Author Topic: What was the Apollo theoretical LOC / LOM figure?  (Read 2415 times)

Offline alexterrell

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1747
  • Germany
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 107
I read an article (by Boris Johnson, who knows zero about Science) that we can't go to Mars, because of the Health and Safety regulations have us in a strange hold. Apparently, Apollo was not safe - just lucky.

Has anyone applied the existing NASA methodologies to retrospectively estimate Loss of Crew/ Loss of Mission? In practice, we know LOC was zero, and LOM was 1 in 7, but I'd guess the theoretical LOC would be worse than 1 in 50. Would the most dangerous fault been on the Lunar Descent / Ascent where engine failure results in lunar crash?

Offline the_other_Doug

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3010
  • Minneapolis, MN
  • Liked: 2191
  • Likes Given: 4620
Re: What was the Apollo theoretical LOC / LOM figure?
« Reply #1 on: 08/30/2009 10:59 pm »
IIRC, the numbers they finally came up with was LOM every ten flights and LOC every 100 flights.  They were very close to correct on LOM.

-the other Doug
-Doug  (With my shield, not yet upon it)

Offline Danny Dot

  • Rocket Scientist, NOT Retired
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2792
  • Houston, Texas
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: What was the Apollo theoretical LOC / LOM figure?
« Reply #2 on: 08/31/2009 03:48 am »
I read some early Apollo documents and the LOC estimate was REALLY bad.  Something like 25%.  They understood the risk of a design flaw, which is usually the root cause.  NASA no longer does this.  They sum up the total probabilty of failure of the individual components and that is it.

Mr. Augustine does under this risk when asking why NASA decided to man-rate a solid which had never been done before.

Danny Deger
Danny Deger

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2611
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 1096
Re: What was the Apollo theoretical LOC / LOM figure?
« Reply #3 on: 08/31/2009 06:34 am »
From James Oberg, last week Space Review http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1448/1

Quote
More rigorous techniques of quantitative risk assessment’ developed in response to Apollo’s preliminary analytical procedures, showed in hindsight that Apollo had indeed been “safe enough” to fly: calculations indicated that crew survival chances were better than 98% and mission success chances were in the 75% range for the early missions.
Han shot first and Gwynne Shotwell !

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5413
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3113
  • Likes Given: 3862
Re: What was the Apollo theoretical LOC / LOM figure?
« Reply #4 on: 08/31/2009 04:20 pm »
Great question and topic. 

A practical exercise to go back and look at it too and see how current systems compare.

We know so much more than during Apollo that the numbers must be easier to calculate (but still hard).
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0