Author Topic: Surveyor Program (Read 27191 times)

Andy_Small · « **on:** 10/04/2007 05:37 pm »

I have a couple questions about the Surveyor Program.

Was there a curise stage attached to the spacecraft? I've read where there were 3 rocket engines that fired at about 3.5m above the lunar surface. I would thing there there would have to be a burn to get them onto the moon from a cruise stage. There doesent look to be enough fuel onboard to do all the things that would have to be done to get to the surface.

I've looked around and can't find anything.

Thanks

Rusty_Barton · « **Reply #1 on:** 10/04/2007 06:33 pm »

These NASA reports have the info you are looking for.

Surveyor Lander Mission and Capabilities
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19640019055_1964019055.pdf

Surveyor Automated Landing Missions
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19690075314_1969075314.pdf

Surveyor 1 Mission Report
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660026658_1966026658.pdf

The Surveyor separated from the Centaur after being placed on a trans-lunar trajectory.
Surveyor had three main, liquid fueled, vernier engines that were also used for course corrections and the final landing maneuver. In addition it had a large, spherical, solid fuel rocket motor, nestled within its frame, that slowed the Surveyor for the landing maneuver. It fired at 60 miles altitude when the Surveyor was going 6,100 mph. It burned out before landing, at 25,000 ft, after it had slowed the Surveyor to 240 mph. At that point, the burnt out solid motor was ejected and the verniers took the Surveyor the rest of the way to the lunar surface.

Andy_Small · « **Reply #2 on:** 10/04/2007 06:50 pm »

were the main engines hypergol?

Rusty_Barton · « **Reply #3 on:** 10/04/2007 06:56 pm »

Quote

Andy_Small - 4/10/2007 11:50 AM

were the main engines hypergol?

Yes.

meiza · « **Reply #4 on:** 10/05/2007 09:49 am »

The Surveyor program is interesting from the Lunar X-Prize competition point of view.

Andy_Small · « **Reply #5 on:** 10/05/2007 02:36 pm »

That's a good point. It would be a good baseline for a team to use as a design. Since the requirements are alot like what Surveyor did. The diffrence would be the rover aspect.

rsp1202 · « **Reply #6 on:** 10/05/2007 03:36 pm »

Check me; this is from memory: Once landed, Surveyor's verniers were able to provide enough thrust to lift and hop the craft X number of feet away from its original landing site. It performed this maneuver during at least one mission.

wingod · « **Reply #7 on:** 10/05/2007 03:45 pm »

Quote

rsp1202 - 5/10/2007 10:36 AM

Check me; this is from memory: Once landed, Surveyor's verniers were able to provide enough thrust to lift and hop the craft X number of feet away from its original landing site. It performed this maneuver during at least one mission.

Yep

Rusty_Barton · « **Reply #8 on:** 10/05/2007 03:48 pm »

During the Surveyor 3 landing, the verniers did not turn off just above the surface as intended. They cutoff after landing, causing the Surveyor 3 to hop several times before finally coming to rest. The Surveyor 6 fired its vernier engines, after being on the surface for some time and intentionally took off and flew across the surface several feet before coming to rest again.

Jim · « **Reply #9 on:** 10/05/2007 03:54 pm »

Quote

Andy_Small - 5/10/2007 10:36 AM

That's a good point. It would be a good baseline for a team to use as a design. Since the requirements are alot like what Surveyor did. The diffrence would be the rover aspect.

Not really, there were versions of the surveyor with tracks instead of pads

Andy_Small · « **Reply #10 on:** 10/05/2007 04:01 pm »

wow I didn't know that. The only ones I've seen where with the pads.

Rusty_Barton · « **Reply #11 on:** 10/05/2007 04:05 pm »

All of the seven flight model Surveyors had landing pads. There were designs for versions with tracks, but they never flew.

Raoul · « **Reply #12 on:** 10/19/2007 07:20 pm »

Here are panoramics from the Surveyors:

http://www.planetary.org/blog/article/00000856

rsp1202 · « **Reply #13 on:** 10/19/2007 08:07 pm »

As a follow-on to your post (thanks, by the way), see:
http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521819305
Looks to be very interesting.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #14 on:** 03/06/2024 05:31 pm »

Blackstar · « **Reply #15 on:** 03/06/2024 10:11 pm »

If we're reviving this thread, it should probably include a link to the JPL documentary that addresses Surveyor, which is where Scott Manly got most of his video from:

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/who-we-are/documentary-series-jpl-and-the-space-age

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/who-we-are/documentary-series-jpl-and-the-space-age/episode-3-destination-moon

It's mostly about Ranger, but does discuss Surveyor.

Addendum: I don't think he got all of his video from that JPL documentary, but a lot of it is from there. And I noticed no acknowledgement of that. He doesn't list his sources. When you use the work done by somebody else, you should at least indicate that.

laszlo · « **Reply #16 on:** 03/07/2024 01:59 pm »

2 things really struck me in that video - the lovely wide legs of the spacecraft and the guy smoking a pipe in the control room. Today we've reversed both to the detriment of the spacecraft and to the benefit of the controllers and electronics in the control room. Can you imagine having to maintain vacuum tube equipment coated with baked-on smoke residue?

The mention of the analogue feedback loops from the radar to the gyros to control the spacecraft trajectory should also help with the Apollo Hoax conspiracy crowd and their claims that 1960's computers were too wimpy to allow a moon landing (how about no onboard computer?), except I doubt that any of them would understand CW radar and PID loops and analogue electronics. But it does demonstrate that good tech existed back when TV was wireless and phones were cabled and apples kept the doctor away.

eric z · « **Reply #17 on:** 03/07/2024 03:09 pm »

There is a guy running for Govenor now who thinks the Moon landing was a hoax, among other things..

. Maybe Chris could give him a gift subscription - I would chip in for that.

Blackstar · « **Reply #18 on:** 03/07/2024 03:13 pm »

Quote from: laszlo on 03/07/2024 01:59 pm

should also help with the Apollo Hoax conspiracy crowd

There is nothing that will actually convince them. There's an old saying that you cannot use logic to get a person out of a position that logic did not get them into in the first place.

Blackstar · « **Reply #19 on:** 03/07/2024 03:17 pm »

Quote from: laszlo on 03/07/2024 01:59 pm

But it does demonstrate that good tech existed back when TV was wireless and phones were cabled and apples kept the doctor away.

There's a comment that Manly makes about "primitive computers" that bugs me. They were not "primitive" at that time. They were advanced at that time. Forty years from now, somebody is going to make a documentary about the "primitive computers" we had in 2024. Do we think our computers now are primitive? It's a distorted way of looking at history.