~'ASA TECHNI CAL

>I"MOM;;:,

11 ~_. _\..,

{'."fT.

,," ~ .. -\.' .. ' ••...•• ,;. '. ' ' ·· .. ·.7 ' ," J .. '

"f," ",'" G' 1f."A ,CdI

.' ' ~OLLO ' .. A .. '~ .• I' . .:'ENT AND "'CENT TR ,.eTO.R ~ .•.••. s.,~,)ln

.1( '~' '"

NASA TM X-58040 Ma.cll 1970'

Pt'"Gl sc!t~~d to

the AIM 8th Aet'(~.space Seie'rlces Mt!'e~ting New York, New YQ,i!'l~" Jar!l,ugJ,J:'Y Hl-21, 197Q

f

NA 1~ONAL AERONAUTICS AND £iFAC E ADMlN1E'fRl\. 'HON MANNED SPAC,RCR.A.FT (:I!iN'rER

HOUSTON, TEXAS

NASA 'I'M X-58040

, ,

. ".

,.

't.

:~

.i-" of-" ',i"

APOLL9 LUNAR DESCENT AND ASCENT TRAJECTURIE8

F'Joyd V-Bennett Mann·~d spacecraft Center Hou ston, Texas·

.~

l' ; ....

.>

.",

.",

-. '!

AIBST!RACT

-,

~.

A description of the prernisston planning, re,al- c time strulltion,anct tXl5tiligM analysis for- the lunar de"scent :olrnd ascent. p.hases of the Apollo 11 missIon) the first manned lunar landing, is given. Ad.b.al flight results are shown to. be in agr eemehj witb prennaston plarming, Based 01 ApoUo 11 postflight . analysts, a navigation correction capabiltty was provided fOl' Apollo 12, A prel iminary postfligbt summary ot the descent for Apollo 12.~ the first pinpohlt landi]t~l is also included,

~.

')

.'

-"

APOLUJ LUNAR DESCEN1AiNDASCENl iRAJECTOR,!ES

By Floyd V. IS en n ett Manned Spacecraft Center

I NTR OD iU CTI ON

Lunar-Module (LM) descent and ascent pr emtsston planning for landing men em. the moon started in t962 wH:h the decision to uss the Iunar orblt rendezvous (LOR) tachrrique fo,t the ApoUo mission (ref. O. The LOR concept advanced by Houbolt and OUil.HS is dI@fim~d in reFerences Iand 2. ThIiS technique allowed design of LM systems and trajeetorvplarmtng to be optimized for orbital descent t,o. and ascent Irorn the lunar surface.

The LM descent was .destgned to be aceornphshed in two powered. flig.ht maneuvers: a. descent orbit tns€rtion(DOl) maneuver and the powered descent maneuver. The DOl maneuver', a. short OJ:" impulsive-type transfer maneuver, is. performed to reduce the orbit altitude from the eo mmand and seJL"'Vice module (CSM) parkjng orbit to a lower altitude for efficiency in initiating the Ionger, more cornpl ex powered descent maneuver. The baste t:raj ectory design for the pow€I"€:(I descent was divtded into thr-ee operational phases: an :i.nitiaJ fuel- optimum phase, a IMding approach transition pha se, and a final translation and touchdown phase, The initial trajectory analysts whieh led to, this design was pel'fOl'med by Bennettand Price (ref. 3). In ref,erQncc 4J Cheatltam and Benn,ett provided .<l) detailed descr-iption of the L WI d.e-scent d€sign. strategy. This

de sc ri ptton tllust rat es the c omplex int e raetion s among Sly ste rris {guidance t nav igation and control, propulsion) and landing radar), crew, trajectory,. and operational constraints. A mote de~H(jd description. of the guidance, na:viga.tion" and control system is: given by Sear s (reI.. 5). As l.M s,ysbems changed from design concept to r,eaHty and as operational constraLnts we.re modified, it was necessary to modify or reshape the descent trajiectory; however, the basicthr-ee-phase design phHo,sopby was sil:.iill urihz.ed.

The L M asc ant was de signed as a single powe red night m aneuver to retu rn th e CrE!W from the luna!' surface (or from an aborted d,e SIC eat) to a satisfactory orbit from which rendezvous with. the CSM could be performed, The basic traieetorv design. for the powered ascent was diYided into two ope rattonal phases: a vertii?al rise phase for surface clearance and a fuel- optimum phase for orbit inaertion. Thua, the ascent planning was more straightforward titan the descent planning (and, because of the lack of atmospher-e, simpler than earth launch planning).

The purpose of the present report is to describe the pr ernl seion operational planning forLM descent. and ascent, that ts, to describe the bridge from design planning: to ihgM operational s talus" A dI se us s ion of th ~ P rtmary crite ri a w hie h p rectpi L'1 ted t.h.e plan for Apollo 11, the first manned lunar landing on July 20, 19809; a. compa rtson of the

r eai-f ime $UU~ltiOIJ with this plan; and a discuasion of the postflight analysis and ita appl i cation to Apollo 12 and subs equent mrsstons are inc.luded, A pr-el iminary postflight drscusalo» of Apollo 12, the Iir st pinpoint landing, ia also included.

Th(' author wishes to acknowl edge the member's of Ute Lunar Landing SecUon of Uw Landing Analysis Branch: (Mission Planning and Analysts Division) who contrfbut ed !tj the generation of much of th,e data presented in thts report, part icular.ly, W" M. Bolt, ,J, H. Alphin, J .. D, Payn , and J" v . West.

PREM I SS I ON PLANN! NG

Pr emrss ion planning entails an Integration of mission requi .. remellts or obj eeti vos with systems and e rewcapablf lties and cnnst.raints. This integration is tirne varying since naithcr mission r aquir ements nor systems perto rmance .t·.emaiinstaUc.This sta Lern ent haebeen particularly true of the LM descent and ascent Inal1eUV8[,S which have been '[ years in design and planning.

A major problem lin the d!esig-nof the descent and ascent maneuvers was the lack f a sattsja elory night simulation; thatIs , these maneuvers could be simulated propedy only by actual perfor-mance of the first manned. Iunar' landing mrssion, For this rouson, constderabl.e eHort h3S bern spent on r-el.iabtltty, rodundancv, and flight safety.

Ij} this section, the final evolution of' the planning for the descent and ascent mal1E'llVOrS for Apollo 11., the Itr st manned luna).' Landing, wm. he described. A brief desc z-ipt ion of the pertinent systems, the guidance logic" the ope rattonal design phases, . tie trajectory cha .. r actemsttcs, and the t!J.V and propellant requirements for each maneuver Is provided.

D esce n t P I a r1 n i 19

The LM descent f rbm the CSM parking crbtt (approximately 62 by 58 nautical lni l,t~s) i s il lustra ted in figure 1. After the

1 1' ... 1 and the CSM have undecked and sepa ~ rated a bare distance (several hundred f€et}, the LM perform s OOI,which is the It r st and the simplest or the two des cent rnaneuv 1'5 .. Descent orbit insertion, whicr. is a 8boi't :retrogr<:lde maneuver ot approx - irna tcly 75 Ips perf a I'm. cd with the descent cnginC', is made at a posttion in the orbit 1BO a (Hohmann-typs transf'er] from powel'cd descent initiation (PDl)., the second descent maneuver - The purpose of the

DOJ i s lo olf i ciently reduce the orbit a It.itud from approximately 60 nautical rrrilr s to 50 000 feet for PDL Pe rrormance of cont muous powered descent from. a ltttudas mur » ~rr.ater than 50 000 fed, it; lneff'Ictcnt, and a PDIolt lowe-r than 50000 fpet can bl"("'()m~' :1 s;:)fr-ty hnza rd (n~L 3). The 001 ts d scribed in the operational tr' )C'{"to~'y

Flgu.re 1. - Lunar module descent,

documentation at MSC and is discussed further in the section of this repo r t entitled "Real-Time Analysis." Powered descent planning will be discussed in the remainder of this section.

Ql?erational phases of powered descent. - The LI\I powered descent traj ect o ry design was established (ref. l)as a three-phase maneuver (as illustrated in fig. 2) to satisiy the operational requirements imposed

I}. such a maneuver. The first phase,

caned the braking phase, is designed prj - marily f or efficient propellant usage whi le reducing orbit velocity and guiding to "high gate" conditions for initiation of the second phase, called the approach phase. The ---~~

term II high gate" is derived from aircraft //

pilot terminology for beginning the approach LOW GAn to an airport. The approach phase is de - li.NOIHG.

Signed for pilot visual (out the window) mon- ~'<.::.::>

itor ing of the approach to the lunar surface. The final (or landing) phase, which begins at "low gate" conditions (again from pilot terminology), is designed to provide continued visual assessment of the landing site and to provide compatibility for pilot take- Figure 2. - Operational phases of powered

over from automatic control for the final descent.

touchdown on the surface. A brief descrip-

tion of the systems required and the guid-

ance and targeting logic for achieving these operational phases is given in the f'o l lowtng sections. A detailed description of e a c h phase is also g i v en in the operational trajectory documentation.

C5,M CH4!BIT

Mil

PH A IE I INITIAL 1VINT D£>lGN C~ITERtA
I --
(5,Ii!AK~NG rDI M,INIMIH PRO~1tLANT U \A G[
"'PP~OACI< j HIGH G .""E CHW II I ,I'BILII Y
._.
LANDiNG I lOW GAl! I MANUAl CONTROL Systems description. - The success of the LM powered. descent is dependent upon the smooth in.teraction of several systems. The pertinent systems are the primary guidance, navigation, and control system (PGNCS); the descent p ropu l si on system (DPS); the reaction control system (ReS); the landing radar (LR); and the landing point designator (LPD). A detailed description of each system and of the characteristic performance of each system is given in reference 6. A brief description of each system follows.

The PGNeS consists of two major subsystems: an inertia! measurement unit (IMU) and a computer. The !JliIU l s the navigation sense r. incorporating accelerometers and gyros to sense changes in velocity and attitude reference. The IMU sends this information to U1€ computer, which contains preprogram ed logic for navigation, for calculation of guidance commands, for execution of steering commands (by means of the digital autopilot (DAP)) to the DPS and ReS, for processin.g of LR measurements of range and veloel ty relative to the lunar surf ace, and for display of information to the crew. The crew controls the choice of computer operation through a display and keyboard (DSKY) assembly. A description of the guida.nce logic is given in a subsequent section. A complete description of the guidance, navigation, and. control logic is given in ref e r e nee '7.

The DPS, contaf ning the rocket engine used for lunar descent and its cont rol s, (;i)l't~~l.':;L'; of a th rottl« and a girnbal drive capable of ± S" of motion. The engine has a n.ax imum thrust of approximately 10 000 pounds (nominal engines varying from 92.5 to 9:", 5 percent uf the design thrust of 10 500 pounds). This thrust level is r efer red to as i:H: fi_X0'(i throttle position (FTF) and is used fur efficient velocity reduction during the brzJilt1g pha.se. It is tnrottteabl c between 10 percent and 60 pe rc ent for controlled op- 2nlliolls in the approach awl landing phases. The throttle can be controlled auto matic',LLy by the PGNCS guidance commands or by manual controls. The gimbal drive is co:'tre,lled automatically by the D!~.P ro r Slf)1.V attitude rate commands. For high rate ,:lE~ilgeS) the DAP controls the RCS"whicl1 consists of four groups of four small control }'l);,'kets (100 pounds of th ru st each) mounted on the L'M to contr-ol pitch, roll, and yaw.

The Ln, mounted at the botto m rear of the LM) is the navigation sensor which jH'CY ides ranging and veloc ity inf'or rnation relative to the lunar surface. The LR con-

s ist s of four radar beams, one to provide ranging measurements and three to provide

v cloc ity measu re ments. This bea.m pattern) which is illustrated relative to the LM body axis system in figure 3, can be oriented in one of two positions, as shown in parts (c) and (d). Position 1 is used in the br aking phase when the LM is oriented near the horizontal. Po sit ion 2 is used in the approach and landing phases as the LM orientation nears a vertical attitude. The guidance computer converts the ranging infer-rna-

t i on 1:0 altitude and updates its navigated state every 2 seconds. The guidance computer also converts the velocity m ea.su r e ment along each beam to platform coordinates and update s ,1 single component of its navigated vel oc ity every 2 seconds (requiring 6 seconds for a complete velocity update). The LR data an' also weighted before they are tucorpo rated into the computer (ref. 7).

LOCATION OF t·

(:l) Luna r module body ax cs

e D11 D21 03 AR~ VHOCilY BEAMS " 04 IS AN AtTITUOE 8EAM

BOI(ESIGHI

.... 1 A

Co) Landing radar ant enna axes.

~'ii~un: 3, - Lunar rnodul e body and L_F(_ .LX/"S.

l '

l

Xe(A

I

z a.

(c )L2!ndlng radar pes! tton ] tu.sed mnrak- {el) Lal,tdlng radar position 2 (used on, ap-

ing phase), p roach and landing phasea).

The final system to be described is

a grid on the commander" S forward window called The LPD (fig. 4). The window is m arkedon tit ein ne r and au te r panes to form an ai.ming device or eye position, Du ri ng th e approach and lanai ng phase 5 J' the c omputer catcuiates the Iook angle (relative to the forward body axi s 2B) to the

Ianding site and displays it on the Ds!~Y, The commander can then 5igJlt along Ute angle on tlle LPD (zer.o being along £B)

to view the tanding- ar ea to which, be is being guided" If the commander destr as to change Hie landing area, he can make incremental changes m plane or cross range by moving the hand controHeI" in the appropr-iate direction. to provide inputs to the co J11})u ttl' ' C 1'0,5 6 - rang e pes i tion is changed Itn2t iecrementa, and in-plane position is changeGi in o. s" increments. See re-ie,r.(!)nc0s '7 and 8 fot' a detailed de-· scrtptton of the guidance Iogic.

Ftgur e 4, - Forward window.

~ ~~ ~k!.::~.;2:~ J 0l~ i_~. - The b,L~ i c de Gee nt gu i.d<w f. e 1. DE; ic is .(i e n n ed byan Ole c: el eration C}l1i ~i.,~tnd·Y..'hl-.:-l~ I::; J. quadratic Iunction of timeand is, th,ereior©, termed quadratic

~"\.! i dJ.nc c- A si m~)l if.'·ed now char t ~ji' thi.~ quadratic guidance la given in figure 5. The

ell :Tf~r::l 1,·\1 ~()~iL11)11 and vr.!t)...;i.lY,·Edor8 ~

:..

a.ul ~... ure detGnnined f'rnm the navigation

~·("";d j I; t··, The r.k,·~; l r ed {or hwg,et, position

, ~

rl:-ctfl~· ;-i~""., -~-':'iDcit-; r'r-~etCli~ ·'V,.-...I aCf_'clel"r-

- ~ ....::-: :~.J

,~L'. ,:in 1.'( COl" A 7",-' and dcwn - c2_;,!.~e compu-

!. i

[lent. 01 .~f·:·k ,1DZ are cbtamed from the strn-r d ruemory. ("Jerk ts Ute timEl dnrrvdF~~ uf accel e ratton.} The down-range (}K)t·~7.l)nU.ll components of th{)S·f; BtGl;(O vsct{IL'l I>:U r r ent and d:::-si.r''3'd) il.re llseel. in the j0rlr dquAion to deterrntne t l rn € tc !~C (TGO)1 that ts , the time to t(.'o f rom cu rrent to d("~s l !'ea condi ttons. If U~{l TGO, the n.lYi-tt!.t ·~tatc} and ths desiI'ed 8L.1.:[(: (i!,{~ known, then the commanded ac ceieratiDn vee u

~

tor Ai·" 18 deter min.ad from the quadrntk F'igure S. - Basic descent guidance logtc.

'".-

gu idanc€ law, It should be noted that: th.e acceleration command eC1L1ation yieldr> in-

f inlt c cQ:rrnllands when TGO reaches zero. PDr this r eason, the targeting is bi~.fiied such Uw.I do:;:sircd eonditions ar e achieved p rio.:' to TGO reaching l;ero ,Usit1g space-

C nut mass Mjcalculating~he accel eration dIfferential between. commended and lunar

g ravtty G, and applyi tlg Newtrm' e law yields a commanded thrust vector ;of c· The magnitude of the vector 1.5 used to provide autnmattc thrnttltng of the DPS. When the throUle cormnands exceed the throttle region oJ the DPS (to to 60 pel'ICent), maximum thntst (F'TP} 1.'5 s.pptieci. The vectcrdlr-ection is used by the DAP to or-tent the DPS U~nl :;it, by ~~iUH' r t r lm gimbal attitude commands or HCS commands to :reorient the en~ t i r-e space c rail .

TP .. H'i.ng thepower ed descent, Hw guidance cornpu t-CI provides. several sequential

p [·o~~nl.Tr:h (P - (},3 to P - 57} for guidance anrl control oper-at ions. fA descr-iptron of each.

p r ogT4.m Joliew 5, A cornpl etc descriptiou of the d.escent guidanc e log;c and guidance modes is ~ive!l in r81ere-nc8s"i: to "9. ThE! f'ir-st prog ra ill is P- 6 3 enli tl ed nbraktng phase g uidanrc. tt Prugrarn p, {) 3 contains an igrii tlon <ilg-orithm and the basic b'll idance log-lc. The if"~Il.![::(Jn 1 o!J:l r: date rmtnas the tiro"e Em' t~le c rcw to '~gnlt8~h(' DPS for ]pDT, based on a s~r)I·cd 6H'~s~lected) su rtac e ril;ag,i;_; io the Ianrling site. jHte~'~gJ1Hion .• the basic gutdance logi t: is used to ste,e r tIJ the de si red conditions Ior begtnning t.h~ appr oacn ph as e . ,6.", stated nrovioc sly , U;~ targets. :1re sel e cted with a ldas sud, that the de.si.r-ed condltions ::Ln~ a~e:,h.h:''iie.(.l prior to TGO r·ea.ebinf~ zer-o. Vlhen TGO r-eaches a preselec.ted. value, the ~~Lli.dunrc proG'.rn:111I S\vttC.h&8 a:utorllati('8:Hy from program P-'63 [0 pr-o-

g ran ~ P - f:1 en t i ~ Ic d I; u PP j' o :a.c.b pha,·H.' KU E da nc e. '" (I!'":, is p ro gra.rn couta L~Hl th e Same bat; ic glli.dan(T lv!!]{'> but :.!E. n ew sd of tarpet s. The's2 targets ;J.re selectedto pr-ovido tra.·pr« 1'~' '·i,,~~pb~ r':. ·,~,:~l~)A -:h(' '\.1JoFr(l,,~;h find l.~r~::l1rqr pl>:.t;;;(~s~ .. ;J1d to cstnbl ish conditions re'.:: illil,jl.". ::i'.~" »: I!~:tl"':.,:,~~;:: ".I~:r"~·:r'a.~ d~~~.f"f·r~t Cr·:")]',': ~~ lo~~v altiLudc: to tuuchdewn. In

addition, program P-64 provides window pointing logic for the; LPD operation. That is, the landing point will be maintained along the LPD grid on the commander's window. During this time, the crew can make manual inputs with the attitude hand controller to change incrementally (down range or crOSB rang e ) the intended landing site and remain in automatic guidance. (See the section of this report entitled .tSystems De sc rtption. '1)

Again, when TGO reaches a pr ese-

1 ectcd value) t.he guidance program switches AlllTUD! automatically from program P-64 to pro-

gram P-6.5 entitled "velocity nulling guidance. t t This pr-ogram nulls all components of velocity to preselected values and is used for an automatic vertical descent to the surface, if desired. No position control is used during this guidance mode. The sequencing fo:r automatic guidance is illustrated in figure 6.

Program- p- 66 entitled II rate of descent" and program P-67 entitled "manual guidance" are optional modes which can be used at crew discretion (manually called

up through DSKY) at any time during the automatic guidance modes (programs P- 6 3, P~64, or P -65). During P-66 operation,

the crew controls spacecraft attitude, and the computer commands the DPS throttle in order to maintain the desired altitude rate. The desired altitude rate can be adjusted by manual inputs from the crew. This mode is normally entered late in P-64 operation (near low gate) prior to P-65 switching for manual control of the final touchdown position. Program P-67 maintains navigation and display operations for complete manual control of the throttle and attitude. Normally, this mode is not used unless pro-

gram P-66 is inoperative.

RANG.

'QUIO .. NCI P-65 IS VHOCITY NUlliNG orHY

Figure 6. ~ Target sequence for automatic descent guidance.

Braking phase. - A scale drawing of the LM powered descent for the Apollo 11 mission is given in figure 7. The intended landing area (de signated Apollo site 2) in

the Sea of Tranquility is centered at latitude 0.6° N and longitude 23.5° E. The major events occurring during the braking phase (illustrated in fig. 7 and tabulated in table I) are discussed as follows. The braking phase is initiated at a preselected range (approximately 260 nautical miles) from the landing site near perilune of the descent transfer orbit (altitude of approximately 50 000 feet). This point is PDI, which coincides with DPS ignition. Ignition is preceded by a 7. 5- second ReS ullage burn to settle the DPS propellants. The DPS is ignited at trim (10 percent) throttle. This throttle setting is held for 26 seconds to allow the DPS engine gimbal to be al ined (or tri.mmed) through the spacecraft center of gravity before throttling up to-the max irnu m, or fixed throttle, position. The braking phase is designed for effici ent reduction of orbit velocity (approximately 5560 fps) and, therefore, uses maximum thrust for most of the phase; however, the DPS is throttled during the final 2 minutes of this phase for guidance control of dispersions in thrust and t r aj ecror y . As stated earlier, the DPS is th rott leabl e only between 10 and 50 percent; therefore, during FTP operation, the guidance is targeted such that the commanded quadr at i c acceleration (and consequently the commanded thrust) is a decreasing function. when the command decreases to 57 percent

h,

N, M~"

Figure '"[ ,- Apollo U L]I.;f powered descent.

TABLE [_ - APOLLO [1 prU:M[ss]ON POWE~!~J) J)ESCEl'<T .EVENT SUMMARY

,:,."

I~c ·----;....---O-O :-0-7

wer~~d <l.S~·~l'll DO~QO m mntion

i

(' T:H'OtUf, Lr; maxi- \

"",m thrll~t

D Re1.He to ..... ioom .... -s- I

up p!)51tiiln I

t:: t.n <Inlitud~

I I

f

. I

l J Tou c 11 du '''';- :'p ;,d,t' 1 ctmt;lC~ J

---- __, - ----

G LR v 1?1l1C'Lr.:,' u;jJd;;J[1?

rna mil .s ec

-3-

O'J:56 4000

-50

O~: B 3~65

"i 0·6

J9 2.0L 25.% I

I

~4 ~3~ 4~39 I

22 H4 I 'l3~9 I "[ 515 ! 5:)7'5 I

_':: I :::: j

OG:~~ 1J 15

-145

-J

__ ._l __ ...

(~3-pereent. low bia9),~he i)PS is lhrottl ed as commanded (tlluatrated by the time history of commanded and actual thrust shown in fig, 8 (a»).. The thrust attitude (pitch) profl.ls is shown in Hgu're .8 (b), Early ttl the descent, crtentatton about the th rust axis is by pilot drscratton. The Apoi lo 11 crew ortentcd in a windows-down altitude for visual ground tracking as a gross navigatl on cheek, P..otation to awindows- up attitude is periorbH'd at ~U! altitude of approximately 45 000 feet so that the LR can acqurr e the lunar surface tn order to update the guidance computer estimates or altitude and velocity, Altitude updating is expected to beg ill. at an altitude of approximately 39 000, feet. Velocity updating is expected to begtn at approxl mately 22. QUO feeL

---.:Ii.l;fIi,1.:>1

--~- O::O~M~NDHI'

],6- r---.

1 "."

1

I

12: 1

I.

~ .. OiS~!jJ$Wt. tHlOTUf, i\H<:I''1I~'"

...... , ~""'I

"-,

In - "",PP .. OACHo

1----~Ui<I .. (:;-·-- - -,----1--.1 l,ll.NOlt.l5

Pl, ~ ~ J't(llol "I E H I( "i. 01.<;·

" S ItI

W .. IE fRO ..... '()~IrIOt-l, ..... 11'01

.~

II M~ ~~o II.<, I g.N·:~~OU'i, "'",I r<I

10

(a) Thrust.

(b) Attitude.

Ftgur e B, - Time history Qf thrust and attttude

The braking phase is tarmmated when the guidance-calculated 'J"GO (to achieve targets) is reduced to 60 seconds. 'I'er mination occurs at an aUl'tude of approximately 7000 Ieet, a range of approxtmat ely 4,;) nautical miles. from the landing aite , and a time from igrntton (T:F':O of 8 minutes 26 seconds. The gutdance 'Computer- automatically switches programs and targets from program P-63 to program P-l34 in order to begin the approach phase, as explained in, the provtous section.

Approach phase. - The approach pi.iJ.as'e (fig. 9) provides visual monttortng o.i the approach to the lunar surface. That is; the guidance (program P-54) is targeted to provide spacecraft attrtudss and fH.g:ht time adequate to permit crew visibility of the landing area thr-ough the forward window throughout the approach phase At high gate] i.n addition, to HH; guidance program switch, the LR antenna is switched from pcsttton 1 to position :2 for operation near the surface. (See the section of this report entitled

It 8y5t e ~8 De sc ririi on. l~) Tb e t raj EtC to ty app r~ ach angl e (gHd eo angl e) is _ Shown. to be approximately 16 relative to the surface. ThIS angtealtows the c rew vtsuai lme of stght to the landing area to be above the SUIlL angle 000. g,a nominal to 13.6" maximum) even in disper-sed (up to 30) situations. The angle above the Sun line ~s desirable becaasc surface roatures t-end to be washed out when looking ~_1ong or 'below the Sun line, (See reJ. 10.) The LM attitude, LPD angle, and LR beam geometry are also shown in fig:ure 9. During the approach phase, the altitude decreases from 7000 to 1500 feet] the range decreases tr . m approxunatel y 4 .. 5 nautical miles t.o2000 feet, and the time of flight is approxtmately 1 mmuts '10 seconds, Although no guidance changes or othe r

U·d.bienLS are m;a..ct€, operati na.Hy, the appr oaeh phass is consider-ed to be terrntuated at an aJti.tudc of 500 [Get (low gate}, at which point the landing phase begins"

k. n

b j-----t--___,f--.--"""l----__,!---

1~~~IIl~IT1J

ij II It 11] 14 S :0: 10 3!

!J.t-H;H, r r

J -.- _~ ... J ~_..I..---..,........i,._=. _..,.-~_~ ........ J..i!-- __ -IJ

~ ~ 4 4.5

·f(A~Gi', "Ii_ )0\1

"'l,- ............ ,;.!.1~_.....,_~ __ ~J ~ __ _.L~~~ ~ ~ _ _...

11,~~ re.cc 9,.0100 10>·,:;10 'ilLOU li,';(} :8.20

Tf i, ;II~Hh!l ill e

L-.__..J __ o

~'iglil"e 9. - Approach phase,

Land ing pl1,lS'el: - The l[=.Llldlng pnas e i s designed co provtde conrinued visual asscssment 0{ the landing stte and to provide compattbiltry for pilot takeover from. the automatic. ,(:::(mtroL No change occurs in gu idanc(! law c: r targets at this point (10'\'1' gate) bacause the approach pha..S€ targets ha, e been selected to satisfy the additional constr aints. The approach and. landing phase ,af'g~t.s (pro.gram P-64) yield conditions 101' inttia.ting the ~\ulomati.c vertical .de·s-cent :from an alHt-ude of approximately 150 Ieet at

a 3-fps vertical downwar-d altitude rate - These condit inne, along with the selected acceleration Md jerk targets, yi.eld tl'Rjedory conriirlcna at a 500-foot altitude of 60 fpa of Iorward velocity, H3 Ips of vertical rate , and an attitude of approximately 16" off

the vertical. Th,ese condttions we re considered sattslactory by the crew for takeover of manual contr-ol. Should tbe crew continue on autnrriat] C gurdance, at a TGO of to ~H:"'!Conds, prog rarn P-65 ((ho vetocttv nulling g 'ldaw::e} tt> autornattcal ly called to maintain the velcci ties Icr vertical descent to the St. rIac.e, Pr-obes (extended 5,- 6 teet below the landing pads )., upon making Btl dace contact, acti vatc a Ilght which sigl'WS the c r-ew to shut down the DPS manually, \l,lhetlier using automatic (H· manual, guidance. The Ia ncling phase trajectory is shown 11IH.h~l" automatir glJidanc.e ill figure 10-

P r emlssron e stunate s of dbp€I'Sl,OnS in Ianding positroa are shown in fiJPJ I"C 1 iThe se disperaions, wntcn are based un 3_ Mnrrte Cado analyst S" tnctude all known systcrr]s performance- as defifi.ed. ill r("f:'~-~nc:e {)_ Das(d on this ~r;~~lY5lS~ tile 99-]J~1'C'et'tprub,ab~lily ~~.nd~nl.; elliu:·q-:! was d.""!termi.~\crl TO by.' • .";l.~! nau.tiC":3!! iniJes iil plane by .:~! J !i:~':.t'!.~ ~"~:I~~ 'Hi!;?s [. :'!)~"~' ··~~li1~.: r.

~! f'l"

~ ,,1000 "'"", .......,-.....-~-..---.---,.---.-....,.--.--..~,...-~~F"'"..,....__,.-.,.....

e

.2' ~,A'.U~a:, M. 1M L

.3

. .t

HJol20

lfl. MJN~UC

1(11.40

Figure 10. - Land.ing phas e .

Figure 11.'~ Predicted ApoHo l11.anding dispersions.

11

The /J,.V M,d propellant n>.quiremellts,. ~ The !!J.V and propallant 1',equtrements a re dete-rmined by the nmnlnal haj,ectol'Y de-sign. contingency requir-eraents and dtep;;rshms. Consequently ~ these requtrements have under-gone continual uhange, The

f inal de stgn requirements are reported in reference- 11. The final operation :req~iI'ements are given in table II. 1'11.' required 6827-f.ps 4.V is e$ta.bHshed by the automatic guided nominal. In additiou, 85 tpsts added to aSBuN 2 minutes of flying time in tne Ianding pnaae, that ts, below an altitude of 500 feet. (The autcrnatie guidance requtres only 104 seconds of flying time for the Iandtng phase. J Also) i1: eO-ips AV is added

Ior LPn operation in the approach phase t n order' to :3)votd large crate r-s (10.00 to ~OOO feet in diameter) in the Ianding area. Conti.r'l..g:~nc:y propellant allotments are provided tor failure cf a DPS redundant propellant flow valve and fot' biaa on propellant 10w- level light operation, The valve hUll r€ causes a shin "in propellant mixture ratio and a lower thrust (by about 160 pounds), but othel"Wise, DPS operation is satisfactory, The Iow -Icvel light sigrlri.Hes approaching pt'opella..lt depletion;, there£o,r'C, a. bias Isused to protect against disper-sions in the indicator. If the low-level. light should ian, the

c rew u seS the propeHant gage reading of 2: percent rem.a.tn.1ng as the abort dectsion Indicator. The light SE:-!1S0l" pruv idas more accuracy and is therefor e prei~rred over the

'TABLE n. - DESCENT' I!N AND PROPELLANT REQUIREMENTS

Item

r- .. -------.--~------ --~"'-~-.--r--------r_-~-----__,

I

I

l

Syst8'n1 capacity (7.051 - 2 lb fuel, 1!.1 ,200. 3 ~b Ox irllzer)

Offloadad (minimize malfunction penalty)

Unusabre

Availabte for f:.V

Nominal l·equired 101.' 4V (6827 Ips)

Di.Bperslons (- 30}

Pad

Conttngertci.e s

Englno '\iSiive malfunction (t..MR = ± 0, 016) Redl ine low- level s,enSQr

nccl('si~:rU1.tiO[l {Go. Ips;

Manual hover (B5 Ips.]

~ ~'tll;;:'!.l·gt u

l~. . .. __

,

I

I

! f

I

_. ~ • ._.I. __

Propellant r'e qui red, lb

Propellant remaining, lb

75,4

250. 5

16 950. ill

29.2. (I

64- ., 6.8 _ 7 102..9 lH,O

13 260.5

181815-,1

17 934.6

17 9'34,6

973,7

68~-7

681. '1

6l7. [) 54B. 3 445,4 3,01.. 4

_- 301_4

. .---.--~~---.------.-----

mc<~n;:; that the verttcal r+se phase is te:r;L i~.ld(:d 10 seconds after hi1-off. Also! durinL~ the vertical rise, the LM Z body J:}[; is is rob~fied to the deed red az Irnuth, which is normally in the CSM orbit plane-

The ornit inser-tion phar;(! isd~sig!1ed ror effident propellant USR~e to achiove DrolL condttiona fo r subsequent ~'~11{:ezvo'U 5. 'The o:l_'btt Insertton phase; tho total ascent phase performance, inss rticn orb-tit paramt~tcrs. lind onboard displavs at tnser hon ~",<l'C shown in figlH€ 14- T •. e onboard display values reflect the cnrnpute r-, asu mated valuea. Yaw Bteerlng is lJsecl dul']ng the od:Lt insertion phase, if requlr ed, to maneuver the LMin'to the CSM orbit plano or into Q plane paraltclwith the CSM orbit.

In the nominal case, no yaw steer-ing Is !:e:[lli:t"oQ. The ncrnlnal ascent burn time

i s 7 minutes 18. seccnds wah a 30 dispersion of ± l'1 seconds. Th e tra] ectory diap8rHiD~~s are plotted in Ii rurc 15. The ascent guidance logic is 4isCUSSf}d in tho Iclluwing sectton.

Guid::mcE: logic. - The ascent guidance logic commands only ahittJde since no engine turcttling is required. FOr the vertical rt 50 phase, the IG~i'c. is simple: the

i fJ itial atti tude- is hetd tot '2 seconds in order to ctoar the d<?scent stage; tne atti~]d{' is pitched tothe vertical while rotating La the desired azimuth; and i.~:rmifJation o c. cu r s whcn ih e a.I ti tu cl e r8; t cis g::re a u~!' than 01' equal to 40 Ips upwar-d or when Ute alti tude is g:r-eater than 23 GOO feet {used for aborts of[cl[:;sf..:ent).

The ir,~;;~rticm phase g-u±dancE logtc

is defined by an accel e ration command which is a l inea.r function of" lime and te, thQr<~~Ol'0, i e rrned lmear guidance. The TGO is determined as R. functton of velocity to be gained, that 15 ~ the diffe rence betwe en current and destred velocity. '1'his TGO. along with crur ont and destr ed targets, is u sed to determtne acce~eration commands in ra dial 2.11<"1 C ross- range dit-S'{': lC:1S, 'l"'~"l'~. <\(~c2lt!'", rattnn arailublr- from

Ti""'~ !'flaM lin -OFF He

'QT~L ~H E.r.lr,

!d.ltN 11P;t!i !: ., ~r'N ~[I; j,!ii('

~" ~HH!IUII) = ,,,o~o !p~ 'l!:()'~ULJi.Nl UOU!UIl = ~~lJ.4 U

,j;JIU1iC·", OU,~I t"',t,:l,M!U~S h~ ~ ;:; oJ .OC-CJ P ~

i'E-a = 4~ iJII,.JinL

" I! II"

1":: J"='

v = ~~~~6 ~H h, = n.~ F~S

~ "' ~~,Ol~.~ IT

Flgllre 14. - Orbit insertion phase.

;110[" 1'00 'I:tD ~~!'Hn_ N.,.,k

} j 5U r e 15- - Pr-edicted Apollo 11 O!s.eent dispersiorrs.

according to the DAP logic to sati.sfJi these eommands, with any remain.ing acceltratlon belng applied in the down-range direction, Cress-range steertng is limited to 0" :J,Q, Gut-of-plane maneuvertng greater than O. 51l ts combined with the subeequeut r endezvous S1;lCll,l,encitlg maneuvers. '..vb,en TGO becomes les8 than. 4: seconds, a timer Ls activated to cut aff the APS at that time.

Three ascent gutdance programs are used: program P-12 for ascent frOlll the surface, l):t'o!Gralh P-70 fOr ascent aborts during: deScenit (to be performed with the OPS), and, pr-cgr-am P-'ll for ascent n,bol'ts dlll'in.g descent (to beperfQi'med with the APS). All the programs USB the ~!:J.d::iea.l !"'] se ami inaertton logic daecr'ibed pre v io11]!51y" They differ only by the targeting: logicused to est~bU.s,h the desired orbit il!~,serttoncondttlons. For aocrtsat PDI and through the b.r~",~ing phase? the t.M {a.s. a result of the 001 maneuver) 1<::; ahead of ULe CSM.. During the approach and. landing phases, the CSM moves ahead of the LM. Therefore, tile desrred orbit tnsertion conditions targeted by progr-ams P-70 and. P-"!] vary as a function of phase relationship between the LM and. CSM to establish rendezvous sequencing, Reference 7 contains a3!. complete description o~ the ascent guidance logic,

The i1 V and pr 0Jle lIa.r.t r L9q::-J. i r Ell 111 ent s. ~ The AV andp ropellan t r equt rem ent s are determined by the nominal tr.aJeCtory design, conting@rilcy reqlliI·ementa~ and disper-sions, CQnseq1l1.enUy~ the r.equbeHlentr for ascent, as for dill's,eent) have \].ndle:rg:o]'lE\l continual change The final design 1l'8quire.m.8f.lts i!l..re given. in re.fe:rence U. Thef'inal operatton requl:rements are given tn table, HI. Th,a requir ed 6050-fps t!.V is e stablishedby the nominal insertion into a 9- by 45-nauhcal-mHe orbrt. In addition, a 54-ips tN Ls provided Jortwo contingencies. A 40-fps ~ V 1.s. provided for the first contingencv, which tsa swttchover from PGNCS to AGS for tnsertlng from an oH~ ncmmal trajectory caused by a malfunctioning PONes. A H·-fps !:N is provided for the second eontingency, in which the thrust-te-weight ratio is r-educed in an abort from a touchdown situation wherein the LM is heavier tJUUl the nominal Iif't-off weight. (Some weight is 'nominally off-loaded on the lunar su,riace.) Also~ HI poundsor pr-opelkant fs allotted for c~)intingency engine valve malfunction as in the descent requtrements. Tille allowance for dtspersl.ons is detel'mined Irom the- Monte Carlo aualysj s, As can be seen from: table III, the t;;.,V and Pl'OptlUant l~eqtl.~.rement:s are sati sfied, with a positive margin of 48 pounds,.

IL ::il:.:,;'

~·I"""II"'~' ."I"'~ 1"(I~'II!I:"'r~:..::rj ~ III r: .1"1 !.II i'..)

,..6Ht.~ I':' .... ~s. h:~d';o)-~t !~~ ',"~I

i5

p E 1.,1' -T' N~ c ~ I ' til V (;' .1' S

I ~ )"1_ 1, I L I·" \j ''"''1.1.. I ;J. I "

D'.tring the real-Lime sltuatton, monltor-ing of the spacecraft systems and Df L1.0 traj ~.'C tury is perfortm:::d conttnnatty both on board by thecl'ElW and on the ground bv the flight cuntr cl.ler s. This monitoring deter-minas whether the mission is to be coDJrt{nued m' ;.;.u~;~"tcd as established by mission tDchniquU"~~ IH'ior to flight. The real-tfme situation, I'Jr }iPOUO 11 descent and aso.H-~t is d.escribed III thi; f()llQ'~'ing sectton.

Descent Orbit i nsertion

The DOl maneuver IS performed on the far sirl,e of the mDO.~ {at a. position in the orbit 1800 prior to PDI) and is: therefure, ex e cutod and monitor-ad solely by the crew, o.f ma] ur concern dur-ing thE!' burn is the perfo r rnance of tj~G PGNCS "l.nd the DPS, The nOT maneuver 1.S essentially a l"(?h'og;r-ade burn to redt] ce orbit aUttucle from appr-oxtma_te,~y 60 nautical miles to 50 000 fe·et fm' PIll and reQuUI'es a. 4V redUction. oJ 75 ips. This redaction is accornpl ished by throttling the DES to lO--petcent thrust for 15 secends (c. g:, trimming) and to 40-11erc ent thrust fo t 13 seconds, An overburn of I 2 ips Io t" :3 seconds) would cause the LM to b0 On an impacting: tti;:Ljed.ory prior to PDT. Thus, the DOl is monitored. by" the cr ew with the AGS during the burn and by rangerate traclcing with the rendezvous radar fRR) immedlately after the burn. JiIf the maneuver is unsattsraceory, an imrnedtata rendezvous with the CSM is performed wtth theAG$, For Apollo 11~ l,fds maneuver was nominal. (l)cwn-range rastduats a1t@r tha bu rn were O. 4 fps. )

Powered DEscent

Tl)C powered descent l s a complex maneuver whtch ts dsmauding on both crew aad systems performance. Ther efor-e, as much monitoring as possible is performed on the ground in order to reduce CI'!3W activi.tIes and to use sopMsHca.ted computing techniques not possible en board, Obviously] tirnE-critie:al failures and near-SlIrfa,e,e operations must be monitored on board by th~~ crew 101" 1 rnmedlate action. Pertinen.t aspects of g,\fi.dance, propulsion, and ih[?;l1t dynamics real-tim>€, monitor-ing of the powe r ed descent arc given ,,),.$ follows,

The PGNCS r:r.on ttor ing, - To d,o::tl::'rmin.e. dEgra;doct periormanc.e of the PGNeS, the g round H) ght control] e 1'5 continua.Ilyccmpa i-a the LM vel ocitycomponents computed by the PGNCS with. those computed by the AGS arulw tth th.OS€ determined on. the ground throtlgh Manned Space Plight Networ-k (MSFN) tracking, That is , a two- out- of -three voting comparison ! ol{i r: is used to dr:te~,:rl1 int whether the PGNCS or th-e AGS 1 s degradlng. The power-ed Il ight prceeasor used to C ompute LM velocity from MSFN tr-acktllg data i.H explained in~'ef\;l>0ne€'i':l .. Limit or- redlincs for v€loc\ity resill:'tuals between the PGKeS and the MSFNcompuhl;tioE1;s and betweenthe PGNCS and the AGS computations are established pr emiaston, based on the 8,.!)tHty to abor-t on tho PGNCS to iii: sare {:.JO 000" foot perilune} orbit.

Hi

In real ttme, the Apollo 11 PGNeS and AGrS performance wasclose to no nnual; howewer,a. large velocity dnierenc'e between ttLe PGNCS and the MSFN c'ompu.tatio:n.s in the radial direction off HI Ips Uim1it line is 35 1:p8) was deb~cted at pm., ren'lainhlg constant wen into the burn. T.h~s error did not indtcate a systems performance problem, but rather an 1LIlLitia.lt.zatiou error in down- range posttton.. This eUed Is iUustrated geometrteallytn figure 16. The PGNeS

....:0.. . .....1...

posltton ~ and veloctty V E e.sttmates

are used to inihate the MS.rn powered flight processor" The ,MSFN ci.it€ctly

senses the actual velocity VA at the acttlal positionRNbut being initiaHzedby

......::.. ....i

the PGNeS state, alJpHes VA at REo

Thllrg.~ a flight-path-alit'lgle el'D:Dr' /:;.1' is lntrcduced by a. down- range-pcsttion error and shows up as a radtal velocity dliHe!;>

enee flVD]FF' Th€ magnUJI.]!d.e of th.e

v eloc tty diHer enc e i n d i. C8i. t e B thaa fh e Apollo 11 LM down-range position was in

error by approximately - 3 nauttcal mtles at PDI and throughout the powered descent to landing. The reason for- the down- range navtgation ,errQr was attributed to ,several smatl t1V inputs to the spacecralt state in coasting flight, These inputs were from uncoupled ReS aUii:tude maneuver's and cooling system ventingoota1ccount,ed i'Qr by th e propagation of the predicted navigated state at PDI.

Filgure ]6. ~ Effect of position error on velocity comparison,

The LM g;uidane'e computer (LGC} also. monitors the speed at which it ts performing computation tasks (navigaHon.~, guidance, dis,!pOlays, proce selng radar data, and .auxiliary tasks). II the computer becomes ever-loaded or faIh;, beb]ud in a.c:toml)ti.sMng tnese tasks, an alarm is tssued (to tntorm crewand flight controller s], and prio.rities ar s established 15,0 that til'B rnot€ Importanttasks are accompll.shsd first. This alarm system is termed computer restart protection, During real time, an e rrcnecus voltage signal from file RR was sent to the c nmputer, Th]s. signal caused tne computer to contmaal.ly calculate angles from RR tracking oi t.he CSM and consequently to fan behind in completing its tasks, AS a result, the alarm was dl.sphayed~8Lnd computation pr-iortties were executed by 'the computer. The alarm was quickly recognized. and fligh! control monitcr ing indicated that guidance and navlgaeion functions were being performed. properly; ~bms, tlt.e descent was continued. Despite the initial posH-iion error and the RR mputs, the PGNCS performed excellently dlnirngpowered descent [If tile Apoollo 1]. mtssion.

The DP$gPGNCS interface. - To determine in real Um.€: if the DPS is providing sufficient thrust to aCh.ievethe gutdance targets, the flight controller-s monitor a plotof gu idanc e thru st C ornmand (GTe} VB l'5U is ]11) dz: ontal ve i ocity, as sno wn i n fi~re 17.

17

Nominally:, the GTe decreases (approxtmatelv paraboHcaHy) ft'om an initia.l valus near um percent to ilie throtUeable leveli

I 5'7 percent apptOKirnately 2 minutes: (hori~

I zontal ,!;reiocity 'being 1400 fps) p:ri,o'1' to high

m M~R,LI gate'OlOrhwntaJ. v,eloetty being 500fpos}. Ii

-~, NCl""IP<lI, ~9S001 . the HPSfH·oduC0!3'-s. off-nominal ,high thrust,

-.- ~ ~- ~,., cn"~BIOiN:S

. horizontal velocity is beIng r'ed!l.!c~d more

rapidly than desired in ol"der to reach high-

-:'::---::'::-----:-'-..J...._--::'-~;....~....L.,_---L.____J._--'--=.d gate condrtions. Therefore, the GTe drops

10 1~ ~o:) ~~ ~o ~~ t!l ~~ ~,~ ~,~ 0'!!o;IO~ to 57 percent e8:.dier (art higher than norm-

:,iO.IIZONf ;l.L, ~~tg.:;:I,n. ~I"~

nal velocity) i.n order to guide to the desired. pnsition and velocity targets- This ear-ly throttl,edown results in: propellant ineffi-ciency. H the DPS produces off-nominal

lowthrust, hor-izontal v'elodty is not being' r edu c ed .:ra.p ldly enou gh . Thereto re, th e GTe drops to 57 percent later (at lower

velocity) in order to guide' to the desired posttion and velocity, This later thr()Ulfldm~. resuttsin inc:rea.$ed propellant efn,ei.enc}r (i. 0., longer operation aJt maximum thrust). However) If no thl"'ottle.aowu O'CC-'Ul'S prior to high gate (prog,r-arn switchfrom P-€l:3 to

p- 6 4)~ the targets win not he s.atisHed" and the resulting trajectory may not be sansfactQry {from the standpoint'of visibility). In fact} for e.xt:r@mely low thrust, tbe guidance solution for GT,C can diverge' (fig .. 17); as TGO becomes sman, the gutdance calls for more and mcr e thrust in order to acbieve its targets, This diveqpiHlce can result in an unsafe tl'ajed~ry~ one :fJr'om which an abort cannot tie s~ltLsfactol),rny pel"fornled. The 2-ml:11ute bias for throttle recoverY prior to high gate prov].de:s: sufficient margin foOt 3u low thrust even with propeUant. valve malfunction, However, fli.ght controllers monitor GTe to assure satils:lfadory interface between 'DPS and P'GNCS operation. A mtsstcn rule waseetabllshad that calledror an abort based em GTe divergence. During: Apollo 11, theDPS thrust wasnear-ly nominal (fig. I 7); thus, no ups- PGNeS il1ter~ fa.c.e pr oblerns wereencountered,

--- "'G~A~

_. Q~O~

--·-.n~c

o

Ftg'ure 1.7. - G!;]idanc~' thrust command VETSl..lS horizontal veloc ity.

The LR~PGNCS mterrace. - Normally, La update. oflliB PGNCS aJ.ttrudee'stbtlla.te l.sexpec:.ted to occur (by crew input) at an altttude of 39 (1)0 ~ 500t], feet (30 dt.spe!l's].on). Without LR altitude updating, systems and navtgarion errors ':lI"@ such tha;t the descent cannot be safely completed, In facl:.~ it is unsafe to try to achi,ev8' high gate (where the crew can vt sually assess the approach) without altttude updating. Thus., a mission rul e for real-time operation was estabhs.ned that called for ab'()rting: the descent nt a PGNCS-esUrnatedaltitud.e of ]0 0000 feet if altttude updating has not been established,

In aduttion to the- tOmCE!l'n fo:r the Hme initial altih.ldeupdating oCrCU.,fS is the COncern Icr the amount of aWrude updating (that is, t!le difference between PGNeS ~nd, LR altitude determinations An). Uthe LM is actually higher than the PGNeS estimate, the LR will determine the dtsc repancy and update the PGNeS. The g.;.idanceUten trtes to steer down l'spidly to acMe-we the targets.. As a result of [h,e rapid changee, altitude rates may increase to an unsafe level for aborting the descent. 'fhu:tis, should an abort be required, Ule altitude rates could not be nulled by the ascent engine' in tiime to prevent surtacecolltsic». The ll.h It ruits necessary to avoid thase r-ate s are shown in

figure 18. Notice thd over t(h'e esUmated 3 if region 01 LR LI!liUal updating (whi en at the time of that analysis was, centered at an altitude of only 35 600 feet instead af

39 00(1 feet)~ th,€) t1h limits are much greater than the +50 navtgatten estimates of tJl. HQwev,er, filight c(D['[tronen;;~ as well as the Crew.jMo:nitor 6h to assure the boundary is not ex.ceeded before Ineorpor-ation 'of the LR altitude updating. If

the boun.dary is exceeded, then tft€' data are not incorporated, and an abort. i~ called. Vlhen the LM is actually Icwe r than 'e5timated, no sxceasive rates aI'€! encountered upon LR updating.. It is necessary oruy that the LM altitude and altitude rate be above theabort Iimtts, whic.h are defined in the section of this report entitled "Tra-

j ectory Limits, r!

Jo,~'rr!"U'D~ '0 1~~Jfn~,NU ~~, n ,

~ I

~!

ti 1'L__L____Jl

~'D H 0110 :iii! ~o u !.o ~ IB~ ~I" '!,J '(l,AU "'UI~~~~, n

Ylgtl,:re 18. - La:ndfng-radar altrtude updases.

Durmg ApoUo llj, the L.R acquired reek-on to the lunar sutlaceduI"ltng tlIe. rotation to face-up attitude at M altitude oj' 37 000 feet.· Tbe ~ was .. 2:2.010 feet (indicating that the LM was actuallv iO~Il). Tbis small amount o.f .Mlt can readily be attributed to terrain varIations. ShlJic@ [10 Bruits were vio~at.ed, the data were incQ.rJlowa~ed a.f~er a. short period of monitoring at an. altitude of 31 600 feet, The . .:lb re'mdily converged to

3L small value 'crt llO{l feet wjrlliin 3~} seconds. TheLR vdodty updates werelmcoll"p0- rated nominally, beginntug at a 29 OOCI-foot aJtifuJde. As e:xpe,ctedt LR si.gna] dropouts we.re encountered at low altttudss (bt'!iOW 500 feet)1 but presented no problem. (W'h,en

the velocity b(lcome~ slllMl along ~eLR beams, depending ontas alttitndJe ;8.lJJ.d approach velocUy 1 zero Dopple'l' s.hift can be eneonntered; bence, no :iJigna]: occura.}

Trajectory nmits. ~ During real Hme, trajl@c[ory limits are monnored for flight Bafety. Tn,e ]Jrim.e cl'it,eria for Hight safety are tlU3 abilit.y to abort the descent at amy time until the final dedsilm to commit to touchdown. 'I'hM,fligh.t dyrnun.ks, unuteare placed on altirtude,and altitude rate, as shown in.Iigure 19. Notice that the nominal trajectory dsstgn does not approach the Ilmits 1UnH~ late tntll€ descent, after the crew has had ample tim~ for vtsualaasessmem of the situation. The BmUs shown are based om APE: abort with a 4-second free' Ial.l for. crew acnon delay or a DPSOlIibort with a

2(l-se'coemdi commuueatfons delay for gronncinoti.:hcatiQR. The Uig<n't controllers amd the crew monitor aJtitUJdeamd altibide rate, hu.t because oj c'omnruntcation delays with the ground, the Uight contrcllers -only advrse ~ based on pro] eeted trends. The ApoUo 11 a.lUtude and aJ.tltude rate pNfHe shown in figmt"e :HI was near nominal.

Jl,LT!WO~, ~] ~ ~ " 10]

!O

-HQ""I~~l ~- j. [)I'~P~II~I(lN~ -'--~ Jo,<:~ U~_L

I'"DI

§o

Ilf"S 111M OrTLE

L:rQ~W~~~~'D~O:~~~H~~~~5[~==~==::::~~

I)

~ 0 -~ _. .s .• dQ .'12 -B ,·16 ,_,~ .:~Q -l~ '" I.:)

"'l.~ITI!t):E ~ ",fE. IPS

Figure HI. - Altitudo versus altitude raf.e during 'powered descent .

Cre\1,J vEsual assessment. - As stated pr'evioualy, the apPl;oaeh a n d landing phases have been designed to provide, crow visibtl ity of the landillg ar-ea. Thts [}l'oviston 01..1101.,,",8 tho crew to assess the acceptabrlity of tho, landing area - to decide 1:0 cuntinu a toward the landing area 01' to rucles~,gnat(!; (vvHh LPD Or manualcont-ot) a iand[ng away from j,t" During- Apollo 11" hecause 'Of theinittal navigation errors}

the descent was guided into the g'€nera11y rough area. surroundtng West Cl'aJer (see Jig, 20 and the section of Uris report entitled tr Tlu;lPGNCS MonttorlngI1). West Crater is inside. the premiBsion mappedJ area approxtmately 3 nauttcal rni.lc s west of center. TJn1ortllmlte].y~ because of the

Flgu_re 20. - Apollo 11 landing site.

guidance program alarms, the commander was UH2I!ble- to cQncentr-ate on the window v"tE;;'W until late in the descent. [near 10'1); gate) _ Thus, :C J:"ew Vt811,l~1 aaseasment dur-ing the apr. roach phase was minimal, r esultmg tn continued approach into the West Crater area, This statement is. eli scussed further in the subsequent section. ,('nb tled " Post-

Il ight Analys.is. "

Ascent

Dur-ing the real-time situation, the crew and flight controllers continually monitor the sy.s~~ms and trajectory for detection of off -uorninal performance. Of primary coucern is the performance of the APS and the PGNCS. The APS, of course, must perform, as no backup propulsion system is provided .. Should the APS Iail during the final 30 seconds of ascent, the ReS can complete the insertion. The PGNCS performance is monitored by the AGS and powered flight processor, using MSFN tracking in the same manner as in the descent guidance monitoring. The limit lines are set for completion of the ascent on the AGS should the PGNCS performance degrade.

In real time, the PGNCS (as well as the AGS) performance was excellent, and guidance switchover was not required. The APS performance was also excellent. Insertion occurred at 'i minutes 15 seconds from lift-off', with 7 minutes 18 seconds being the operational trajectory prediction.

POSTFlI G HT ANAL YSI S

Postflight analysis is conducted to determine how the actual flight performance compared with the premission planning. The purpose of postflight analysis is to determine if the premission planning was adequate and, if not, to determine the changes required for subsequent flights. A brief description of the Apollo 11 postflight results for LM descent and ascent, application of these results to Apollo 12 planning, and a preliminary postflight estimate of Apollo 12 are given.

Apollo 11 Descent and Ascent

Descent. - The DOI maneuver was performed nominally, as discussed in the preceding section. The events during powered descent are tabulated in table IV. The braking phase events were near nominal (table 1). Rotation to a windows-up attitude was delayed slightly because of the cr-ew' s selection of a slow rotation rate, This rOtation delay resulted in the slight delay in acquiring LR (which was acquired prio r to completion of the rotation). The approach phase, as shown in figure 21, also agreed well with premission planning. As shown previously (fig. 20), the descent headed into the area near West Crater because of initial navigation error (approximately 3 nautical miles down range). During the approach phase, the LPD indicated to the commander that the automatic system was guiding to a landing up range of West Crater. Later on, the landing appeared to be heading into the rock field just beyond We st.Cr-ater-. This uncertainty was due to several factor-s: the time rate of change in LPD angl e, errors introduced by terrain variations (primarily slope), and the lack of time for visual assessment because of crew diversion to guidance program alarms. (Refer to the section entitled "Real- Time Analysis.") Therefore; n?t y.ntil the ?e~~nning of the landing

21

TABLE .IV .. ,- L.UNAR DESCENT EVENT TIMES

a g .. e. t, ,

hr.min .sec

Event

10'2 :17:17 ]02 :20:53 102;24:40 102:27:32 102 :32:55 W2~32:5S 102~33:05 102 ::.33 ;31 102:316,:57 1012, :3:7 ~S1 102 ;3·7;59 102 :3fk22 102 :38 ~45 102:38:50 l02~3ai50 102:3'9:02 ,li 0.2 ; 3.9:31 Hl2:41:32 l02~41:37 '!'02::41:53 1 02;42 ~03 1 02 :4,2; ua 102~42:]9 L 02. :42 :43 lQ3 :42;5,8 1012 ;43 :09 l02 :1:3:1.3 102 :4:3 :20 H~2:43;22 l02~44!11 102 ::44:31 102. :44:aa 102:44]:59 10'2 :45:l13 102 :45:40 HJ2:45:40

Acquisition of data, LR au

AHneme,nt of abort g"Uli.d.ance to pr-imary guidance Yaw maneuver to obtain im~'}I"oved communieattons Altimde ,of 50 000 !Get

Propell:anl-seUHn:g firing start

Descent engtn e 1 gni H 0 t1

F'ixsd-thrnttle position (crew report}

Face -up yaw maneuver In process

LR daea good

Face -up maneuver complete-

1202 alarm (computer determined) Enab ling· of r adar updates

Altitude ]ess than 30 000 feet (inhibit X-axls override) Velocity less than 2000 rps {sta.rt LR vdlDcity update) 1202 alarm

TIu'oit1e :recovery

Program P -64 entered

LA. antenna to po s i ti on 2

, A tti wd€! ho lei. (handling qua lit! es ch@c,k) Automatic guhiane€

12!Qlalatm (computer d.etermim:!d) LR low scale (less than .2500 f,e,et.) 1202 alarm (comouter determined) 1202 alarm (computer dstermtned) Landi~\g -potnt r edesignaticn Attitude hold

ilJpdate ,of abort guidance altitude Program P~i:i6 entered!

LR da ta not good

LR data good

Prope llant low-level sensor light on LR data. not good

LR data gooD!

Landing

Engine off

22

phase did the commande r b.'Y l(} avo id the h l"g:c: LI :'!:,::. (d l'Cili';~" ~ ,. n:, in by takllls over manual cnntnd (P-6El guidance) at an .::.i.l.tit~;;.de of 4 'j;~' .U'oL ">,>h'cH tlH.' forward velocity was only 50 Ips. An LPD~npui.. \'?as made, as snown i rl lab i £ I\'; blit in II rseuastons with tho c rew, it was cl8termIned that lhis inpul, w~'!s i nadveJ.'~e.rJ. The~ landtng phase is i llustratod in figure 22, and the Gl'Ol"!nrJ.trad..: ]5 .sh()','.'ll in fiF)l~'(;' 23. 'T"i1e- landlng site is shown toO have been moved, thl"OUf~'lt mo.nual TIJ~u~c:.n'erin~;, approximately 1100 feeL down range and 400 rcot CI'OSS ra.ngL' Jr om '.+(·l'!2 the Rt'(o)'!mttc guidui (\~.l3cent [undc r P-'64/ 1"-65 control) would have l~lnd(!d, The .;)i.Hi.~d,e pl'nfiloC! and t.h~ a.ltit,;;.de/alHtw:le-l'ate profile 'iU'C shown in fig;urC!s 2:1 <\nd :'5, t'e:::rC(;t~v;_'~~:, 'rhl~ .':'(jme,,~·h~d. cr ratic Leh.a.vtor of U1C'S(1' i) rof il es can b·e st IJC expla.incd b~,,' Com malic! (?f :J l, !,i A .. A.l'lHstrong'iS corornonts to the Soc iaty of Expa rimontal Test .PUDI,~ "H)dtn~r ill l,c:~~ )'Hgel~s On September 26) HIGH ,11 I [was 1 just absolutely adamant ,,'t:~::)uttn}' GQd- g'iven right to he wishv-washy

a bout who re I was go i ng: tJJ land. ' ,

... lll'I.,!N ~ ,

t"HI(: 1

~ :::.r,:.o -

!

--~r.:H.t.':;''_

· ...... ,PL.~NlilE[:i-·

l<l{)~ I p.OI)

I I'!-Hrl.'1~IQN

In>' t ' I· PilCH 11< _

ul,or . .. tt ' ._~-

'I-_ !L--'_"P- I

HJO ._ . I I LP'b ~I":,l_...-J~: . . . ._ ~. _

_ .. ---:.:-=~-~.. r I

, ~-____.___ . ~~----

.1';j1)1) "QO ~-. -ioo -?01J ~(;O~ -:JtalJ ::rJ~DD :!I-~I)O

~'::t\lI'l.!!: re L;!NtlIN~' ~IH. r'l

Figure 2 L - Apollo n approach phase.

c R95~ R .ii.N,m:,

i ~J ....

I,'

.. 1,2~'<l ·~aD . ~ ~o

23

AtmVD~r ,'11

Fi~'1.1re 2<-;' - iHt;b:d;J protVc phase,

The Pl'{.ll)(>lLa~i.t situation. dm'Ll~ th-== Ianding phase is, summar-ized in figlln::: 2t-;. Touchdown is shown to h~'h~ ~~u~l~'[';'~d !~OtJ.' 50 seconds prior to PI'UP',"1i,'!J1t .lc'~)~(.;.i(lnj only 20 to 30 seconds f rorn LrH' I :~ndit:lg/ abort decision point, and a.~lJ-'c..:xim<n.E:'ly 52 to 62 seconds longer than pn:.,Qit:tkJ f;j t: an automatic Iancli ng. The fly:i.rig time uelcw 500 feet was approxtmately 2 rninul es

213 seconds:

Figute 25,. - Altirude/altitud.e·-r,ateprofiilelanding phase.

n;''1lre 26. - Landing phase: events.

As{:enL - A summar-y of ';.::';{'cnt 110 given hiIille V and compared with prr-mi s-

ston csttmate s. In sururuary, thi s cornpa rtson indicates that 110 anomatias Occurred dtlrin~ t!lH ascent burn and that t~w in_..,c,yiiuj t.'trgc't!:l were closely sa.ti.sn()d;. The 3-~econd diffen-n)(C, 1,[ burn tW:'l t s ~'itLdtlLltt'(] (0 ~'L s~'!!!.hUy hJgh!:!f" actual thrust-toi-',Tlg:ht rati o I.h2.!) pn;!_!' dr:d. 'f"'tlL'l'<; 1:; .-;'" maans for fi~ltf)rrnining whetbe r the differ-ence \;,'US du r: to hi~h ~h rt: :;t •. 1) i;_~., :.; ":~ : '. 'n. "._ ,,,bJ (~ .,\ r~~ P.f()Fpll:tn~ at cut -off was estimated tn bp ~~ripr~IXi.l:rl~Ltl~~r. :~:'~("or ·····Ul~~;:.

2·[

TABLE V.- APOLLO 11 ASCtNT .sUMMARY

Pr etnlastcn

Actual

Ell!.'iCl'! vertical rise

Beginn1qg: of velocity residual trim.

0;10

0:10

'1':15

'1':33

a:37

I

R@s1dua.! trim com.plet.e

Radial.

Yel.ocity·, tps:

Down-range v,eloclty, fpe

M east!f@ment tY'P'e

AHitude, H

33

30

35

55·37.0 553'7.9 5,MQ'.7 553.7 _ 0

Premission

SO 085

Resulting orbit after r,eeidlial trim J.pol~ll!e alt.itlldej n. m.i.

Fe ril1iH'le :l.!ti tude:, II. ;111 i.

PGNCS v·elQc1ty restduala (LM b~y coordinates) Vp,ips .

Vgy' fps

VgZ' r~:U3

60 60.2

AGS (real time)

600\9

I MBFN [real time) PQstfUght

Ascent targets

Ra.(Ual velocity, fp!1l ••. _ ... _ Down-range velocity, fpi> ..•

CrOBS r:ange to be staar ed out, III. ml. Ineertion altlt.ude, ft ....•.....

;J2:.2 5534 .. 9 1,. 7 sa (1\)0

~2. 1

-0..1 1.a

47. 3 ~. !)

25

Apollo 1'2 Plannlnq

Apoll o 12 had the same major mission objecttve as Apotto 11, namely, to land men on the moonand return them safely to earth, 10 addition, a secondary ob.j€!cti ve' fer Apollo, 12 wastc demonstrate pi.npoint tanding capa.bility, requi.:rod for future sctantif'tc rntsatons, by l:and~t1.g within a 1. O-kilometer (0. 54 nautical mile} radtus of the target~nea!' the S'u.rveyor m epacecraltIocateeat Apollo site 70aUtude 3, (l~; longitude 23,.4° W), Basically, the planning philosophy for ApoUo 12 descent and ascent remained tbe san1€! as the philosophy for Apollo]1, Howevel'J, stnce Apollo H. Ianded apprro:lmately 3. nautical mkles oH target and consumed .more propellant for terra\]U avoidtitnce than antictpatsd, several miner' changes were constdered for Apollo £2 descent, Thesa changes were concerned with al leviattng t:.V and prope.na:n~. X'€q;uii.r.em'Elnts and with more effici.enUy correcting position errors dU:ritlg th.e des,cent

TwO methods foraHevi.ating propellant requtrements W(H'€ propos,ed.. The Hrst method! was to perform DOl with th€ CSM b.efore undockmg thlil LM~ perhaps even. cornbiuing DOlI with the lunar orbit insertion maneever-, BJ'ush~g llLiis method) tile LM i:1.'V and propellant requirements C.SiI1 be reduced by 'Hi ips and 190 pounds of ;ptOpeUOI;l'!I.tf wntch increa.seahover or translatton ttrne avaj]able 'in the la;f1ding pl1a~H3by 20 seconds, The planning time for analysis and the crew ~lcrUivity time line did not p~Tmit incorpo . ration ()of this method for Apollo 12, However, the' method has been determined to be feasible and ia currently planned for use on Apollo 1,3 and subsequent mtsstona. Th.e second method was to modulate the DPS thrust 10 to [2 times b€!tween FTE (maxtmum) and. 67 percent (upper thrlott~er~gio:::l) tn order to correct thrust dispersions. In lIfl,ing this m.eihod,the 2~minute throttle recovery region prior to high gat€' can be ehminated, r esnlttng in about the same savings as the first method. This modalaticn requires a changa to the basic: guili.meG Iogtc, considerable eystems (:H5per$i(!ln<l\lliI!lysis~ ami DPS testing over I:h.18 duty cycle before h'l:CQrpDrating the logic. The second method also could not be inco,poraJedi in Apollo 12 planning, but is being ,ciIJn..,~dered forfurure mtas.ions; Thus, the Apollo 12t:.V and pro[pel1antre'quirement.s for descent remained the sameas the Apollo 11 SV and 110rcfleUant requirements.

Two means for proViding mere efficien.cy in: co rrecting position during descent were proposed. 'The first nLe3LUiS was to 'ta."L:;:e advantage Qfth.e detection 01 down-range posl.tioon error by the powered flight proce$sor during the, brating phase. (See the sectio n entiU ed "Til e !P GNGEl Monitor i ng ,. n)o Anal y $iS sh ow edtha t Ia rg ~ 1ll.pdOJlte s in down-range or up- range tar-get posHion could be maile :for small changes in ilV and

t!h r-otfl e 1'8 C 01/ e.ry t lme (fig. 27). In addtti On ~ di SlJ.9 1':8 i on <l!:I1alysi S U sling' this updat eo 10- dicated il:hat down- range disper stons would be ]"1r.duCr;ld to approximately = 1 , 3, nautical miles as shown in figure 20. A minor change to Ute guidanc,elog']c to allowtbe c.rew to manually input (IJU:·OlJgh the nBKY) updates to the bnchng-sitle coordinates sent from the ground. was requ.l.roed. The guidance change was maca, and this proposed technique was approved lor use on Apollo [2. The second method proposed was to change the guidance targeting lor the approach and! Iandrng phases {p ~64 guidance) in order to erthanc e rade.signattorl (LPD) and manual rnaneu verirIl.g capabutttes. Use of these c;;I.pabilHies

WOIJ lel be required in o.rclerto reduce the 3u dtspe.t81 Qn3 shown in figure 26 to a l=kilumeter r-adius for pinpouit landing. The results ola limtted study for v:ll'ying hcr'izoutal and verttcat velocay at ]OW g a te (500 feet) witIl vertical descent targ,eted to

a 1000- Ioot alit tude are shown ill J]gllre :20, Itwas determined tha'~ by increasing (00]"w.~rd velocity at 500 fed from. 160 to 80 rps, sign.~fjc'1nt gatns tn rede6ignatioTIl c.apnbH~ it)' (Ug- 30} were achieved while altitade rate was maintained at 16 ips. In addition.

120

I

-J_ .. l-

,

_t_________:_ _----'- __

DL---'--_l __ ---'-_-L..._---'-- _ __.__--I.~___J

(;I (i 1 2 0 2. 4 6, 8

DOWN ~.AI\IGIE, ~, 1'1, Mi.

i r : i "F- I""." A""' I

-- ~ -I--.. -I- 2'; s~c-I

",~ -- - UlP[)AlTE JI~ I'[)!

I ~-- -.1+ ~ MIIN

: I -.- I

2 - - • r .-- ,--

I . i I

. I

I

!

~-. Ef>.IGIN~ f>ULSE'

~ j",

,

-- . ,. .~_~:.I:

. "-':;:_' .. I

. -- --.--~. - I~"'l I

rHIii,01'U~ ~ARGm TIMiE, MIN

-40

-ao

11 0 L.__------'-~ _.'-_-'--_

~ S ~ ~ 0

!DOWN i'I:,A~GE, 10:, N! 1>'11.

.~ 4 6, a

LJi> II!ANG~, 1.. N. MI.

I.W Ii:ANGE. R, N. MI.

(a) Throttle margin tirne.

(IJ) Change in character+stlc velocity-

Fi.gure 27. - Landing=site updabe capabihty during br.a.kingphas,e.

y .

. ,

~'

-, : I

. j

Figur c 28. a Predicted Apollo 12 landing dispersions,

27

VII L.oiltl'r'f = '" l~ jI! ~ '6'D~II~,=,,{)_,.hIQ ~~LIQ ~'Ii"",.~~~(1'1

1 ~ I,.,

"'·E HIC~ L ""~t,O ei t'f, f~~

Figure 29. - Variatiou of f:J.V with landing phase velocities,

thts trajectory resulted in. a slowly changing or mere constant LPD time history dU :ring appro aeh, as shown in figu re 31. Th,eref'or1e, this proposal was also ac,copted for the Apollo ~ 2 opera.hGIli::ll trajectory planning.

In summary, the Apollo 12 descent and ascent used. the same design as tile Apollo 11 descent and ascent. 'fhQ descent approaeh and landing ph ase tra] e eta ry wer e speeded up :;Hg.htly. The eapabiltty to update the landing~sae position during: the braking phase was added, Finally reduction in the descent liV and propellant requirements [or mlaslons subsequent to Apollo l.a is contemplated ,

.28

_,_ --

Q' ~ :I

Figure 30, - The 6,V requir-ements fol" down- range redeBignations. at4000-foot altitude.

P rei ~ min a ry ADOI to 12' PosHI ig ht An .alysi s

The second manned lun.ar lauding occurred: On November [9, 1969, at Apollo site 7 in the Ocean. of storms (latitude 3" 00 S, lo~gibude 23. 4'" W)~ acJ!j~,~,ent to the crater conmining BU.r-veyol' III. As of this writing, the Fostfligh.t~nal.ys~.s is not completed; however, a few events during the descent are wo:t'lliyo.f comment, (The diata pr esented in this sectton, since they a.re preliminary,. are subject to change a..s more p(J~tflight data become avaikable , )

During powered descent) an systems performed excell.ently qWllth not even a program alarm). The PDI occurr-ed 5 nautteal miles north of the nominal groundtrack, This cross-range distance was known to lli'e guidance and was steered out during the braking phase .for a minimal .l:i.V of appr-oxl mately 10 fps, AR50~atpn[~arn up-range position error of 4200 feet was. determined by the powered Hight processor. Thus, the Ianding-jsite PO'Sit.iOIl was updated (moved down range) ear~y in the brattn,g phase by that amount, This resulted in a 5-secol1d- early throttle recovery and a .sHgtlt .6 V penalty (fig., .. 27'). A down-range redeeignatton of 420000 fe,et in the approa.ch phase couldhave been performed, if necessary - however, not as cheaply as ~he br~in:g phase update (figs, 27 and 30,). .During the approach pAA5ej tb!e commander pertcrmsd ,sever:al redasignstions; however, the largest isestil'l"lil.led to be only 800 ~~,€t, A :p1.o't o£ the guidance - target jed landing sire as a result ortnese rede stgnattcns its shown in Hgnre,s32 and 3~~ along with a g roundtrack o.f the Iandiugphase trajectory under P-66 control. The time (if flight in the landing phase below 500 feet ts estimated to beg minutes! and total powered descent tOOK 1.2 minutes 2:6 secoeds (prel11issioTh automattc nommal landing, 11 minutes 20' seconds), Touchdown occur-red 35 seconds after low-level light ON~ or approxtmatetv 60 seconds prior. to the la.nding/abort dectston potnt. Th.1S margin is almost twice the Apollc Ll margtn. ApoHol2 stirred up more mst than Apollo H du r-. tug final touchdown, resulting in considerable loss of'if],sihi.nity. 'What effed~ if ;:!I,ny, this win have on future mission planning has not yet been dele·rmined,

!D\Ul

o .. ~cu~u

_.- LPn. TAI'a.:. M(i,Y{:MJlI.!r _ •. rl'~J~~l!D ... 1II10,.",m: ~I!o~(l'if

i"HTI~ L "~'LlIOMAn{ ~i~J"ltliNI~J P;OIHT 'IA~:lIE .... ;Ij';l.g~ 1~1 J!.,I:L,i~

... I}Q ~~QO ' .... ~(JI ll"~~ ii:! :i:~(1 ::J.~fiO J(lg~ ~toQ'WN ~"~~~E, n

o(a.) Altitu.de .hi8tOCY,

(b) Grouudtrad.

Figu:re 32. - Apollo U ,groun.dtr8!:c.k and altitude hrl.iStor-y.

29

• .... :i;'

CROSS. tANG",

FT .

. ~._).

E .. .:

','

Figure 33, - Apollo 12 groundtrack - landing phase.

In summary, Apollo 12, the second highly successful manned lunar landing, achieved the first pinpoint landing, This achievement greatly enhances the possibilities for lunar exploration into the rougher mountainous areas of particular interest to the scientists,

CONClUDI NG REMARKS

The pr cmtasion planning for the lunar descent and ascent mission phases which led to the first, highly successful manned landing on the moon and return from the moon has been presented and compared with actual flight results, The Apollo 11 lunar module descent and ascent, the maneuvers that could be flight simulated only by actually perforrning the lunar landing, compared excellently with pr emi s si on planning, An initial navigation e r r o r caused the landing to be approximately 3 nautical miles down range from the target, but the landing was still within the premissLon mapped area, The original th r ee-pha s e descent design and contingency planning afforded the c rew the opportunity, late in the descent, to maneuver out of an area of rough terrain to a .')lJCcessful touchdown.

NA:~A - MSC

REFERENCES

1. Ertel~ L D.; and Morse~ M. L.; The Apollo S)Jacecr,afL ¥ohnne 1: A Cbronology. NASA SP-4009, UJ69.

2, EfouboH, J. C.: Ll,Hl.ar Rendezvous. International Science and Technology" Feb. 19M3, 3.1 pp, 62-70,

,3" Bennett, F. V,; and Price, T. G.: Study of Powered-.Desc.ernt Trajectories fot'

Manned Lunar Landtngs, NASA TN D-2:426, 1964. .

4 . Cheatham ~ D. C. ; and. Bennett, F . V.: Apollo . Lunar Moru.:..[e Landing:

Strate~y. Apollo Lunar Landing MiSsion Syn'1lposilum, July 25~27~ng,fJ;6, NASA TM x. 5Sm)6, 1966, l)P. 175,<240 ..

5. Sears, N, E:,} ed .. ; Prim31Wy G&N System, Lunar Orbit OpEl'1"ations (U). Vol, I, NDT!lLL Report R-44:6~ Apr .. m~}64.

6- Anon, : CSM/LM Spalc,ecraU Operattoual Data Bo,ok. Vo[ume U: LMDab Book, Part t! Revision 2; SNA-8-·D~027 (TI)~ SepL 1~, 19i6'91•

7. Ma.rscber, W. Y.: Guidance System Operations Plan Ior Man:ned LM ER~~th 0[bital.and Lunar Missions USing Program. LUNIINARY [A {LUMINARY REV. 099}, Section !5~ Guidlauce Equations (Rev. 4).. MlT/IL Report R~5€l7, June 196'9.

:3, Klumpp, A. R.: A Manuw.ly Retargeted Autemattc Descent and Landing System ror LEM, MlT/IL Report R-539 , Mar" 1966. (Also <3IV a HaliJle in MAAj JACC Gtl1.dru1c e and Control Come renee, Sea~t], 19', ¥l:as.h., Aug:. 15- 1 '7 ~ 196 1!5., 'T,e!CJu:dcal Paper-s, P];1. 713-727.)

9. Cherry, G. W,: E Guimnce- A IGBn.eral Exph.citt Optimizing Guidance Law for Rocket-Propelled! Spacecraft. MT!IL Report E-4!56, Aug. 19~ 1964:.

:10. Ziedma.nj K,! Vi5ibilUy[)uri.~ LUn3;l' Landing. I05~152-6m95-ROOO, TRW' Systems,

Jan, 19~ 19138. -

11. Anon .. : Revision I [0. Apoll» Spa,cetraft Weight and Mission Perfm;"n:lance De-Haitian (Dec.ember 12, 196'1), M""y 5, 19ti9.

12, Anon,,: Apollo OperaUons Handbook, Lunar Module LM5 and ISUbsequentVolume 1,_ Subsystems Data, LMA790- 3-L1'I.15 and Subsequent" Mar. 15~ ]19169!.

12, TRW Systems Grou.m LM AGS Progr-ammed Equa,;tionsDoc:ument, Fltght Program 6j nl'I'Ni-6041~T'(H}O, Apr ... 1£169.

14. Lear-, W" M.: The LM, Powered Plight Ttackimg~Data Processor, TRW Systems Report 7224. 5-El-Rl~ Dec, IH68.

As a re.sult of Apollo 11 p-ostn.ight analysts!, only two minor changes were incorporated: hi descent planning for ApoUo. 12. The first change was the provision of a navlgation update o.f tJh·e landIng stts early :Ln the brllking phase in order to .emruJl.ce pinpoint landifl;g eapabHity. The second change was a ali.ght modification to the descent targsttng tn order to enhance the Iandlng-alte redestgnatton and manual translatlon capability in the approach and .land1.ng phases.

Apollo 12j• the second highly successful manned lunar landing: mtsaion, again demonstrated eXceUent cornpartson with premieslon planning [or descent and ascent. During' de-s:cent~ tbe l~ndling-site navigation update and redesignation capabilities were used,aJlong with manual maneuvertng, to achieve the first pinpoint landing, The pinpoint landing, within tWO leet o,f the Survey10r IT! spacecraft; has provided confidence for pr1em.ission, plruming of rumre' manned lunar exploratton rntsstons.

Manned Sp.a.c:ecraft Cemer

Natwnal Aeronautics. and Space Admtrnstration Houston, Texas, March 1191j 19'70, I076-00-0U- 00-7.~

31

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful