressed with what he's seen.  They want to get it right
and go so far as to offer apologies when they do have to use a little
artistic license.  For the flight segments, they are sticking as close
to the actual dialog and, when the actors have to throw a switch, want
to make sure that it's the right one and that they know what it's
going to do.  Dave was particularly struck by the attention to detail
that is going into the control room scenes.  Ed Harris is playing
Kranz and has him down to a T, brush cut, vests, mannerisms, and all! 

	Sounds promising.
 
	I am told that I'll be back into a posting mode soon... but,
in the meantime, could you pass this on for me?  Thanks. 
 
Eric
 

Article: 21680
From: pchien@ids.net
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: RE: Apollo 11 moon shots
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 94 20:22:12 GMT
Organization: IDS World Network Internet Access Service, (401)
              884-9002 GUEST [telnet ids.net] 
 
There was only one roll of film in the Hasselblad film in the
EVA camera.  I saw an original copy of the film in the house of
the person who trained the Apollo astronauts a couple of months
ago, and borrowed a second generation set from the Johnson Space
Center.  I had hoped to have a strip of photos - like a slide
show illustrating the first lunar expedition as part of an article
I did on the 25th anniversary of Apollo 11 for "Popular Mechanics".
Trouble was - most of the shots *are* pretty boring.  There are a
variety of excellent classic shots (Aldrin with the flag, Aldrin
descending from the LM, next to the LM, on the moon with Aldrin
reflected, etc.) and these do get published fairly often.  The
rest of the shots are pretty bland, so they don't get printed much.
I thought that a strip of all of the photos would be pretty
interesting - but the art director disagreed.  Later I found out
that I wasn't the first person to come up with this idea, many years
ago somebody did publish a strip of photos in a photographic magazine.
 
What's interesting is that, during the moonwalk they didn't expose
an entire film magazine!  When it came back and was developed it
turned out that there was a long unexposed section of film!  That
film was cut up into small pieces and mounted on certificates
verifying that that film had made it all of the way to the surface
of the moon and back - without getting exposed!  I've got a piece
and it's one of the most treasured pieces in my space collection.
(and no - it is not for sale or trade).
 
So I'd have to say the answer to your question is (e) all of the above.
 
Philip Chien
no sig yet
 
In Article <1994Aug15.144750.5884@il.us.swissbank.com>
andreas@black_uster (Andreas Forrer) writes:

>While reading several articles on the 25th anniversary it occured to me,  
>that you always see the same photos made on the moon by Buzz and Neil over  
>and over again. Is that, because:
>a) they only shot few pictures (given the 2.5 hours, wouldn't surprise me)
>b) only few pictures turned out nicely
>c) NASA only released few shots
>d) the newspaper/book editors lack some interest for diversity
>
>Does anybody know?
>
>Andreas
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Andreas Forrer, Swiss Bank Corp., 141. W. Jackson Blvd, Chicago
>andreas@il.us.swissbank.com
>"Stupid is as stupid does."

Article: 21682
From: brydon@dsnvx1.tulsa.dowell.slb.com (Harvey Brydon (918)250-4312)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 moon shots
Date: 16 Aug 1994 01:57:05 GMT
Organization: Schlumberger Dowell, Tulsa, Oklahoma
 
Second time this month I get to say something nice about the excellent
movie "For All Mankind".  I attended a film festival in Galveston in
March 1989, where the world debut of the movie occurred.  A number of
people including the producer, Hal Reinert, made presentations and
held Q&A sessions about the movie and of course the whole subject of
NASA and Apollo. 
 
Almost all (maybe all?) of the footage was from NASA archives.  A
major problem for them was deciding what to include and what to cut. 
NASA has a tremendous amount of film from the Apollo era, stored
mostly at Johnson Space Center ("JSC") in Clear Lake, TX.  Most of it
has never been seen on television.  A lot has only been seen by one or
two people. 
 
The original film is in cryogenic storage in some basement of a seldom
seen building at JSC.  Reinert's team had to decide on an interesting
sounding film to copy, based on boring sounding written descriptions,
then requested a particular reel of film.  The reel was requested ages
in advance, the film was pulled from the storage container, warmed up
to room temperature highly controlled over a number of days, then they
were entitled to view it, supervised, on premesis and copy on a
specially-cleared duplicator.  A similar process was involved putting
it back.  There's days and days of stuff nobody's ever seen in there,
folks... 
 
He joked that they had to obtain some sort of cosmic security
clearance to do all this. 
 
They also had a challenging time syncing the separately stored,
separately recorded sound (where applicable, eg. CAPCOM/capsule). 
 
One of my favorite lines in the movie was right at the end of the
trailer titles, where it says something like "filmed on location on
the moon". 
 
P.S.  There are 2 movies/videos with the similar name "For all
Mankind".  The excellent one I quote here is produced by Hal Reinert,
and melds together all of the Apollo missions, without identifying any
of the missions specifically or any astronauts' voices (my only
criticism of it).  All Apollo astronauts' are seen and heard at one
time or another.  It is more than one hour, less than two hours in
length. I haven't seen it available on video yet.  All voices heard
are either astronauts or mission control personnel. 
 
The second best one IMHO is actually called "Apollo 11: For All
Mankind" and deals only with Apollo 11, produced by NASA.  It is about
30 minutes.  I believe I saw a transcript of it here recently thanks
to Steven Pietrobon (at steven@spri.levels.unisa.edu.au).  It can be
ftp'd from audrey.levels.unisa.edu.au. 
_______________________________________________________________
Harvey Brydon         | Internet:   brydon@dsn.SINet.slb.com
Schlumberger Dowell   | P.O.T.S.:   (918)250-4312

Kubrick fans will note that the HAL 9000 became operational on 12-JAN-1992.

Article: 21700
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 moon shots
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 1994 13:23:33 GMT
 
This is an excellent question, and a point that has always kind of
aggravated me.  Yes, you usually only see the same few shots over and
over again (I call these the "stock" Apollo pictures).  As far as Apollo
11 is concerned, most of the photographs that were taken are fairly
dull: pics of the lunar surface, rocks, panoramas, etc., i.e. few 
photos of Neil and Buzz on the moon.  The early missions emphasized
photographing objects that were important to the science folks back on
earth.  Later missions, however, began to focus on the astronauts
themselves on the surface.  (Check out the Apollo 17 pics, Cernan and
Schmitt manage to get into the majority of them.)
 
In fact, there are zillions of interesting photos out there, it's just
that the hacks who put these little retrospectives together just go to
the "source file" drawer and draw out the same pictures over and over.
Having been collecting Apollo-related books and articles for some time
now, I sometimes think I've seen all the Apollo photos I'm ever going to
see.  Until recently, it was very rare for me to see a photo that I've
never come accross before.  But NOW, there's a WWW site at the KSC
digital science division that has all of the
Mercury/Gemini/Apollo/Skylab press release photos available for the
public.  If you have a Web browser like Mosiac, you can check them all
out.  There are roughly 100 pics for each Apollo mission, and slightly
less for Gemini/Mercury.
 
>"Stupid is as stupid does."
 
Ok, so does anyone but Forrest Gump really understand what that means?
 
-- 
--------------
Gary Schroeder  		
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov        
Brookhaven National Laboratory 
 
     "The human element is the foundation of our manned space program.
      When it's powered and running, it knows no limits.  It's
      infinitely flexible and has resilience and reliability and
      strength that no mechanical system can match.  We call that
      machinery a team and we power it with spirit."
	-- Marsha Ivins, astronaut

Article: 21692
From: dawson@utpapa.ph.utexas.edu (Doug Dawson)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: For All Mankind ( was: Apollo 11 moon shots )
Date: 17 Aug 1994 03:43:55 GMT
Organization: Physics Department, University of Texas at Austin
 
In article <32p6dh$mjj@sndsu1.sinet.slb.com>,
Harvey Brydon (918)250-4312 <brydon@dsn.SINet.slb.com> wrote:
 
>Second time this month I get to say something nice about the excellent movie
>"For All Mankind".  I attended a film festival in Galveston in March 1989,
>where the world debut of the movie occurred.  A number of people including the
>producer, Hal Reinert, made presentations and held Q&A sessions about the
>movie and of course the whole subject of NASA and Apollo.
 
   Interesting that you should mention this.  This film has been available
   on laserdisk for a few years now, available from the Voyager Company, in
   two versions, identical as far as the film itself is concerned.  The
   more expensive version includes, running the length of the film on a
   second audio track, an edited live sound recording of the Q&A sessions
   held at this festival.  Really quite fascinating.  Many other extras as
   well, e.g. a number of paintings done by Al Bean, in still frames,
   accompanied by a running audio commentary by Bean on how he came to
   paint each one.  And a bunch of other stuff of general interest on topic.
 
   This is perhaps the most treasured disk in my collection;  as well,
   apart from the extraordinary subject matter, the picture and sound are
   as first rate as transfer from 16mm to 35mm blowup to laser video will
   allow.  ( Also, it's surround encoded, but of course this was done
   later. ;-) )  Worth buying a laserdisk player to have this, IMO.
 
>Almost all (maybe all?) of the footage was from NASA archives.  A major
>problem for them was deciding what to include and what to cut.  NASA has a
>tremendous amount of film from the Apollo era, stored mostly at Johnson Space
>Center ("JSC") in Clear Lake, TX.  Most of it has never been seen on
>television.  A lot has only been seen by one or two people.
 
   Reinert describes this quite colourfully in the above audio
   commentary.
 
                                   Regards,
                                     Doug Dawson
                                     dawson@utpapa.ph.utexas.edu
 
Article: 21827
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 moon shots
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 1994 15:19:04 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1.7435.3569.0N27DAE4@dscmail.com> dennis.chien@dscmail.com
(Dennis Chien) writes: 

>I heard somewhere that Aldrin was originally picked to be first on the
>moon and Armstrong was chosen at the last minute.  I also heard that
>Aldrin "accidentally" left his camera on the moon thus leaving the only
>photographs returning being of... Aldrin from Armstrong's camera.
>Any truth?
 
No.
 
The matter of who would be first out of the LM was undecided until a few
months before launch, with various documents etc. differing.  The decision,
when it was finally made, was that Armstrong would be first -- it was almost
entirely dictated by the internal layout of the LM, which made it nearly
impossible for the right-hand man to be first out.
 
There has been one (1) (00001) recent media report that Aldrin deliberately
left his camera behind.  The well-documented fact is that there was only
one camera and Armstrong had it most of the time.  There is, in fact, one
photo of Armstrong on the surface, although it's not a very good one.
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 21842
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 moon shots
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 1994 20:05:04 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1994Aug22.191106.19735@il.us.swissbank.com>
andreas@black_uster (Andreas Forrer) writes: 

>> entirely dictated by the internal layout of the LM, which made it nearly
>> impossible for the right-hand man to be first out.
>
>This raises the question, how did they (or rather the later moonwalkers)  
>sleep in the LM. I guess even a little gravity makes it quite  
>uncomfortable to sleep upright? Did they take off their suits?
 
Armstrong and Aldrin had a fairly awkward time of it and didn't get much
sleep.  As I recall, the later crews took off their suits (which must have
been quite an operation, given the small size of the cabin) and strung
hammocks.  That sort of worked.  The Apollo-follow-on plans (never
implemented) included double-launch missions in which an unmanned LM
would make a one-way trip followed by a manned LM, and one possibility
mentioned for the payload of the "LM truck" was better living quarters.
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 21853
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Apollo 11 moon shots
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 1994 23:44:54 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
I wrote:

>>This raises the question, how did they (or rather the later moonwalkers)  
>>sleep in the LM.
>
>Armstrong and Aldrin had a fairly awkward time of it and didn't get much
>sleep.  As I recall, the later crews took off their suits (which must have
>been quite an operation, given the small size of the cabin) and strung
>hammocks...
 
Eric Jones (who's the authority on the Apollo lunar-surface activities,
but can't post right now because of software problems) filled in some
details for me.  The hammocks were provided (and used) starting with
Apollo 12, but the 12 and 14 crews slept in their suits because their
surface stay didn't seem long enough for it to be worth the trouble of
getting out of them.  This may have been a mistake; they did not get
a lot of sleep.  When the longer-stay missions started, with Apollo 15,
the crews finally got to take their suits off, and that worked much
better.
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3138
From: croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Aldrin's camera: From August Esquire
Date: 21 Aug 1994 09:55:27 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
 
Here's a section of Elizabeth Kay's piece from
the August Esquire:
 
(First a paragraph ending with the "switch" of
 who goes out the LM first. Then:)
 
   Both astronauts were given cameras, and both were supposed to
photograph each other as they leaped and frolicked around Tranquillity
Base. This they did. But then Colonel Aldrin left his camera on the
moon, so that the only photographs of an astronaut on the lunar
surface were those Armstrong took of him, an elegant revenge that
comes to mind whenever I hear the term passive-aggressive. 
 
(Earlier she wrote:)
 
  I got to know Colonel Aldrin after that. He had, back then
, a part-time job selling cars, which...
 
(in last paragraph:)
 
   Eventually, I lost track of Colonel Aldrin, though as
the years passed, I would hear about him from friends. I
heard that he had remarried. I heard that he had...
 
------------------------------------------------------------
 
Comments:
 
I've seen what looks like time-lapse 16mm frames, in a sequence,
of an Apollo 11 astronaut poking around the surface...shot from
a high angle (LM window). I assume this was shot by Aldrin or
by an automated camera. Are these blurry frames of Armstrong?
 
Back to the ESQUIRE piece. Several of you have e-mailed
me and said that only one Hasselblad was on the surface, and the
ESQUIRE piece is incorrect. I thought I'd post the intact
relevant paragraph. (I was careful to shorten this to fall within
the "fair use" provision of copyright law. As long as what
we're doing here is educational, there's even leeway to duplicate
the whole thing, but that's a side issue.)
 
So are we all still correct in asserting that the paragraph is
flat wrong? One way to settle it is to find the mission  manual.
I've seen this at some university libraries...it tells the astronauts
exactly what to do when.
 
  Chris Roth
 
(Anyone remember that pre-Apollo 11 pop song which goes something
like this:
 
Hey little girl can I carry your balloon
Hey little girl can I marry you in June
Hey little girl can I carry your balloon
I might as well be asking to be the first man on the moon
 
(Can anyone post the artist/title/year and if this made the Top Ten?)
 
As a kid, this song set me up for the coming magic of Apollo 11.
I had a sense that no one had, of course, landed YET. There was
a mystery there, I think...
 
Article: 3168
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Aldrin's camera: From August Esquire
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 1994 15:02:27 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <9408211455.AA28559@omnifest.uwm.edu>
croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth) writes: 

>   "Both astronauts were given cameras, and both were
>supposed to photograph each other as they leaped and frolicked
>around Tranquillity Base. This they did. But then Colonel Aldrin
>left his camera on the moon..."
 
I don't know where they got this idea.  Several accounts, including
the one in "Apollo Expeditions To The Moon" (NASA SP-350) and the one
in Chaikin's book (probably the best history of the actual landing
missions -- certainly the best-researched), all agree:  there was only
one camera.  And none of them mentions a camera being left on the Moon
contrary to plan. 
 
In fact, the claim that it was the *camera* that was left on the Moon
is most suspicious, because the Hasselblads used on the lunar missions
had interchangeable backs -- film magazines -- and it was the backs
that mattered.  It sounds very much like a relatively ignorant author
made up a story that sounded good to her. 
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3157
From: pchien@ids.net
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Did Aldrin leave film on moon-an error?
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 94 19:30:26 GMT
Organization: IDS World Network Internet Access Service, (401)
              884-9002 GUEST [telnet ids.net] 
 
As I stated elsewhere there was only one Lunar EVA camera during the
Apollo 11 mission.  Armstrong had it for most of the time, so it isn't
surprising that most of the photos show Aldrin.  When Aldrin had the
camera he used it for technical purposes - documentation.  So it isn't
surprising that the back of Armstrong's spacesuit is the only view of
Armstrong.  There was only one roll of film in the camera for the EVA
and it was returned to Earth.  Much of the surplus equipment which
wasn't required to be returned to Earth was jettisoned by the
astronauts before their liftoff so that may be the source of the rumor
about leaving the camera/film on the moon. 
 
Given the fact that the crew was under enormous pressure, the
existence of fancy photographs, dialog when stepping off the ladder,
and other historic items certainly weren't high on the priority list. 
 
It wasn't until the film was developed on Earth and viewed by the
astronauts in their isolation quarters that it was realized that there
were no decent views of Armstrong. 
 
Too bad they couldn't go back to the moon to shoot replacement shots! 
 
Philip Chien
no sig yet
 
In Article <CupMGq.551@zoo.toronto.edu>
henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:

>In article <9408161323.AA29839@omnifest.uwm.edu>
croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth) writes: 
>>ESQUIRE had a commentary (August issue, p. 86,
>>writer: Elizabeth Kay). The writer said that
>>Aldrin left his camera on the moon, which means
>>most of the pix taken on the surface (film pix
>>returned to earth and developed) are from
>>Armstrong's camera.
>
>It's quite true that almost all the Apollo 11 shots of an astronaut
>on the lunar surface are of Aldrin, but the explanation is even simpler
>than this one:  there *was* only one camera, and Armstrong had it for
>most of the EVA time.  Aldrin had the camera only for a couple of
>specific activities, like a series of shots of the LM for engineering
>purposes.
>
>It's been suggested that Aldrin deliberately avoided photographing
>Armstrong, but it's also possible that he's simply telling the truth when
>he says that the issue was never raised during rehearsals and there just
>wasn't time to stop and think once it was actually happening. 
>-- 
>"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
>                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3188
From: malin@esther.la.asu.edu (Mike Malin)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Aldrin's camera
Date: 22 Aug 94 19:43:13
Organization: TES Project, ASU, Tempe AZ
 
I've only sporadically followed the thread regarding what photographs
Buzz Aldrin may or may not have acquired during the Apollo 11 EVA.
Presumably someone asked him and/or others who would know and was not
satisfied with the answer, or there may be conflicting answers as
reported by journalists.  In any case, on Sunday Chris Roth wondered
what might be gleaned from the mission plan.  I reviewed my copy of
the Apollo 11 Press Kit and the Apollo 11 Flight Plan (both dated
about 2 weeks prior to launch) and found them somewhat contradictory.
The LM clearly had two Hasselblads on board, but it isn't clear that
both were taken outside.  The Flight Plan does not have both
astronauts ever taking photos at the same time: Aldrin's
non-photographic work load was quite high and Armstrong appears to
have been the designated photographer (at least by number of
photographic tasks specifically called out).  Just before Aldrin was
to take his first photos outside, Armstrong was to put his camera on
the MESA; that is where Aldrin was to go to take his first images, so
it is conceivable that the plan was for him to take the camera off the
MESA, shoot the pan and the two Quads he was assigned, and give the
camera back to Armstrong.  But the plan may in no way reflect what was
actually done. 
 
For those interested, I have OCR'd the Press Kit's description of
photographic tasks, and scanned in (in .gif format) the relevant pages
from the Flight Plan (which is in timeline form), and put them on the
MSSS WWW/Mosaic server: 
 
	http://barsoom.msss.com/http/apollo11.html
 
If the moderator of this group permits, I can also post them, but
they're of order 50 KB each. 
 
Sorry I couldn't provide more definitive info.
 
Michael C. Malin
Principal Investigator
Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter Camera

Article: 3232
From: malin@esther.la.asu.edu (Mike Malin)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Aldrin/Camera/Film/Moon/etc.
Date: 25 Aug 94 20:23:08
Organization: TES Project, ASU, Tempe AZ
 
I previously avoided this thread, but posted last weekend concerning
what little I could add (see, for example, our WWW/Mosaic server
http://barsoom.msss.com/http/apollo11.html for gifs of the relevant
pages of the Apollo 11 Flight Plan).  I see that Henry Spencer, among
others have already responded with like comments.  However, Eric Jones
(LANL) contacted me after seeing my post and asked me to pass on the
following message:
 
	Actually, the Apollo 11 crew followed the photo plan quite
	well and Buzz did, indeed take the two pans. Both contain a
	picture of Neil, unfortunately, showing only his back. Those
	pictures are AS11-40-5886 and -5916.
 
I then asked Eric if I had been correct in surmising that Aldrin and
Armstrong had handed the camera off to one another, so that there was
indeed only one Hasselblad outside (not having the benefit of reading
Andy Chaikin's book or seeing other authoritative information), and
whether there was some identifying mark in either -5886 or -5916 that
showed it was Armstrong (since all I have is the NSSDC Apollo 11 70-mm
catalog, NSSDC 70-07, which don't have the detail necessary to tell),
or that the crew said that Aldrin took the pans.
 
Eric's response sounds definitive to me:
 
	I spent three days in 1991 going through the mission,
	minute-by-minute, with Armstrong and Aldrin and lately, have
	been turning those conversations into an annotated transcript.
	It took us a while to work out the details but, indeed, Buzz
	got the camera (they only planned to take one out and that's
	what they did) from Neil to take the plus-Z pan (west), gave
	it back so that Neil could take some pictures of the plaque,
	etc. (during which time Neil took The Full-Frontal Picture of
	Buzz), then Buzz got it back to take the plus-Y (north) pan,
	then some shots of the north and east footpads and struts.
	During the first pan, Neil was packing the bulk sample and
	Buzz caught him at the MESA.  During the second pan, Neil was
	running around with the close-up stereo camera.  Once Buzz
	finished with his second pan and the footpad/strut photos, he
	gave the camera back to Neil who then had it for the remainder
	of the EVA. You really have to listen hard to the audio and
	keep a sharp eye on the video to get all of this sorted out,
	but I'm confident that we've got it now.  Regretably, there is
	nothing in either of the two pictures of Neil that say "This
	is Neil" but the indirect evidence is overwhelming.
 
Mike Malin
Principal Investigator
Mars Global Surveyor Orbiter Camera

Article: 1176
From: kjenks@sd-www.jsc.nasa.gov (Kenneth C. Jenks)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,sci.space.science
Subject: Contact with Space Aliens Illegal?
Date: 22 Aug 1994 16:50:47 GMT
Organization: NASA/JSC/SD5, Space Biomedical Research Institute
 
Over in alt.alien.visitors, James Carter (jcarter@orl.mmc.com) wrote:
: XTRA-TERRESTRIAL EXPOSURE LAW 
[...]
: On October 5, 1982, Dr. Brain [Brian?] T. Clifford of the Pentagon 
: announced at a press conference ("The Star", New York, Oct. 5, 1982) 
: that contact between U.S. citizens and extra-terrestrials or their
: vehicles is strictly illegal.
: 
: According to a law already on the books:
: 
: (Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations, adopted
: on July 16, 1969, before the Apollo moon shots), anyone guilty of
: such contact automatically becomes a wanted criminal to be jailed
: for one year and fined $5,000.  The NASA administrator is empowered
: to determine with or without a hearing that a person or object has
: been "extraterrestrially exposed" and impose an indeterminate
: quarantine under armed guard, which could not be broken even by
: court order.
 
This has enough truth in it to be interesting, but that's not really
what's going on.  I looked up that section of the Code, and I
discovered that there is indeed a section which applies.  (I'll
attach it to the end of this message for your perusal.)  The purpose
was to allow quarantine of people accidentally "contaminated" by
contact with lunar samples from the Apollo missions, but the law,
which still seems to be on the books, is broad enough to allow
quarantine of samples from any future space missions.
 
Although nobody was ever dragged into quarantine against his will
by force of this law, the law was created to do just that.  An
interesting story arose during the time when this building where
I'm sitting right now was the Lunar Receiving Laboratory for the
Apollo Program.  (http://sd-www.jsc.nasa.gov/37/lrl.html)  The LRL
was constructed to quarantine the astronauts, the lunar samples,
and even the Command Module after they all returned to the Earth.
In addition to the astronauts, a flight surgeon and several scientists
and other workers entered quarantine voluntarilly.
 
This was back in the bad old days of male-only flight crews, and
female flight surgeons were hard to find.  However, a female
laboratory worker was accidentally exposed to the lunar samples,
and she had to be quarantined, too, along with all the men.  (As
far as I know, she's still in the area; she married a long-time
NASA bureaucrat.)  As far as I know, she went along peacefully,
but the law was in place to force people who accidentally contacted
lunar materials into quarantine for the good of all mankind.
 
Back then, we didn't know that the moon is completely lifeless,
so we carefully set up a quarantine system to prevent any
living things, especially microorganisms, from contaminating
the earth.  This law is a relic from those times, but it will
still be useful for quarantining samples from Mars in the
(all-too-distant) future.
 
So contact with aliens or their spacecraft isn't illegal, but the
contactees would have to be quarantined to prevent harm to the rest
of us.  This has never been used as a weapon against people claiming
contact with UFO's and space aliens.  If contact did happen, we're
presumably the ones who would deal with this issue.  But right now,
nobody here is at all worried about it.
 
-- Ken Jenks, NASA/JSC/SD5, Space Biomedical Research Institute
      kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov  (713) 483-4368
 
     "[I swear] I will support and defend the Constitution of the
      United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I
      will bear faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this
      obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of
      evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties
      of the office on which I am about to enter.  So help me God."
 
        -- Standard Form 61, Appointment Affidavits, the oath taken
           by all new Federal employees.
 
 
1211.100 Title 14 - Aeronautics and Space
Part 1211 - Extra-terrestrial Exposure     
1211.100 - Scope
 
This part establishes: (a) NASA policy, responsibility and authority
to guard the Earth against any harmful contamination or adverse
changes in its environment resulting from personnel, spacecraft
and other property returning to the Earth after landing on or coming
within the atmospheric envelope of a celestial body; and (b) security
requirements, restrictions and safeguards that are necessary in
the interest of national security.
 
1211.101 - Applicability
 
The provisions of this part to all NASA manned and unmanned space
missions which land or come within the atmospheric envelope of a
celestial body and return to the Earth.
 
1211.102 - Definitions
 
(a) "NASA" and the "Administrator" mean, respectively the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration and the administrator of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration or his authorized
representative.
 
(b) "Extra-terrestrially exposed" means the state of condition of
any person, property, animal or other form of life or matter
whatever, who or which has:
 
(1) Touched directly or come within the atmospheric envelope or
any other celestial body; or
 
(2) Touched directly or been in close proximity to (or been exposed
indirectly to ) any person, property, animal or other form of life
or matter who or which has been extra-terrestrially exposed by
virtue of paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
 
For example, if person or thing "A" touches the surface of the
Moon, and on "A's" return to Earth, "B" touches "A" and, subsequently,
"C" touches "B", all of these - "A" through "C" inclusive - would
be extra-terrestrially exposed ("A" and "B" directly; "C" indirectly).
 
(c) "Quarantine" means the detention, examination and decontamination
of any persons, property, animal or other form of life or matter
whatever that is extra-terrestrially exposed, and includes the
apprehension or seizure of such person, property, animal or other
form of life or matter whatever.
 
(d) "Quarantine period" means a period of consecutive calendar days
as may be established in accordance with 1211.104 (a).
 
(a) Administrative actions. The Administrator or his designee..shall
in his discretion:
 
(1) Determine the beginning and duration of a quarantine period
with respect to any space mission; the quarantine period as it
applies to various life forms will be announced.
 
(2) Designate in writing quarantine officers to exercise quarantine
authority.
 
(3) Determine that a particular person, property, animal, or other
form of life or matter whatever is extra- terrestrially exposed
and quarantine such person, property, animal, or other form of life
or matter whatever. The quarantine may be based only on a determination,
with or without the benefit of a hearing, that there is probable
cause to believe that such person, property, animal or other form
of life or matter whatever is extra- terrestrially exposed.
 
(4) Determine within the United States or within vessels or vehicles
of the United States the place, boundaries, and rules of operation
of necessary quarantine stations.
 
(5) Provide for guard services by contract or otherwise, as many
be necessary, to maintain security and inviolability of quarantine
stations and quarantined persons, property, animals or other form
of life or matter whatever.
 
(6) Provide for the subsistence, health and welfare of persons
quarantined under the provisions of this part.
 
(7) Hold such hearings at such times, in such manner and for such
purposes as may be desirable or necessary under this part, including
hearings for the purpose of creating a record for use in making
any determination under this part for the purpose of reviewing any
such determination.
 
(b) (3) During any period of announced quarantine, no person shall
enter or depart from the limits of the quarantine station without
permission of the cognizant NASA officer. During such period, the
posted perimeter of a quarantine station shall be secured by armed
guard.
 
(b) (4) Any person who enters the limits of any quarantine station
during the quarantine period shall be deemed to have consented to
the quarantine of his person if it is determined that he is or has
become extra-terrestrially exposed.
 
(b) (5) At the earliest practicable time, each person who is
quarantined by NASA shall be given a reasonable opportunity to
communicate by telephone with legal counsel or other persons of
his choice.
 
1211.107 Court or other process 
 
(a) NASA officers and employees are prohibited from discharging
from the limits of a quarantine station any quarantined person,
property, animal or other form of life or matter whatever during
order or other request, order or demand an announced quarantine
period in compliance with a subpoena, show cause or any court or
other authority without the prior approval of the General Counsel
and the Administrator.
 
(b) Where approval to discharge a quarantined person, property,
animal or other form of life or matter whatever in compliance with
such a request, order or demand of any court or other authority is
not given, the person to whom it is directed shall, if possible,
appear in court or before the other authority and respectfully
state his inability to comply, relying for his action on this
 
1211.107.
 
1211.108 Violations
 
Whoever willfully violates, attempts to violate, or conspires to
violate any provision of this part or any regulation or order issued
under this part or who enters or departs from the limits of a
quarantine station in disregard of the quarantine rules or regulations
or without permission of the NASA quarantine officer shall be fined
not more that $5,000 or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.
 

Article: 1197
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science,alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Contact with Space Aliens Illegal?
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 1994 16:52:49 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <Cv3rDp.1F03@austin.ibm.com> jsummers@vnet.ibm.com writes:

>>Had there been any harmful lifeforms, the quarantine might well have
>>been useless, because as I recall, the the CM was opened after
>>splashdown and PRIOR to quarantine...
>
>This was pointed out to the folks at that time.  However, when most of
>the high level decisions are being made by politicians, you have to 
>expect a certain amount of idiocy.  The techies wanted to put the
>entire (unopened CM) in the "bag", but the politicians wanted to 
>parade the crew at every opportunity.
 
Actually, the technical issues dominated the decision.  In particular,
hoisting the still-sealed CM aboard the recovery carrier was considered
hazardous to the astronauts, with possible serious injury if it were
dropped.  (I seem to recall that this actually happened to the Apollo 10
CM.)  It was felt that any airborne organisms would probably have been
filtered out by the CSM's air-circulation system during the four-day
return trip, so the chance of the cabin air being contaminated was low
and the risks of removing the astronauts before hoisting were acceptable.
 
(There was also some feeling that the quarantine was more of a public-
relations exercise than anything else, since an organism that could
survive millennia on the surface of the Moon would be totally outside
human public-health experience anyway...  As some of the scientists
pointed out, if you wanted to design a totally effective sterilizer,
simulating lunar-surface conditions would be a good way to do it.)
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

     "The only way to make a difference in the world is to put ten
      times as much effort into everything as anyone else thinks
      is reasonable.  It doesn't leave any time for golf or cocktails,
      but it gets things done." -- Admiral Hyman G. Rickover

Article: 1219
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.science,alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Contact with Space Aliens Illegal?
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 1994 13:33:23 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <billa-2808942121410001@billa.slip.netcom.com>
billa@netcom.com (Bill Arnett) writes: 

>>...  As some of the scientists
>> pointed out, if you wanted to design a totally effective sterilizer,
>> simulating lunar-surface conditions would be a good way to do it.
>
>On the other hand there were some terrestrial microorganisms found by the
>Apollo 12 astronauts on the Surveyor 3 probe that survived over a year
>on the surface of the Moon in 1969.
 
More precisely, they were found within parts that had spent thirty months
on the lunar surface.  What is not clear, as I understand it, is whether
the bacteria were there all along, or got added accidentally after the
parts were retrieved by the Apollo 12 astronauts.  As I understand it,
there was no plan for systematic examination of the Surveyor parts for
microorganisms -- the bacteria were found more or less by accident -- and
hence there had been no systematic attempt to prevent biological 
contamination of the parts after retrieval. 
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3327
From: croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Stand Up EVA: Why not Apollo 17?
Date: 31 Aug 1994 20:57:49 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
 
I recall that during Apollos 15 and 16, just one astronaut stood up
and looked around thru the top LM hatch. Were photos taken? 
 
Why didn't Apollo 17 continue this practice? The whole EVA seemed
needlessly risky and wasteful to me, however, that's just a surface
opinion. 
 
(Maybe there's a big scientific or logistical payoff ...perhaps I
haven't tripped across it, yet.) 
 
APOLLO 13 TIDBIT
 
Just read in Borman's book that during the Apollo 13 crisis, Spiro
Agnew announced that he was going to "take charge of the rescue
efforts." He was stopped by Borman and Haldeman. 
 
It's always satisfying to find more new facts about these flights.
There's always more to discover. I just hope more participants write
books befor they expire. 
 
APOLLO 1 FIRE MOMENT
 
There's a touching, and disturbing detail about the Apollo tragedy of
1967 in Borman's book CO UNTDOWN (1989). During the investigation
stage, two investigators couldn't take the pressure. They both had
nervous breakdowns. One happened during a formal meeting about the
fire, right in front of everyone. The gentleman stood up, drew an
elaborate flow chart, and babbled incoherently. The other guy drove
his car at 100 mph on the freeway until it caught fire. 
 
More casualties of the tragedy. Thankfully, Borman did not name them.
They apparently put too much pressure on themselves, or perhaps
self-imposed guilt. 
 
Pardon my rambling. The Borman book is worth reading. Just finished
it. Skipped the airline stuff (last third). Start it from the very
beginning. 
 
By the way, someone asked about Apollo Applications possible mission.
Pete Conrad, interviewed in one of my hardcovers (can't recall which
title), said that there was talk of flying out to one of the Lagrange
points. I think he meant the two L points (one would be L5) that follow 
and trail the moon (not the ones "in front of" and "behind" the moon. 
 
The point of such a mission, I presume, would be to see what material
has collected there. I read in Clarke's THE PROMISE OF SPACE that some
astronomers have reported seeing patches of light there. True? Could
any radars image L5 (remember the asteroid recently imaged from the
ground in the past year or two?)? 
 
croth@omnifest.uwm.edu

Article: 3345
From: cook@apt.mdc.com (Layne Cook)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Gemini/Apollo guidance & navigation technology
Date: Thu,  1 Sep 1994 12:52:12 -0800
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
 
I've seen some discussion about the Apollo 12 lightning strike.  There seems 
to be some confusion about its effect on the ascent GN&C (after all, it's 
been 25 years - I myself was 10 years old at the time).
 
I asked Pete Conrad about it (I know Pete from our work together on the DC-X 
project), so here's his recollections:
 
The strike caused a loss of the Command Module inertial alignment.  It 
tumbled the gyros, and they had to re-align them on orbit with star 
sightings.  The S-IVB guidance and control module (which was flying the 
Saturn) was not significantly affected.  They noticed that the electrical 
"glitches" from the strike decreased down the length of the stack.
 
There was a manual override for the Saturn, including first stage flight.  It 
could be activated by a switch on the control panel of the CM and put FULL 
control in the pilot's hand (Pete quipped, "I coulda done a loop with it"). 
It was never used, much to everyone's relief.  Pete felt it would have 
worked, but nobody wanted to try it.  Interestingly, the lightning strike 
disabled this manual backup system, so it's a good thing the primary didn't 
fail or Pete and his crew would really have been in a pickle.
 
Anyway, I've learned some good things from this newsgroup, so I figured it 
was time I reciprocated.  At least it's fairly authentic information.
 
   .
   |
   |
  .|.
  |||
  * * MCDONNELL | Layne Cook  -  Flight Systems
 ** **  DOUGLAS | Single Stage Rocket Technology
*** ***   SPACE | 
 
Article: 3347
From: summers@austin.rscs (James Summers)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Stand Up EVA: Why not Apollo 17?
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 1994 20:25:10 GMT
Organization: IBM Austin
 
In <9409010157.AA04528@omnifest.uwm.edu>, croth@omnifest.uwm.edu
(Chris Roth) writes: 

>APOLLO 1 FIRE MOMENT
>
>There's a touching, and disturbing detail about the
>Apollo tragedy of 1967 in Borman's book CO
>UNTDOWN (1989). During the investigation stage,
>two investigators couldn't take the pressure. They
>both had nervous breakdowns. One happened during
>a formal meeting about the fire, right in front of
>everyone. The gentleman stood up, drew an elaborate
>flow chart, and babbled incoherently. The other guy
>drove his car at 100 mph on the freeway until it
>caught fire. 
 
I think my experience was typical of the "ordinary break-downs". 
After the fire, the support team in Houston replayed the tapes several 
times, with the mission controllers trying to determine what happened. 
(The ones of us in the computer complex were assisting in the tape
replay.)  After several hours, they released the support personnel and
we headed home.  I got about half way from the Mission Control Complex
to the NASA gate and got the shakes so bad I could barely drive.  They
lasted for quite some time.
 
A bunch of the guys went and got drunk out of their minds.  Not sure 
what some of them did.  Me, I went home and cried.
 
This still causes emotional stress, every time I think about it. 
Remember, kiddies, 3 of our HEROES had just died a very nasty death. 
However, they were professional to the very end.  "Houston, we have a 
fire in the spacecraft."  Simple, precise, professional!
 
Article: 3348
From: Ben_Burch@wes.mot.com (Ben Burch)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 1 fire: audio recording of tragedy
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 1994 16:08:45 GMT
Organization: Motorola, Inc.
 
In article <9408311843.AA00124@omnifest.uwm.edu>, croth@omnifest.uwm.edu
(Chris Roth) wrote:
 
> Frank Borman was part of the investigation team.
> He said that he replayed, over and over, the audio
> tape of the astronauts reacting to the fire.
 
Not an answer to your question;  I worked for a while at the Cook Electric
division of Northern Telecom.  Years ago, while it was still Cook
Research, the operation built rocket sleds, biomedical recorders, and
etc.  They built the bio recorder that was used on Apollo 1.  The older
engineers there tell the story of how the somewhat singed recorder was
read out at the factory in the wake of the fire, and of seeing the last
heartbeats played out on a strip recorder.
 
-- 
"I don't speak for Motorola; They don't speak for me."
-Ben Burch                 | Motorola Wireless Data Group:
Ben_Burch@wes.mot.com      | Makers of the Envoy(R) Personal 
                           | Wireless Communicator

Article: 13972
Newsgroups: sci.geo.geology
Subject: Re: Lunar Seismometer?
From: schweig@ceri.memphis.edu (Buddy Schweig)
Date: 7 Sep 94 09:35:19 -0500
Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
 
In article <kjnCvKLvr.3EE@netcom.com>, kjn@netcom.com (Ken Navarre) wrote:
 
> Crossposted to sci.space,  sci.geo.geology
> 
> Is the lunar seismometer that was left on the moon during the 
> Apollo 11 (?) mission still functioning? If so, who monitors it?
> -- 
> Ken       <kjn@netcom.com> 
 
I talked to Jim Dorman (dorman@ceri.memphis.edu), who is the director of
our center.  He was a member of the lunar Passive Seismic Experiment.  He
says that the seismometer on the Apollo 11 mission was an afterthought and
put together hastily.  It quit operating after about 3 weeks.  The
seismometers on the Apollo 12, 14, 15, and 16 missions were still working
(although not all components) when they were turned off in 1978.  The power
supplies may now be low enough that they might not be able to be turned
back on.  The data are archived at UT Austin and at NASA.  I hope that all
of this information is correct and that it helps.
 
-- 
Buddy Schweig
U.S. Geological Survey
Center for Earthquake Research and Information
The University of Memphis
schweig@ceri.memphis.edu

Article: 3412
From: croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Blacklisted astronauts-Apollo 7
Date: 9 Sep 1994 18:34:25 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
 
I've read so many books lately, I can't recall which one this is
from....perhaps COUNTDOWN. No, maybe the TBS book...by Slayton,
Shepard, and ghostwriters...here goes... 
 
We all know that Wally Schirra, CDR of Apollo 7, was cranky when
dealing with MC. For all I know, there are two sides to this. Debating
this is not my intent. 
 
What I DID read is that the other two astronauts were never given a
flight after Apollo 7 *because* of Wally Schirra. Fair? Unfair? My
question is: were Cunningham and Eisle supposed to do a mutiny
(against the rules, right, aren't they supposed to do what the CDR
says?) to get another flight? 
 
This seems unfair. What could Eisele and Cunningham *have done* during
the flight to have a fair shot at future appointments? 
 
(I did read that Cunningham accused Schirra of concealing early cold
symptoms before the flight...for the purpose of not giving up the
flight.  This from SCHIRRA'S SPACE, his book.) 
 
--Chris Roth

Article: 3430
From: croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Apollo 7 refusing MC orders
Date: 10 Sep 1994 22:27:16 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
 
 I read a little more about the Apollo 7 incidents. It seems to come
down to the crew simply refusing ground orders. To perform certain
actions (tests and experiments that were not in the schedule) and to
wear their helmets during reentry. 
 
What I'm after is the following: did the *entire*] crew expressly
challenge mission control, or was it *just* commander Schirra? Did
Schirra say that he was speaking on behalf of the entire crew, or that
he was speaking as the CDR? 
 
The answer to this question will shed some light on the fairness/unfairness 
of Eisele and Cunningham never getting another flight. 
 
--Chris Roth

Article: 3445
From: tomkessler@aol.com (TomKessler)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 7 refusing MC orders
Date: 12 Sep 1994 15:12:01 -0400
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
 
In article <9409110327.AA21595@omnifest.uwm.edu>, croth@omnifest.uwm.edu
(Chris Roth) writes:
 
>What I'm after is the following: did the *entire*]
>crew expressly challenge mission control, or was
>it *just* commander Schirra?
 
According to Andrew Chaikin in his book "A Man on the Moon", Schirra was
the main troublemaker, perhaps egged on by a massive head cold. But Eisele
was also difficult and insulted the flight director in flight.

Article: 3451
From: dsheldon@netcom.com (Ed Dravecky III)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Blacklisted astronauts-Apollo 7
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 02:06:10 GMT
Organization: United Space Assoc.
 
Chris Roth (croth@omnifest.uwm.edu) is alleged to have written:
(snip)

: We all know that Wally Schirra, CDR of Apollo 7,
: was cranky when dealing with MC. For all I know, there
: are two sides to this. Debating this is not my intent.
(snip)
: (I did read that Cunningham accused Schirra of concealing
: early cold symptoms before the flight...for the purpose
: of not giving up the flight. This from SCHIRRA'S SPACE,
: his book.)
 
I met Donn Eisele at Georgia Tech back in 1986. He confirmed that
Schirra refused the usual cold shot because he hates needles...and
then promptly caught a cold. He got cranky, meanwhile the other two
now-infected crew members were also getting cranky.
 
Donn said that the greatest irony was that Wally wouldn't take the
cold medicine and that *Wally* got the cold pill endorsement contract!
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Ed Dravecky III *is* :: If NASA were more commercial: "No-Doz Tranquility
 dsheldon@netcom.com  :: base here, the Eagle Brand Snacks LEM has landed"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article: 3410
From: croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: 9 Sep 1994 17:51:08 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
 
Just read Borman's COUNTDOWN. Wasn't much in there I could remember
about his illness aboard Apollo 8. 
 
Then I picked up the 1989 book APOLLO: THE RACE TO THE MOON and opened
it to the Apollo 8 section. 
 
Just when I thought I'd read everything about that magical flight, I
find the following facts... 
 
The crew (or CDR) tells the ground, cryptically, to dump the stored
audio. Someone in MC gets the hint, goes to a secluded area (away from
press?) and listens to a tape from the CSM. 
 
MC then knows that Borman had vomiting and diarrhea. This is discussed
in the context of the Van Allen belts, which no humans had previously
passed through. 
 
The big worry: was Borman's illness radiation sickness? No one else
aboard had it. This is just fascinating. Questions: 
 
1. Was this question--and the illness--successfully
   kept out of the press in 1968?
 
2. How many seconds did it take for Apollo 8 to
   enter/exit the radiation belt(s)?
 
3. How is it that some onboard speech was stored
   and not fed back live...I can understand this
   when a ship is out of radio contact...but wouldn't
   a craft in cislunar space always be in radio contact?
   
4. Did the CSM provide any partial protection from the Van Allen belts? 
 
5. I've always read that a solar storm would've been
   unfortunate during an Apollo  mission. What would
   have happened? Cancellation of landing? Orientation
   of CSM with SM towards sun? How fast would they
   die, during the mission? Or later, on the ground?
   
   How was launch timed to avoid solar storms, if this was at all possible?
 
--Chris Roth

Article: 3424
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 18:27:55 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <9409092251.AA13367@omnifest.uwm.edu>
croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth) writes: 

>1. Was this question--and the illness--successfully
>   kept out of the press in 1968?
 
Looks to me like it wasn't publicized right at the time, although it
started to come out within a year or two (which makes it hard to tell
for sure about when it *was* released). 
 
>2. How many seconds did it take for Apollo 8 to
>   enter/exit the radiation belt(s)?
 
Not a meaningful question, really:  the belts don't have sharp boundaries. 
They'd have spent perhaps an hour or two in the thicker parts. 
 
The concern about Borman was not so much because radiation sickness
was particularly plausible, but because it was thought odd that he
should get spacesick:  He hadn't been sick at all on a 14-day Gemini
mission.  It may, as Borman himself thought, have been
gastroenteritis, which had been going around the Cape not long before
launch.  Another possible contributing factor is that Borman had had
trouble getting to sleep and had taken a sleeping pill, and he was
known to have a slight unfavorable reaction to them. 
 
>3. How is it that some onboard speech was stored
>   and not fed back live...I can understand this
>   when a ship is out of radio contact...but wouldn't
>   a craft in cislunar space always be in radio contact?
 
Not necessarily.  In low-orbit flights, the Apollos weren't always
within line-of-sight of a tracking station, and of course Apollo 8 was
going to be behind the Moon at times.  In this case, they used the
tape recorder deliberately because the channel used to dump it back to
the ground was not public. 
 
>4. Did the CSM provide any partial protection from
>   the Van Allen belts?
 
Yes, the CSM was designed with radiation shielding in mind.  As in the
shuttle, the Apollo astronauts were nearly surrounded by a layer of
equipment and supplies, which provided considerable shielding. 
 
>5. I've always read that a solar storm would've been
>   unfortunate during an Apollo  mission. What would
>   have happened? Cancellation of landing? Orientation
>   of CSM with SM towards sun? How fast would they
>   die, during the mission? Or later, on the ground?
 
Cancellation of landing, certainly -- the LM had very little
shielding. Orienting the CSM wouldn't have helped very much, because
storm particles don't arrive as a steady rain from one direction, but
as a boiling cloud, with motions within the cloud much faster than the
motion of the cloud as a whole, so they come (more or less) from all
directions at once.  Whether the astronauts would die, and if so how
quickly, depends very much on what dose they got, and solar storms
vary widely in strength (in fact, truly big storms are sufficiently
rare that we don't really know the upper limit very well).  Some
fiction to the contrary, radiation sickness doesn't kill quickly
unless the dose is truly enormous, well beyond likely limits for a
solar storm.  The most probable results of an ill-timed storm would
have been cancellation of the landing, return to Earth as quickly as
possible, and substantial (non-fatal) illness developing on the way back. 
 
>   How was launch timed to avoid solar storms, if
>   this was at all possible?
 
Basically, it wasn't.  The launches were timed based on launch windows
and equipment and crew readiness, and they took their chances with
solar activity.  Predicting solar storms is still quite difficult; the
best that the solar weathermen can do is to get some idea of which
regions of the solar surface are likely to produce storms, and predict
a possible storm when one of those regions is in a favorable position.
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3437
From: prb@clark.net (Pat)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: 11 Sep 1994 22:21:09 -0400
Organization: .
 
In article <CvxFAL.Avo@zoo.toronto.edu>,
Henry Spencer <henry@zoo.toronto.edu> wrote:
 
>>   How was launch timed to avoid solar storms, if
>>   this was at all possible?
>
>Basically, it wasn't.  The launches were timed based on launch windows
>and equipment and crew readiness, and they took their chances with solar
>activity.  Predicting solar storms is still quite difficult; the best
>that the solar weathermen can do is to get some idea of which regions
>of the solar surface are likely to produce storms, and predict a possible
>storm when one of those regions is in a favorable position.
 
Oh Oh,  Henry has given an incomplete answer from the encyclopedia
which is Henry.  This one may be good for another 1/10th point into
the henry spencer correction club.
 
NASA is currently working on something called the Advanced Composition
Explorer (ACE)  which will be placed in a 1.5 million KM  orbit.
That's like way beyond lunar orbit.  So this bird will be used to
monitor and predict solar storms and flares and give an 8?
hour advanced warning so that planetary systems can be protected against
solar magnetic storms.  i imagine this is mostly communications assets
(Orbital and terrestrial),  long distance electrical transmission equipment
and perhaps high altitude aircraft.
 
pat
 
-- 
You guys just converted a Billion dollar asset into a multi-billion
dollar Liability -- Investment banker commenting on TMI Nuclear accident. 

"The meek shall inherit the Earth, the rest of us will go to the stars."

Article: 3447
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 20:32:37 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <350dul$2hs@explorer.clark.net> prb@clark.net (Pat) writes:

>>...Predicting solar storms is still quite difficult; the best
>>that the solar weathermen can do is to get some idea of which regions
>>of the solar surface are likely to produce storms...
>
>Oh Oh,  Henry has given an incomplete answer from the encyclopedia
>which is Henry.  This one may be good for another 1/10th point into
>the henry spencer correction club.
 
Sorry, Pat, no points for this one...
 
>NASA is currently working on something called the Advanced Composition
>Explorer (ACE)  which will be placed in a 1.5 million KM  orbit.
>That's like way beyond lunar orbit.  So this bird will be used to
>monitor and predict solar storms and flares and give an 8?
>hour advanced warning so that planetary systems can be protected against
>solar magnetic storms...
 
In fact, I'd venture a guess that it's not a 1.5Mkm orbit in the ordinary
sense, but probably a halo orbit around the Earth-Sun L1 point.  That's
what's been used for such purposes in the past, notably by ISEE-3.
 
However, the warning time is more like 1 hour than 8, last I heard.  The 
solar wind moves *fast*, hundreds of km/s, although admittedly not quite
straight outward.  It's enough time to be highly useful -- and the power
companies were muttering for a while about doing a commercial early-warning 
satellite, in fact, because they missed having ISEE-3 during the last solar
maximum -- but not enough to do more than batten down the hatches.
 
This isn't storm *prediction* in any realistic sense.  It's just a bit of
advance warning of imminent arrival of the storm.  It wouldn't be useful
for mission planning.
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3450
From: dickson@enuxsa.eas.asu.edu (Paul Dickson)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 00:30:51 GMT
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
 
In article <9409092251.AA13367@omnifest.uwm.edu>
croth@omnifest.uwm.edu (Chris Roth) writes: 

>Just read Borman's COUNTDOWN. Wasn't much in
>there I could remember about his illness aboard Apollo 8.
>
>Then I picked up the 1989 book APOLLO: THE RACE
>TO THE MOON and opened it to the Apollo 8 section.
...
>
>MC then knows that Borman had vomiting and diarrhea.
>This is discussed in the context of the Van Allen belts,
>which no humans had previously passed through.
>
>The big worry: was Borman's illness radiation sickness?
>No one else aboard had it. This is just fascinating.
>Questions:
>
>1. Was this question--and the illness--successfully
>   kept out of the press in 1968?
 
According to A MAN ON THE MOON, news of the illness leaked to the
press before the end of the mission.  It was described as a case of
the 24-hour Flu. 
 
>3. How is it that some onboard speech was stored
>   and not fed back live...I can understand this
>   when a ship is out of radio contact...but wouldn't
>   a craft in cislunar space always be in radio contact?
 
Only on Apollo 13 were the mics kept hot (on), and only after the
mission was aborted.
 
I'm now to the point of Apollo 14 in A MAN ON THE MOON, by Andrew
Chaikin.  So far the book has cover Apollo 1, 8, 11, 12, 13 in pretty
good detail, but only those parts sufficiently different from previous
missions.
 
The technical detail seems to be pretty good.  It is almost possible
to figure out how the LM computer works from the description of the
alarm codes during the Apollo 11 moon landing.
 
	-Paul Dickson
	 p.dickson@az05.bull.com

Article: 3456
From: tfrielin@catfish.bbc.peachnet.edu (Thomas J. Frieling)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 12:43:15
Organization: Bainbridge College
 
In article <Cw1LFG.AIA@ennews.eas.asu.edu> dickson@enuxsa.eas.asu.edu
(Paul Dickson=) writes: 
 
>According to A MAN ON THE MOON, news of the illness leaked to the press
>before the end of the mission.  It was described as a case of the
>24-hour Flu.
 
I followed the mission closely on my Christmas vacation that year and I 
recall that Borman's 'flu' was reported by the press during the mission. 

Article: 3465
From: huston@huston.mdc.com
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: RE: Apollo 8 & Van Allen Scare
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 09:43:37 PDT
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access
 
Pat <prb@clark.net> wrote:
 
>Oh Oh,  Henry has given an incomplete answer from the encyclopedia
>which is Henry.  This one may be good for another 1/10th point into
>the henry spencer correction club.
>
>NASA is currently working on something called the Advanced Composition
>Explorer (ACE)  which will be placed in a 1.5 million KM  orbit.
>That's like way beyond lunar orbit.  So this bird will be used to
>monitor and predict solar storms and flares and give an 8?
>hour advanced warning so that planetary systems can be protected against
>solar magnetic storms.  i imagine this is mostly communications assets
>(Orbital and terrestrial),  long distance electrical transmission equipment
>and perhaps high altitude aircraft.
>
>pat
 
Actually, there are two missions scheduled for halo orbits at the L1
point.  WIND is scheduled to be launched this year into a lunar swingby
orbit; it may then be inserted into a halo orbit at L1.  ACE is now to
be the last of the Delta-class Explorer missions with launch planned for
1997.  Both spacecraft will have instruments to measure magnetic fields,
plasma parameters, and energetic charged particles.  An L1 halo orbit
was previously used by ISEE-3 (now called ICE).
 
At typical solar wind speeds of 250-400 km/sec, disturbances *in the
solar wind* will reach Earth about 20 minutes to an hour after passing
L1.  These variations include solar wind pressure and the magnetic
field, which result in geomagnetic disturbances, which in turn affect
spacecraft, long-distance power transmission, etc.  For example, Hydro
Quebec lost most of their system for about 9 hours after a very strong
event in March 1989.  The same event also caused the loss of several
spacecraft.
 
Protons energetic enough to be of concern to astronauts (~10 MeV and
higher) travel a lot faster than the solar wind (> 4x10^7 m/sec, or
upwards of 1/10 the speed of light) so they can get here much faster
than solar wind disturbances.  However, they tend to propagate along the
interplanetary magnetic field lines.  If they are produced in a flare at
a point on the sun where the field line connects to the Earth, they get
here pretty much unimpeded.  If they are produced at a flare somewhere
else on the sun, they have to propagate across field lines, then along
the line connected to the Earth, so they get here more slowly, and with
reduced intensity.  Typical delay times between the peak of a solar
flare and the peak of a proton event at Earth are 4 hours to 2 days.
Unfortunately, the biggest events are well-connected, so the protons get
here faster.
 
As far as prediction, about all we can do at the moment is monitor the
sun.  If we see a big flare (say, in soft X-rays), we can say that the
probability of producing a lot of protons is high.  If the flare is
magnetically well-connected to Earth, we can say the probability of
seeing a lot of protons is higher.  However, the warning time is 4 hours
to 2 days.  We can also classify active regions on the sun and say that
one is more or less likely to result in a proton event in the next
several days.
 
A monitor at L1 would give some confirmation that an event will be big
or small, with at most a few minutes warning, and thus its utility for
radiation protection would be minimal (a monitor at, say, .3 AU would be 
more useful).  It would be very useful, however, for warning of geomagnetic 
disturbances.  In fact, the power companies have talked about building a 
dedicated spacecraft to place at L1 for this purpose.  ACE and/or WIND could 
be used for this purpose, but the problem there is getting real-time telemetry.
 
------------------------------------------------------
Stu Huston                 McDonnell Douglas Aerospace
huston@huston.mdc.com
------------------------------------------------------
"We will go to the moon... and do the other things,
not because they are easy, but because they are hard."
JFK, 1963
 
Article: 3474
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 03:02:14 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <Cw169J.267@crash.cts.com> benji@cts.com (Brad A. Pennock) writes:

>In regards to this current thread about the Van Allen belts, I have a
>question.  My 11th grade history teacher told me the charged particles
>contained in it were mainly due to the explosion of nuclear weapons in space
>conducted in the 50s and they were trapped there due to the Earth's magnetic
>field. Is this so?
 
No.  The Van Allen belts were discovered before *any* nuclear tests had
been conducted in space.  There were only a few in-space nuclear tests
before the Limited Test Ban treaty prohibited them; the ones at particularly
high altitudes did boost radiation intensities in the Van Allen belts
somewhat, but only temporarily.
 
The origin of the Van Allen belt particles is not completely understood,
and indeed it appears that there may be several different populations of
particles with different origins, but they are definitely not artificial.
Jupiter, far away from all human nuclear tests, has far more intense
Van Allen belts than Earth.
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3475
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 1994 03:09:05 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
 
In article <1994Sep13.041801.11966@sq.sq.com> msb@sq.sq.com (Mark
Brader) writes: 

>> ...  In this case, they used the tape recorder deliberately because
>> the channel used to dump it back to the ground was not public.
>
>Seriously, how exactly was that "non-public channel" implemented?
>Was it actually encrypted, or did they just not publish the frequency
>and hope nobody was listening in?  Or was it that private indivisuals
>just wouldn't have a big enough antenna to listen?
 
Listening in on low-power microwave transmissions from the Moon would be
difficult to begin with, and then you've got to pick the tape-recorder
audio dump out of all the other information carried on that single carrier.
No encryption, just formidable technical problems for eavesdroppers.  The
news media got their audio feeds from NASA.
 
>How is it done today?
 
They may actually have encryption now, since they've got encrypted-radio
capabilities as a legacy of the military shuttle missions.  In any case,
the eavesdropping problem has only gotten worse, with the complications
added by relay satellites and digital multiplexing.
-- 
"It was blasphemy that made us free."              |       Henry Spencer
                        -- Leon Wieseltler         |   henry@zoo.toronto.edu

Article: 3484
From: GLANDIS@lerc.nasa.gov (Geoffrey A. Landis)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech
Subject: Nukes in Space (was: Re: Apollo 8 & Van Allen scare)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 13:20:27 -0400
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
 
In article <Cw169J.267@crash.cts.com> benji@cts.com (Brad A. Pennock) 
writes: 

> >In regards to this current thread about the Van Allen belts, I have a 
> >question.  My 11th grade history teacher told me the charged particles 
> >contained in it were mainly due to the explosion of nuclear weapons in 
> >space conducted in the 50s and they were trapped there due to the 
> >Earth's magnetic field. Is this so?  Just curious.  Thanks for your 
> >responses. 
 
In article <RAMO.94Sep13214133@vipunen.hut.fi>, ramo@vipunen.hut.fi (Pauli 
R{m|) writes:
 
> Your history teacher is wrong. The charged particles in van Allen 
> belts come from solar wind. Nuclear weapons have (at least officially) 
> never been detonated in space, only in atmosphere and underground. 
 
Sorry, Pauli.  The electrons that the history teacher was referring to were 
real.  The event was the "Starfish" high altitude explosions above the 
Pacific in the early 60's, at an altitude of a several hundred thousand feet.  
The object of this test was to see what happend when you explode nuclear 
weapons in space. They injected a considerable amount of electrons into the 
belts, enough so that at some altitudes Starfish electrons were the dominant 
cause of radiation.  Within a few months after the Starfish test, two 
satellites failed due to radiation doses.  When I first got into the field in 
the late 70's, radiation calculation codes *still* had to include the effect 
of Starfish electrons, although by that time they were not the major 
contributor in any orbit.  By now I'm pretty sure that they've mostly all 
decayed.
 
It's not true that the electron in the Van Allen belts are "mainly" due to 
these tests, but it *is* true that nuclear bombs were exploded at high 
altitudes, and that they injected significant amounts of electrons into the 
lower belt.  It was a real dumb idea.
 
The Test Ban Treaty now forbids this (but then, not everybody has signed 
this!)
 
If I'm not mistaken, this was also the test which took down the electrical 
grid of Hawaii due to the EMP.
 
Geoffrey A. Landis
Nyma, Inc, at NASA Lewis Research Center
 

Article: 3406
From: arch2c@menudo.uh.edu (Kim B Larsen)
Newsgroups: sci.space.tech,comp.graphics.animation
Subject: Info on the Apollo 13 program on PBS - computer animation
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 14:51:40 -0500
Organization: University of Houston
 
Since returning to USA from Norway I have heard that there were lots
of people on the net asking about the computer animation in the
"Apollo 13: to the Edge and Back" airing on PBS in late July. 
 
Just wanted to inform those interested in how the piece was made.
 
The animation was done by John Cook and Kim Baumann Larsen, both
graduate architecture students in the Sasakawa International Center
for Space Architecture and assistant professor Keith Sylvester, using
the facilities of the Computer Design Center at the College of
Architecture, University of Houston. 
 
Background material such as voicetranscripts, flightplans and mission
evaluation as well as other written texts on the mission and
videotapes were studied and storyboards were made in collaboration
with WGBH/Boston. 
 
Detailed engineering drawings were obtained from both Rockwell and
Grumman for the 3D modelling of the Apollo spacecrafts. The LM, CM and
SIV-B were all modelled on IBM compatible PCs in AutoCAD rel. 12 using
the AME package. The SM was modelled on a Macitosh using Form-Z.
Background photographs from the actual Apollo 13 mission as well as
Space Shuttle images of the Earth were provided by the Lunar and
Planetary Institute, Pasadena, Houston. The 3D CAD models were
exported via DXF into Autodesk 3D Studio rel. 3 for keyframing,
animation and rendering. 
 
Special effects such as the oxygen cloud, rocket blasts and the
explosion were done using IPAS plug-in modules for 3D Studio from
Schreiber and Yost Group. 
 
A total of 37 sequences were rendered in 3D Studio on upto 5 Pentium
PCs with 32 Mb RAM and 1 Gb harddisk each. The final targa-files were
output to a professional Sony BetaCam SP taperecorder using a
frame-accurate controlcard. 
 
I hope that this fills the gaps on how the piece was done and encourage 
anybody that have interest in similar projects to get in contact. 
 
--
Kim Baumann Larsen
College of Architecture, University of Houston
arch2c@menudo.uh.edu
http://riceinfo.rice.edu/~kiml
 

    Hello,
    I'm about to order the book "Chariots for Apollo" here in Sweden.
    To do that, I need some info;
    Is the author C.G Brooks?
    Who is the publisher?
    Any ISBN(?) number?
    
    And if I should struck into problems doing this, 
    could someone point out a bookstore in US, who would deal with 
    international ordering (VISA/Master etc) and would have this book? 
    
    Any answer would be appriciated!
    /johan
                        

    There are two books with that title.  Do you want the current (within
    last 5 years) narrative hsitory of the Apollo program, or the older
    NASA history of the Saturn series?  The newer book is probably still
    available; the older NASA history is long out of print and prized by
    those priviledged to own it.
    
    George

    Thanks George.
    It's the latter, "Chariots for Apollo, A history of manned lunar
    spacecraft".
    The background is that there is a reference to this publication in my
    encyclopedia.
    Is the other book good?
    Which other books about the Apollo program are of interest?
    /johan    

The other book is dedicated to the development of the lunar module.


As books go it is pretty good -- I've certainly read drier ones.   It doesn't
come close to "Apollo, Race to the Moon" by Murray&Cox (?), but it makes
a nice companion to it for behind the scenes peeks at the engineering
efforts back then.


- dave

This has been doing the rounds of the net - origin unknown (to me). Take
with grain of salt.
    
-----------------------
    
When Apollo Mission Astronaut Neil Armstrong first walked on the moon, 
he not only made his famous "One Small Step for Man, One Giant Leap for 
Mankind" statement, but followed it by several remarks, mostly traffic 
between him, the other astronauts, and Mission Control.  However, before he
re-entered the lander, he made the enigmatic remark "Good luck, Mr.Gorsky."

Many people at NASA thought it was a casual remark concerning some rival
Soviet Cosmonaut. However, upon checking, there was no Gorsky in either
the Russian or American space programs.

Over the years, many people have questioned him as to what the "Good 
luck, Mr. Gorsky" statement meant.  On 5 July 1995, in Tampa Bay, FL, while 
answering questions following a speech, a reporter brought up the 26 year 
old question to Armstrong.  He finally responded.  It seems that Mr. Gorsky 
had died and so Armstrong felt he could answer the question.

Years ago when he was little, he and his brother were playing baseball in
the backyard. His brother hit a fly ball which landed in front of his 
neighbors' bedroom window.  The neighbors were Mr and Mrs. Gorksy. As Neil
leaned down to pick up the ball, he heard Mrs. Gorsky shouting at Mr. 
Gorsky, "Oral sex?  Oral sex you want?  You'll get oral sex when the kid 
next door walks on the moon!"

FYI, I have debunked this rather thoroughly.  First, I searched the transcript
of the Apollo XI astronauts on the moon.  Nothing.  Then I sent mail to Eric
Jones, maintainer of the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal.  In preparing the ALSJ,
Jones went over the transcripts with the astronauts themselves.  Here is his
answer:

Burns,

It's pretty funny, but that's all.

> To me it sounds like an urban (or extraterrestrial) myth since:

> 	1)  It seems like that would not be a common expression for the
> 		impossible in the 40's or 50's
Don't know about reason (1).  Neil was born in 1930, so the incident would 
have happened in the 30s or 40s.  I agree that, "walks on the Moon"
probably wouldn't have been something people would have said then.

> 	2)  Even if it happened and Neil heard it, it does not seem like the
> 		kind of remark he would have made from the moon and,

It is very definitely out of character for Neil.

> 	3)  I can't find the remark in the ALSJ

True, cause there isn't any such thing

> I did notice a few cases where "technical remarks" were edited out of the ALSJ
> (though it might have been only remarks from the CMP, not from the surface),

True

> thus leaving a small residual doubt

Albeit on a par with doubts about the Sun rising tomorrow  ;-)

> that there might have been some 
> comments which did not appear there.  Therefore, I was hoping that you might
be 
> able to deny (or confirm) any part of this story authoritatively.

It isn't on any tape I've ever heard.

> Thanks for any contribution you can make to truth on the net (not to mention 
> thank you for the ALSJ itself!)

Glad you're enjoying the ALSJ.

    re .172
    
    Yes, ALSJ explicitly contains a paragraph repudiating the story. I am
    not claiming the story as true - just amusing.