Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Conspiracy That Never Dies


Recommended Posts

This quote from Nixon is ludricrous considering what atrocities were taking place in the world at the time of the alleged manned lunar landings .. All perpetrated by the United States of America .

"This is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation."

—President Richard Nixon, July 1969, in the middle of the genocidal wars against our allies in Vietnams, and the genocidal secret wars in Cambodia, Laos and Thailand.

"Fire-till-touchdown not feasible for the Apollo LEM Preliminary results of the "fire-till-touchdown" study by Grumman indicated that this maneuver was not feasible. The engine might be exploded by driving the shock wave into the nozzles. The base heatshield temperature would exceed 1,789K (5,000 degrees F), which was high enough to melt portions of the structure, possibly causing destruction of the foot pads. The allowable pressure on the nonstructural elements of the base heatshield would be exceeded; and the descent engine flow field would tend to cause a "POGO" effect which would cause landing instability and could prevent engine cutoff.

—NASA Special Publication-4009, astronautix.com, 1965 December 9-16

"The Secretary of Defense announced the assignment of Lt. Gen. Samuel C. Phillips (USAF), who had been serving as Apollo Program Director in the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight, to be Commander of the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Organization (SAMSO) in Los Angeles.... NASA named Rocco A. Petrone, Director of Launch Operations at KSC, to succeed Samuel C. Phillips as Director of the Apollo Program effective September 1."

—NASA Special Publication-4009, astronautix.com, "DOD Announcement of General Phillips' Air Force Assignment," July 31, 1969; NASA News Release 69-124, "Petrone Named Apollo Director," Aug. 22, 1969

"Grumman built a full-scale cardboard model of the LEM to aid in studying problems of cockpit geometry, specifically the arrangement of display panels. This mockup was reviewed by MSC astronauts and the layout of the cockpit was revised according to some of their suggestions. Also Grumman reported that a preliminary analysis showed the reaction control system plume heating of the LEM landing gear was not a severe problem (31 August 1963).

In honor of the late President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated six days earlier, President Lyndon B. Johnson announced that LOC and Station No. 1 of the Atlantic Missile Range would be designated the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (28 November 1963).

Grumman conducted manned drop tests to determine the LEM crew's ability to land the spacecraft from a standing position (17 April 1964).

All tests were run with the subject in an unpressurized suit in a "hands off" standing position with no restraint system or arm rests. A LEM ascent engine exploded during altitude firings at Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC - 1 Sept. 1965).

A LM test failed in the Grumman ascent stage manufacturing plant December 17. A window in LM-5 shattered during its initial cabin pressurization test, designed to pressurize the cabin to 3.9 newtons per square centimeter (5.65 pounds per square inch). Both inner and outer windows and the plexiglass cover of the right-hand window shattered when the pressure reached 3.5 newtons per sq cm (5.1 psi - 17 December 1967).

ASPO Manager George M. Low and others from MSC met with Grumman's LM engineering staff, headed by Thomas J. Kelly, to discuss the descent stage heatshield and thermal blanket problems associated with reduced thrust decay of the descent engine at lunar touchdown. Grumman would begin design studies of a jettisonable descent engine skirt. (7 June 1968).

The Allison descent-stage propellant tank, being redesigned at Airite Division of Sargent Industries to a "lidless" configuration, blew up during qualification test at Airite. The crew noticed loss of pressure and therefore tightened fittings and repressurized. As the pressure went up, the tank blew into several pieces (27 September 1968). 'During this period, however, there occurred a successful unmanned test of the Lunar Module and two unmanned tests of the Saturn V vehicle.' The possibility of an unmanned LM landing was discussed at NASA Hq. (11 February 1969).

The additional direct cost to the Apollo research and development program from the January 27, 1967, Apollo 1 fire was estimated at $410 million, principally for spacecraft modifications, NASA Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller testified in congressional hearings. The accident delayed the first manned flight of the spacecraft by about 18 months (11 March 1969).

Russian Luna 15 unmanned soil return mission launched coincident with Apollo 11 mission in last ditch attempt to return lunar soil to earth before United States. After completing 86 communications sessions and 52 orbits of the Moon at various inclinations and altitudes, crashed on the moon on 20 July in an attempted landing. Altitude data used in programming inaccurate or guidance system unable to cope with effect of lunar mascons (gravitational mass concentrations on Moon - 13 July 1969).

During the Apollo 11 management debriefing, the ASPO Manager noted a number of items requiring investigation. During separation from the S-IVB stage, the CSM autopilot apparently had difficulty determining direction of rotation. After the CSM hatch removal, there was a strong odor of burnt material in the tunnel. The temperature in the lunar module was too cold during sleep periods. The biological isolation garment was uncomfortably hot and its visor fogged. The crew observed flashes at the rate of about one per minute in the command module at night."

—Program: Apollo, Astronautics.com - Encyclopedia Astronautica

"The Universe is home to numerous exotic and beautiful phenomena, some of which can generate almost inconceivable amounts of energy. Supermassive black holes, merging neutron stars, streams of hot gas moving close to the speed of light ... these are but a few of the marvels that generate gamma-ray radiation, the most energetic form of radiation, billions of times more energetic than the type of light visible to our eyes."

—Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST), NASA launch date 2006

http://www.geocities.com/nasa_fraud_capricorn_1/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This quote from Nixon is ludricrous considering what atrocities were taking place in the world at the time of the alleged manned lunar landings .. All perpetrated by the United States of America .

"This is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation."

—President Richard Nixon, July 1969, in the middle of the genocidal wars against our allies in Vietnams, and the genocidal secret wars in Cambodia, Laos and Thailand.

Thought the subtitle of the thread was technical reasons...

"Fire-till-touchdown not feasible for the Apollo LEM Preliminary results of the "fire-till-touchdown" study by Grumman indicated that this maneuver was not feasible. The engine might be exploded by driving the shock wave into the nozzles. The base heatshield temperature would exceed 1,789K (5,000 degrees F), which was high enough to melt portions of the structure, possibly causing destruction of the foot pads. The allowable pressure on the nonstructural elements of the base heatshield would be exceeded; and the descent engine flow field would tend to cause a "POGO" effect which would cause landing instability and could prevent engine cutoff.

—NASA Special Publication-4009, astronautix.com, 1965 December 9-16

Wow, a preliminary report about a maneuver they didn't use. Hrmm, good thing they cut off the engines before touchdown. It's almost like all the research they did was actually done for a reason.
"The Secretary of Defense announced the assignment of Lt. Gen. Samuel C. Phillips (USAF), who had been serving as Apollo Program Director in the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight, to be Commander of the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Organization (SAMSO) in Los Angeles.... NASA named Rocco A. Petrone, Director of Launch Operations at KSC, to succeed Samuel C. Phillips as Director of the Apollo Program effective September 1."

—NASA Special Publication-4009, astronautix.com, "DOD Announcement of General Phillips' Air Force Assignment," July 31, 1969; NASA News Release 69-124, "Petrone Named Apollo Director," Aug. 22, 1969

Ok, you lost me, what's your point with this one?

"Grumman built a full-scale cardboard model of the LEM to aid in studying problems of cockpit geometry, specifically the arrangement of display panels. This mockup was reviewed by MSC astronauts and the layout of the cockpit was revised according to some of their suggestions. Also Grumman reported that a preliminary analysis showed the reaction control system plume heating of the LEM landing gear was not a severe problem (31 August 1963).
So when do the technical reasons that Apollo was a hoax begin? You're posting evidence that they did design and testing, that's evidence FOR Apollo.
In honor of the late President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated six days earlier, President Lyndon B. Johnson announced that LOC and Station No. 1 of the Atlantic Missile Range would be designated the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (28 November 1963).

That was nice of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grumman conducted manned drop tests to determine the LEM crew's ability to land the spacecraft from a standing position (17 April 1964).
More testing, good stuff.
All tests were run with the subject in an unpressurized suit in a "hands off" standing position with no restraint system or arm rests. A LEM ascent engine exploded during altitude firings at Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC - 1 Sept. 1965).

Oh no, an engine exploded in 1965! Good thing they had 4 more years to refine the design.

A LM test failed in the Grumman ascent stage manufacturing plant December 17. A window in LM-5 shattered during its initial cabin pressurization test, designed to pressurize the cabin to 3.9 newtons per square centimeter (5.65 pounds per square inch). Both inner and outer windows and the plexiglass cover of the right-hand window shattered when the pressure reached 3.5 newtons per sq cm (5.1 psi - 17 December 1967).
Again, more testing, kinda blows away all your claims that these were untested systems.
ASPO Manager George M. Low and others from MSC met with Grumman's LM engineering staff, headed by Thomas J. Kelly, to discuss the descent stage heatshield and thermal blanket problems associated with reduced thrust decay of the descent engine at lunar touchdown. Grumman would begin design studies of a jettisonable descent engine skirt. (7 June 1968).

Do you even know what the problems were or what was done about them, or did you just see the word 'problems' and say 'ah-ha, proof!'

The Allison descent-stage propellant tank, being redesigned at Airite Division of Sargent Industries to a "lidless" configuration, blew up during qualification test at Airite. The crew noticed loss of pressure and therefore tightened fittings and repressurized. As the pressure went up, the tank blew into several pieces (27 September 1968).
Wow a part failed while being tested during a redesign. I bet they gave up right then and there and decided to fake it in a sound stage. All propellant tanks since then must be a hoax.
'During this period, however, there occurred a successful unmanned test of the Lunar Module and two unmanned tests of the Saturn V vehicle.' The possibility of an unmanned LM landing was discussed at NASA Hq. (11 February 1969).

Your point?

The additional direct cost to the Apollo research and development program from the January 27, 1967, Apollo 1 fire was estimated at $410 million, principally for spacecraft modifications, NASA Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller testified in congressional hearings. The accident delayed the first manned flight of the spacecraft by about 18 months (11 March 1969).

When will you get to the technical reasons?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russian Luna 15 unmanned soil return mission launched coincident with Apollo 11 mission in last ditch attempt to return lunar soil to earth before United States. After completing 86 communications sessions and 52 orbits of the Moon at various inclinations and altitudes, crashed on the moon on 20 July in an attempted landing. Altitude data used in programming inaccurate or guidance system unable to cope with effect of lunar mascons (gravitational mass concentrations on Moon - 13 July 1969).
That's the advantage of a human pilot, corrections on the fly. A probe might not know if it's about to land in a boulder field, but a human can see that and alter the landing site.
During the Apollo 11 management debriefing, the ASPO Manager noted a number of items requiring investigation. During separation from the S-IVB stage, the CSM autopilot apparently had difficulty determining direction of rotation.

Good thing they had a real pilot to correct the autopilot!

After the CSM hatch removal, there was a strong odor of burnt material in the tunnel. The temperature in the lunar module was too cold during sleep periods. The biological isolation garment was uncomfortably hot and its visor fogged. The crew observed flashes at the rate of about one per minute in the command module at night."

—Program: Apollo, Astronautics.com - Encyclopedia Astronautica

Nobody said a week in a cramped capsule would be comfortable.
"The Universe is home to numerous exotic and beautiful phenomena, some of which can generate almost inconceivable amounts of energy. Supermassive black holes, merging neutron stars, streams of hot gas moving close to the speed of light ... these are but a few of the marvels that generate gamma-ray radiation, the most energetic form of radiation, billions of times more energetic than the type of light visible to our eyes."

—Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST), NASA launch date 2006

Yes, gamma ray photons are billions of times more energetic than visible light, that's basic physics. The question is, what is the flux rate? Would you rather stand in the path of a single gamma photon or a high power visible light laser?

Now that's just silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that's just silly is right ... especially if you consider this nonsense you posted here a proper rebuttal .

It woud seem you need to return for a few more months of lessons at the clavius moon base school of pick and choose your hoax evidence rebuttals out of your mentor Jay's big hat ! ... LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that's just silly is right ... especially if you consider this nonsense you posted here a proper rebuttal .

It woud seem you need to return for a few more months of lessons at the clavius moon base school of pick and choose your hoax evidence rebuttals out of your mentor Jay's big hat ! ... LOL

A proper rebuttal? You didn't post anything to rebut! It's just a bunch of quotes that don't support your argument!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This quote from Nixon is ludricrous considering what atrocities were taking place in the world at the time of the alleged manned lunar landings .. All perpetrated by the United States of America .

"This is the greatest week in the history of the world since the Creation."

—President Richard Nixon, July 1969, in the middle of the genocidal wars against our allies in Vietnams, and the genocidal secret wars in Cambodia, Laos and Thailand.

"Fire-till-touchdown not feasible for the Apollo LEM Preliminary results of the "fire-till-touchdown" study by Grumman indicated that this maneuver was not feasible. The engine might be exploded by driving the shock wave into the nozzles. The base heatshield temperature would exceed 1,789K (5,000 degrees F), which was high enough to melt portions of the structure, possibly causing destruction of the foot pads. The allowable pressure on the nonstructural elements of the base heatshield would be exceeded; and the descent engine flow field would tend to cause a "POGO" effect which would cause landing instability and could prevent engine cutoff.

—NASA Special Publication-4009, astronautix.com, 1965 December 9-16

"The Secretary of Defense announced the assignment of Lt. Gen. Samuel C. Phillips (USAF), who had been serving as Apollo Program Director in the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight, to be Commander of the Air Force Space and Missile Systems Organization (SAMSO) in Los Angeles.... NASA named Rocco A. Petrone, Director of Launch Operations at KSC, to succeed Samuel C. Phillips as Director of the Apollo Program effective September 1."

—NASA Special Publication-4009, astronautix.com, "DOD Announcement of General Phillips' Air Force Assignment," July 31, 1969; NASA News Release 69-124, "Petrone Named Apollo Director," Aug. 22, 1969

"Grumman built a full-scale cardboard model of the LEM to aid in studying problems of cockpit geometry, specifically the arrangement of display panels. This mockup was reviewed by MSC astronauts and the layout of the cockpit was revised according to some of their suggestions. Also Grumman reported that a preliminary analysis showed the reaction control system plume heating of the LEM landing gear was not a severe problem (31 August 1963).

In honor of the late President John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated six days earlier, President Lyndon B. Johnson announced that LOC and Station No. 1 of the Atlantic Missile Range would be designated the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) (28 November 1963).

Grumman conducted manned drop tests to determine the LEM crew's ability to land the spacecraft from a standing position (17 April 1964).

All tests were run with the subject in an unpressurized suit in a "hands off" standing position with no restraint system or arm rests. A LEM ascent engine exploded during altitude firings at Arnold Engineering Development Center (AEDC - 1 Sept. 1965).

A LM test failed in the Grumman ascent stage manufacturing plant December 17. A window in LM-5 shattered during its initial cabin pressurization test, designed to pressurize the cabin to 3.9 newtons per square centimeter (5.65 pounds per square inch). Both inner and outer windows and the plexiglass cover of the right-hand window shattered when the pressure reached 3.5 newtons per sq cm (5.1 psi - 17 December 1967).

ASPO Manager George M. Low and others from MSC met with Grumman's LM engineering staff, headed by Thomas J. Kelly, to discuss the descent stage heatshield and thermal blanket problems associated with reduced thrust decay of the descent engine at lunar touchdown. Grumman would begin design studies of a jettisonable descent engine skirt. (7 June 1968).

The Allison descent-stage propellant tank, being redesigned at Airite Division of Sargent Industries to a "lidless" configuration, blew up during qualification test at Airite. The crew noticed loss of pressure and therefore tightened fittings and repressurized. As the pressure went up, the tank blew into several pieces (27 September 1968). 'During this period, however, there occurred a successful unmanned test of the Lunar Module and two unmanned tests of the Saturn V vehicle.' The possibility of an unmanned LM landing was discussed at NASA Hq. (11 February 1969).

The additional direct cost to the Apollo research and development program from the January 27, 1967, Apollo 1 fire was estimated at $410 million, principally for spacecraft modifications, NASA Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller testified in congressional hearings. The accident delayed the first manned flight of the spacecraft by about 18 months (11 March 1969).

Russian Luna 15 unmanned soil return mission launched coincident with Apollo 11 mission in last ditch attempt to return lunar soil to earth before United States. After completing 86 communications sessions and 52 orbits of the Moon at various inclinations and altitudes, crashed on the moon on 20 July in an attempted landing. Altitude data used in programming inaccurate or guidance system unable to cope with effect of lunar mascons (gravitational mass concentrations on Moon - 13 July 1969).

During the Apollo 11 management debriefing, the ASPO Manager noted a number of items requiring investigation. During separation from the S-IVB stage, the CSM autopilot apparently had difficulty determining direction of rotation. After the CSM hatch removal, there was a strong odor of burnt material in the tunnel. The temperature in the lunar module was too cold during sleep periods. The biological isolation garment was uncomfortably hot and its visor fogged. The crew observed flashes at the rate of about one per minute in the command module at night."

—Program: Apollo, Astronautics.com - Encyclopedia Astronautica

"The Universe is home to numerous exotic and beautiful phenomena, some of which can generate almost inconceivable amounts of energy. Supermassive black holes, merging neutron stars, streams of hot gas moving close to the speed of light ... these are but a few of the marvels that generate gamma-ray radiation, the most energetic form of radiation, billions of times more energetic than the type of light visible to our eyes."

—Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope (GLAST), NASA launch date 2006

http://www.geocities.com/nasa_fraud_capricorn_1/

I'm sorry, but I just spent twenty minutes trying to figure out this post (aligning dates to quotes and associated contextual points) before I came to the conclusion that it is just a collection of gibberish. As far as I can tell, it doesn't make or support any conclusions or establish anything in the way of a meaningful post. Maybe the author can elaborate (in a shorter but more succinct post)?

I like to read this forum as most of the contributors provide intelligent and (sometimes) controversial posts which are thought provoking. What is the intent of this post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some other quotes from NASA SP-4001 The Apollo Spacecraft - A Chronology (the document referred to many times in Duane's post):

Volume III

1964

October 2

MSC's Apollo Spacecraft Program Office (ASPO) approved a plan (put forward by the MSC Advanced Spacecraft Technology Division to verify the CM's radiation shielding. Checkout of the radiation instrumentation would be made during manned earth orbital flights. The spacecraft would then be subjected to a radiation environment during the first two unmanned Saturn V flights. These missions, 501 and 502, with apogees of about 18,520 km (10,000 nm), would verify the shielding. Gamma probe verification, using spacecraft 008, would be performed in Houston during 1966. Only Block I CM's would be used in these ground and flight tests. Radiation shielding would be unaffected by the change to Block II status.

Memorandum, Joseph F. Shea, MSC, to Assistant Chief for Space Environment, "Apollo Radiation Shielding Verification," October 5, 1964.

October 14

In a letter to NASA Administrator James E. Webb, AC Spark Plug reported that the first Apollo guidance system completed acceptance testing and was shipped at 11:30 p.m. and arrived at Downey, California, early the following day. AC reported that in more than 2,000 hours of operation they had found the system to be "remarkably reliable, accurate and simple to operate."

Letter, to NASA Administrator Webb, from B. P. Blasingame, Manager, Milwaukee Operations, October 19, 1964.

1965

February 3

ASPO established radiation reliability goals for Apollo. These figures would be used to coordinate the radiation program, to define the allowable dosages, and to determine the effect of radiation on mission success. The crew safety goal (defined as the probability of a crewman's not suffering permanent injury or worse, nor his being incapacitated and thus no longer able to perform his duties) was set at 0.99999. The major hazard of a radiation environment, it was felt, was not the chance of fatal doses. It was, rather, the possibility of acute radiation sickness during the mission. The second reliability goal, that for success of the mission (the probability that the mission would not be aborted because of radiation environment), was placed at 0.98.

These values, ASPO Manager Joseph F. Shea emphasized, were based on the 8.3-day reference mission and on emergency dose limits previously set forth. They were not to be included in overall reliability goals for the spacecraft, nor were they to be met by weight increases or equipment relocations.

Memorandum, Joseph F. Shea, MSC, to Assistant Director for E. and D., "Apollo Radiation Reliability Goals," February 3, 1965.

April 27

ASPO announced that a LEM Test Program Requirement Review would be held at Grumman during the first week in June. The purpose of the review would be to reach agreement with Grumman on an overall Test Program Plan and to consider planned allocation of hardware, test schedules, and test logic in relationship to flight missions.

The review would result in publication of a certification document which would define and catalog the program of testing, analysis, and rationalization which would form the basis for certification of flight spacecraft as capable of meeting requirements of flight missions. It would cover all formal qualification testing above the part level being done at subcontractors or vendors, component testing at Grumman, higher level of assembly testing conducted anywhere in support of a portion of test logic, and individual system test requirements to be conducted on integrated test vehicles such as LEM test article 1.

The format for the review would consist of individual subsystem test program reviews by the respective MSC and Grumman Subsystem Managers. MSC Subsystem Managers would be supported by RASPO, ASPO, and GE personnel where appropriate. After their initial meeting, the MSC and Grumman managers would summarize their findings to a MSC Grumman review board, emphasizing deficiencies in the program (to include inadequate tests, hardware availability problems, and schedules which were inconsistent with flight support requirements).

Memorandum, Owen E. Maynard, MSC, to Distribution, "LEM Test Program Requirements Review," April 27, 1965.

May 6

As a result of the Critical Design Review at North American during the previous month, Crew Systems Division (CSD) directed Hamilton Standard to fabricate an Apollo space suit with a pressure-sealing zipper. CSD would compare this concept with the current gusset design, which leaked excessively and hindered donning the suit.

TWX, Richard S. Johnston, MSC, to R. E. Breeding, Hamilton Standard Division, May 6, 1965; MSC, "ASPO Weekly Management Report, June 3-10, 1965."

During August

Grumman completed an analysis of radiation levels that would be encountered by the LEM-3 crew during their earth orbital mission. Grumman advised that doses would not be harmful. To lessen these levels even further, the contractor recommended that during some parts of the mission the two astronauts climb back into the CM; also, the planned orbit for the LEM (556 by 2,500 km [300 by 1,350 nm]) could be changed to avoid the worst part of the Van Allen Belt.

"Monthly Progress Report No. 31," LPR-10-47, p. 40

Lots of interesting stuff in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some other quotes from NASA SP-4001 The Apollo Spacecraft - A Chronology (the document referred to many times in Duane's post):

Volume III

1964

October 2

MSC's Apollo Spacecraft Program Office (ASPO) approved a plan (put forward by the MSC Advanced Spacecraft Technology Division to verify the CM's radiation shielding. Checkout of the radiation instrumentation would be made during manned earth orbital flights. The spacecraft would then be subjected to a radiation environment during the first two unmanned Saturn V flights. These missions, 501 and 502, with apogees of about 18,520 km (10,000 nm), would verify the shielding. Gamma probe verification, using spacecraft 008, would be performed in Houston during 1966. Only Block I CM's would be used in these ground and flight tests. Radiation shielding would be unaffected by the change to Block II status.

Memorandum, Joseph F. Shea, MSC, to Assistant Chief for Space Environment, "Apollo Radiation Shielding Verification," October 5, 1964.

October 14

In a letter to NASA Administrator James E. Webb, AC Spark Plug reported that the first Apollo guidance system completed acceptance testing and was shipped at 11:30 p.m. and arrived at Downey, California, early the following day. AC reported that in more than 2,000 hours of operation they had found the system to be "remarkably reliable, accurate and simple to operate."

Letter, to NASA Administrator Webb, from B. P. Blasingame, Manager, Milwaukee Operations, October 19, 1964.

1965
February 3

ASPO established radiation reliability goals for Apollo. These figures would be used to coordinate the radiation program, to define the allowable dosages, and to determine the effect of radiation on mission success. The crew safety goal (defined as the probability of a crewman's not suffering permanent injury or worse, nor his being incapacitated and thus no longer able to perform his duties) was set at 0.99999. The major hazard of a radiation environment, it was felt, was not the chance of fatal doses. It was, rather, the possibility of acute radiation sickness during the mission. The second reliability goal, that for success of the mission (the probability that the mission would not be aborted because of radiation environment), was placed at 0.98.

These values, ASPO Manager Joseph F. Shea emphasized, were based on the 8.3-day reference mission and on emergency dose limits previously set forth. They were not to be included in overall reliability goals for the spacecraft, nor were they to be met by weight increases or equipment relocations.

Memorandum, Joseph F. Shea, MSC, to Assistant Director for E. and D., "Apollo Radiation Reliability Goals," February 3, 1965.

April 27

ASPO announced that a LEM Test Program Requirement Review would be held at Grumman during the first week in June. The purpose of the review would be to reach agreement with Grumman on an overall Test Program Plan and to consider planned allocation of hardware, test schedules, and test logic in relationship to flight missions.

The review would result in publication of a certification document which would define and catalog the program of testing, analysis, and rationalization which would form the basis for certification of flight spacecraft as capable of meeting requirements of flight missions. It would cover all formal qualification testing above the part level being done at subcontractors or vendors, component testing at Grumman, higher level of assembly testing conducted anywhere in support of a portion of test logic, and individual system test requirements to be conducted on integrated test vehicles such as LEM test article 1.

The format for the review would consist of individual subsystem test program reviews by the respective MSC and Grumman Subsystem Managers. MSC Subsystem Managers would be supported by RASPO, ASPO, and GE personnel where appropriate. After their initial meeting, the MSC and Grumman managers would summarize their findings to a MSC Grumman review board, emphasizing deficiencies in the program (to include inadequate tests, hardware availability problems, and schedules which were inconsistent with flight support requirements).

Memorandum, Owen E. Maynard, MSC, to Distribution, "LEM Test Program Requirements Review," April 27, 1965.

May 6

As a result of the Critical Design Review at North American during the previous month, Crew Systems Division (CSD) directed Hamilton Standard to fabricate an Apollo space suit with a pressure-sealing zipper. CSD would compare this concept with the current gusset design, which leaked excessively and hindered donning the suit.

TWX, Richard S. Johnston, MSC, to R. E. Breeding, Hamilton Standard Division, May 6, 1965; MSC, "ASPO Weekly Management Report, June 3-10, 1965."

During August

Grumman completed an analysis of radiation levels that would be encountered by the LEM-3 crew during their earth orbital mission. Grumman advised that doses would not be harmful. To lessen these levels even further, the contractor recommended that during some parts of the mission the two astronauts climb back into the CM; also, the planned orbit for the LEM (556 by 2,500 km [300 by 1,350 nm]) could be changed to avoid the worst part of the Van Allen Belt.

"Monthly Progress Report No. 31," LPR-10-47, p. 40

Lots of interesting stuff in there.

Thanks Evan for the actual reports and the application of context (which I guess were embedded in the reports). The information doesn't really provide the Thread author supprt for a point or the substance of an argument, unless I am missing something, but it does provide some interesting information with respect to some of the Safety Criteria for the astronauts. Maybe that is the intent of the quotes?

Sorry to say, but Mr. Daman is correct in saying that I shouldn't really spend any more time reading these threads.

Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you're not missing anything. It's just quotes from the documents, which list all the major events of the Apollo programme in chronological order.

My selection were bits to do with radiation protection, LM testing, the Apollo Guidance Computer ("...power of a walmart watch...") and the zipper on the astronauts pressure suits.

No real point to it at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point the author was making in that part of the article I posted here , was that the Apollo lunar modules could not possibly have technically done what nasa claimed they did in July of 1969 ... It would have been highly unlikely that nasa engineers could have corrected the numerous technical problems in so short amount of time .

I guess Peter either missed that point , or didn't bother to read the entire article from the link provided .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point the author was making in that part of the article I posted here , was that the Apollo lunar modules could not possibly have technically done what nasa claimed they did in July of 1969 ... It would have been highly unlikely that nasa engineers could have corrected the numerous technical problems in so short amount of time .

Actually, the Grumman engineers fixed the problems they encountered. You are aware, of course, of the dual contracts that NASA & Grumman had for some of the sub-systems?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point the author was making in that part of the article I posted here , was that the Apollo lunar modules could not possibly have technically done what nasa claimed they did in July of 1969 ... It would have been highly unlikely that nasa engineers could have corrected the numerous technical problems in so short amount of time .

I guess Peter either missed that point , or didn't bother to read the entire article from the link provided .

Duane - I think the point that Peter was making was that there was NOTHING in your post to show that "Apollo lunar modules could not possibly have technically done what nasa claimed they did in July of 1969". There was mention of 2 or 3 failures during testing, which was padded with a lot of irrelevant stuff. For your claim to stand up, you now need to show why failures during testing of system are proof that the system itself can't work.

Let's make it easy for you. Why did failure of a LM window during a pressurisation test prove that the Apollo landings couldn't have happened? Why were they unable to resolve this issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...