Author Topic: LC-39 Pad B Used Only Once For Apollo  (Read 20634 times)

Offline APG85

  • Regular
  • Member
  • Posts: 78
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #20 on: 01/25/2008 11:17 PM »
Speaking of Apollo 9 EVA's, what was up with the red helmets?
Scott

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22479
  • Liked: 799
  • Likes Given: 295
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #21 on: 01/27/2008 02:58 AM »
For the latter cargo lunar lander, would a manned cm have been needed in lunar orbit, or could it have landed without any extra mechanisms than the lander itself.
And this is a good reminder that just because one of your fellow space enthusiasts occasionally voices doubts about the SpaceX schedule announcements or is cautious about believing SpaceX has licked a problem before actually seeing proof that's true, it doesn't mean they hate SpaceX.

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #22 on: 01/28/2008 08:48 PM »
Quote
During the Apollo 9 EVA's...Schweickart from LM and Scott from CM, was the hatch between the 2 spacecraft opened or closed?

From Astronautix.com:
"McDivitt followed Schweickart into the lunar module an hour later. Within a brief time, a television camera had been unstowed and their activities were being beamed to the earth. Then they shut themselves off from Scott by closing their hatch while he was sealing himself off from Spider."

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #23 on: 01/28/2008 08:56 PM »
Quote
On Apollo 15 Dave Scott performed a Stand-up EVA from the top docking hatch of the LM and did a 360 degree assessment of the lunar landing site.  This was not done on Apollo 16 and 17.  Any reason why?

Stand-up was pushed by head geologist Lee Silver for A15, the first real science mission. Probably the multiple EVAs on following missions precluded any real need for this extra one, plus it used up consumables.

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #24 on: 01/28/2008 08:59 PM »
Quote
Speaking of Apollo 9 EVA's, what was up with the red helmets?

http://collectspace.com/ubb/Forum29/HTML/000179.html

Online grakenverb

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 431
  • New York
  • Liked: 27
  • Likes Given: 25
RE: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #25 on: 02/19/2008 12:03 AM »
Regarding the Apollo 10 LM ascent module "Snoopy" being in heliocentric orbit: Why?  Is it still being tracked? Does it ever approach Earth?

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #26 on: 02/19/2008 01:41 PM »
Talked about here:
http://collectspace.com/ubb/Forum29/HTML/000850.html
About halfway down the page.

Offline Andy_Small

  • Space Geek
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
  • California, MO
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #27 on: 03/29/2008 03:41 PM »
does anyone know of a picture or a diagram of the Rover in it's stowed config on the LM?

Thanks in Advance

Online nacnud

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2336
  • Liked: 508
  • Likes Given: 227
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #28 on: 03/29/2008 05:22 PM »
The thrust of the first stage of Saturn 1B is roughly equivalent to that of an F1 engine. Was there ever a study done looking at redesigning it for a F1 or F1A?

Offline rsp1202

  • Elite Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
  • 3, 2, 1 . . . Make rocket go now
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0

Offline Rusty_Barton

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 360
  • "Hello, world!"
  • Sacramento, CA
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #30 on: 04/01/2008 09:01 PM »
Here are two interesting Apollo documents just posted on the NASA NTRS server:

Apollo Post retrieval Procedures for NASA Recovery Team - Aug 5, 1970
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19750066911_1975066911.pdf

S-1C stage vertical internal access equipment technical manual: Installation information - Sep 15, 1972
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730062821_1973062821.pdf

Offline Takalok

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Apollo 9 Ascent Stage - Could it have been recovered?
« Reply #31 on: 04/02/2008 02:24 AM »
Quote
APG85 - 19/1/2008  10:11 AM

The Lunar Module ascent stage from Apollo 9 (Spider) decayed from orbit on 23 October 1981 and re-entered the atmosphere. Out of curiosity, could the Shuttle have retrieved it (money/purpose set aside)?  Is the cargo bay deep enough to hold the ascent stage?

The shuttle cargo bay is 15 ft 60 ft.

The LEM ascent stage is 13.78 ft in diameter by 12.34 ft in height.  

The weight (fully fueled) is about 1/5 of the shuttles payload capacity of 55,000 pounds.

The answer it would seem is, "Yes."  The asenct stage would fit, and it would not be too heavy.  

Now since the Apollo 10 LEM is still cruising around the sun out there, all you have to do is figure a way to retrieve it to LEO, and then get it in a shuttle (of course, before the year 2010).  

Hey, "It's not a miracle, we just decided to do it."   ;)
Life is what happens while you're waiting for tomorrow.

Offline Takalok

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 146
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
RE: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #32 on: 04/02/2008 02:41 AM »
Quote
DaveJ576 - 19/1/2008  11:00 AM

Assuming we had continued with a robust Apollo/Saturn flight program through the 1970's (i.e. an expanded Skylab program) how likely would it have been that Saturn 1B production would have ceased and we would have gone to the so-called Saturn II vehicle? That is the S-II/S-IVB combo with modified J-2's, boosted by UA1205 or UA1207 solids.

The info I have read on this booster sounds very interesting and the case for going to this Saturn mod seems to make sense.

Even today, IMHO, the first stage, S-1C, makes sense.  But it is politically untennable.

However, to answer your question, "Yes, the S1B was history."  All future versions of the Saturn, according to Final Report - Studies of Improved Saturn V Vehicles and Intermediate Payload Vehicles were based on the S-1C stage.  Some versions had only three F-1 engines.  There was quite a range of configurations and payloads.

Here's a web page here with all kinds of cool configurations:
http://www.astronautix.com/lvfam/saturnv.htm
Life is what happens while you're waiting for tomorrow.

Offline gordo

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 684
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: LC-39 Pad B Used Only Once For Apollo
« Reply #33 on: 09/11/2008 06:59 PM »
Any News on the Lost Apollo Data tapes search that started a few years back?

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32428
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 11169
  • Likes Given: 331
Re: RE: Apollo 9 Ascent Stage - Could it have been recovered?
« Reply #34 on: 09/11/2008 07:18 PM »
Quote
APG85 - 19/1/2008  10:11 AM

The Lunar Module ascent stage from Apollo 9 (Spider) decayed from orbit on 23 October 1981 and re-entered the atmosphere. Out of curiosity, could the Shuttle have retrieved it (money/purpose set aside)?  Is the cargo bay deep enough to hold the ascent stage?

The shuttle cargo bay is 15 ft 60 ft.

The LEM ascent stage is 13.78 ft in diameter by 12.34 ft in height. 

The weight (fully fueled) is about 1/5 of the shuttles payload capacity of 55,000 pounds.

The answer it would seem is, "Yes."  The asenct stage would fit, and it would not be too heavy. 


Down mass is not the same as up mass

Also the dimensions ignore the need for a cradle/support structure

Additionally, the LM structure might not be able to take the landing loads

And finally, the idea ignores the actual condition of the propulsion system that has high pressure gases and hypergols

Offline iamlucky13

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1660
  • Liked: 102
  • Likes Given: 93
Re: RE: Apollo Q&A
« Reply #35 on: 09/12/2008 07:37 PM »
Quote
Jim - 19/1/2008  2:25 PM

Should we start one of these?

Yep indeedy!

Do you think could you retitle this thread "Apollo/Saturn Q&A" then?

Now for my question inspired by a comparison someone made of the Ares 1 to the Saturn INT-21: Did the second stage for the Skylab launch perform a restart for a circularization burn, was it able to make the tight 434x442 km orbit in a single burn, or was the perigee raised by Apollo CSM's during the manned visits?

Tags: