You are on page 1of 39

W

Lu

0

>

N A S A - S - 6 6 - 5 9 4 4 JVL 1

APOLLO LAUNCH OPPORTUNITIES IN 1969 THAT PROVIDE A 1-3-5 DAY LAUNCH WINDOW FOR ORBITER B SITES
24r
!#
SUNSET

12
A

LAUNCH TIME,

''
8

.ai
JAN

A
I
1
I

a-

.
I

.

FEB

E.S.T. HRS

24r 20
16

--

MAR APR MAY PACIFIC INJECTIONS ATLANTIC INJECTIONS

JUNE

12 4
0
Piwe P A

Donald C. Cheatham A s s i s t a n t Chief f o r Engineering and Development Guidance and Control Division

NASA-S-66.5206 IUN

APOLLO LAUNCH OPPORTUNITIES IN 1968 THAT PROVIDE A 1-3-5 DAY LAUNCH WINDOW F R ORBITER B SITES O

Floyd V. Bennett Assistant Chief B e o r e t i c a l Mechanics Branch Guidance and Control Division

12
8 -

4 LAUNCH TIME,
I I I

.
JAN

.

FEE

MAR

APR

MAY

JUNE

I:

I

EST HRS

"[I
20

j

:

5

INTROrnCTION STRA'BCX CONSIDEEATTONS
Spacecraft Systems Guidance and Control System
b g R d r System a n i aa

DJ

Window System

k s c e n t Propulsion System Mission

In a-

Position Requirement

POWERED DESCENT DESIGN

W g Phase i n
Objectives and Constraints I g n i t i o n Logic Guidance with Limited !throttle

Landing R d r U p d a t i n g aa
Da V &@et e l t
Descent Guidance Monitoring

Surmnzry of Braking Phase
F a Approach Phase i l n

Objectives and Constraints Determination of Hi-gate Parameter h d e o f f s Redesignation Footprint Ianding Point Designator U t i l i z a t i o n

OOO f t . This. This a l s o w i l l be m a n ' s i n i t i a l face-to-face encounter with t h e exact nature of t h e t e r r a i n i n t h e landing a r e a and of t h e problems of v i s i b i l i t y as they may a f f e c t t h e a b i l i t y t o land t h e L . A f i n i t e t h r u s t to-weight r a t i o of t h e descent engine must be used and t h e approach path must account f o r lunar t e r r a i n v a r i a t i o n s and u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n t h e guidance system. t o t h e uncertainty. of course. of lo9 f t / s e c . M as i l l u s t r a t e d ih f i g u r e 1. was quite a r b i t r a r y because t h e difference from t h e standpoint of f u e l requirements w a s very s l i g h t .APOLLO L N R MODULF: LANDING S R T G UA TAE Y Dl V Buaget e t a 1.Modes of c o n t r o l The landing of t h e Lunar Module (IN) upon t h e surface of t h e moon w i l l be t h e climax of t h e Apollo mission. was chosen as a pericynthion a l t i t u d e . u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n t h e value of t h e l nr reference ua radius. and.0 INTRODUCTION flmnnary of F a Approach Phase i l n Landing Phase Objectives and Constraints N o m i n a l Tkajectory Dl V Budget e t a LUNAR LANDING T u K KW C N R L oC C l N O T O Objective and Constraints Sequence of events Descent engine shut-off . i s an impossible and i m p r a c t i c a l approach.000 f t . The f l i g h t path angle i n t h e f i n a l portion of t h e approach would be zero degrees. coupled with guidance dispersions. These simulations are extremely important i n t h e preparations f o r the mission. although. Since lunar t e r r a i n v a r i a t i o n s of as much as + 20.000 or 60. as i n d i c a t e d i n figure 2 . as shown i n f i g u r e 3 . but only a f t e r t h e mission i s completed w i l l it be known how adequate t h e simulations have been.OOO f t .OOO f t .tenths. M Combining t h i s thrust.000 f t . Such a t h e o r e t i c a l approach would require i n f i n i t e t h r u s t . could add another l5. leads t o t h e descent p r o f i l e . a conservative safe value of 5O.t o weight r a t i o by t h e descent engine. t h e choice o f 5O. The separation and Hohmann t r a n s f e r maneuver requires s l i g h t l y Mu c o n t r o l of landing v e l o c i t i e s aa nl Automatic c o n t r o l of landing v e l o c i t i e s ABORT AFTER TOUCBDOWN SUMMARY . these aspects of t h e landing w i l l M be simulated many times i n fixed-based simulators and p a r t i a l p r e f l i g h t simulators. a l s o .000 f t . followed 180° later by an impulsive v e l o c i t y change of about 5622 f t / s e c as t h e L approaches t h e lunar surface. a t h e o r e t i c a l landing maneuver could c o n s i s t of a Hohmann t r a n s f e r impulse on t h e back side of t h e moon with a d e l t a V. Considering t h e e n t i r e L descent after separation from t h e M Comand Module i n lunar o r b i t .to. The IN landing approach w i l l be t h e f i r s t time t h a t t h e comp l e t e LM system w i l l have been operated i n t h e lunar environment. could be expected. The i n i t i a l t h r u s t to-weight of t h e L descent engine w i l l be about three. although t h e importance of t h e r e t u r n phases'is not t o be de-emphasized. o r change i n v e l o c i t y . From a performance standpoint. as opposed t o e i t h e r 40.weight with a perigee a l t i t u d e of 50.

w i l l most e f f e c t i v e l y improve t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of a t t a i n i n g a safe landing. The remainder of t h i s s e c t i o n i s concerned with descriptions of t h e spacec r a f t systems and t h e mission landing p o s i t i o n requirements. A summary of t h e guidance system c a p a b i l i t y f o r a t t a i n i n g a given landing point on t h e moon i s presented i n f i g u r e 6a and t h e associated assumptions i n f i g u r e 6b. i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e e n t i r e descent takes approximately 220 n. v i s i b i l i t y . then. Although all of t h e L systems a r e important t o a t t a i n t h e M l nr landing.0 STWEGY CONSIDERATIONS The LM landing s t r a t e g y can be defined as the science and and art of spacecraft mission planning exercised t o meet the lunar environmental problems under advantageous condit i o n s . They can look e i t h e r d i r e c t l y up. Both t h e MSFN and t h e spacecraft onboard navigation i n lunar o r b i t a r e considered. m. and determination of s u i t a b l e landing p o s i t i o n s ) . Spacecraft Systems Guidance and c o n t r o l system The guidance and c o n t r o l system i s important t o t h e landing s t r a t e g y i n t h a t it has a d i r e c t e f f e c t upon t h e a r e a over which t h e landing may be accomplished and on t h e problems of landing a t a desired point. The e f f e c t of t h e guidance. The l n r environmental c o n s t r a i n t s ua w i l l be discussed i n a subsequent section. navigation. however. t h a t a s t r a t e g y i s needed t h a t w i l l trade off t h e system c a p a b i l i t i e s of t h e spacecraft and t h e crew c a p a b i l i t i e s against t h e unknowns of t h e lunar environment encountered during t h e descent from t h e o r b i t . The development of t h i s strategy. determines t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s at the start of t h e powered descent. The powered descent p o r t i o n approaching t h e landing area. whether performed by t h e onboard system o r by t h e Manned Space F l i g h t Network. 1. T h i s t r a j e c t o r y has t h e predominant c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a low f l a t p r o f i l e terminating with a f l i g h t path angle of about 9 degrees. Assuming t h a t t h e guidance system w i l l be updated by landing radar t o e l i minate t h e a l t i t u d e dispersions. (b) t h e landing radar. ( c ) t h e spacecraft window. and t h e range from which the landing area can be adequately assessed must be traded off against t h e amount of f u e l involved i n t h e penalty of t h e shaping. and c o n t r o l system of t h e L on t h e landing begins M with navigation i n t h e lunar o r b i t . t h e objectives. The 30. t h e l i m i t a t i o n s of t h e spacecraft systems (including l i m i t a t i o n s i n f u e l capacity and payload c a p a b i l i t y ) . requires a d e l t a V of 5925 f t / s e c . similar with t h e major axis f o r t h e MSFN case being s l i g h t l y shorter and t h e minor a x i s f o r t h e MSFN being s l i g h t l y longer than t h a t f o r t h e case u t i l i z i n g CSM onboard navigation. t h e problems t o be faced. conn sidering t h e location of t h e LM window. never have the opportunity t o see where they a r e going. i n order t o insure t h a t proper u t i l i z a t i o n of t h e onboard systems can be made t o g r e a t e s t advantage. I n order t o plan s t r a t e g y . A obvious feature i s t h a t t h e crew. t h e objectives of t h e M landing planning strategy are t o a n t i c i p a t e t h e lunar environmental problems and t o plan the landing approach so t h a t the combined spacecraft systems. Both t h e amount o f time t h e crew w i l l require t o assess t h e landing area. The Apollo system s p e c i f i c a t i o n of a landing CEP of 3000 f t . those a f f e c t i n g the s t r a t e g y a r e (a) the ua guidance and c o n t r o l system. The LM v e l o c i t y and a t t i t u d e i s shown p e r i o d i c a l l y along the f l i g h t p r o f i l e . Shaping t h e t r a j e c t o r y awaJ from t h e f u e l optimum approach w i l l result i n a penalty i n f u e l requirements. The accuracy of this navigation. and t h e c o n s t r a i n t s of t h e lunar environment ( i r c l u d i n g t e r r a i n u n c e r t a i n t i e s . A s p e c i a l case i n which t h e downrange distance was allowed t o - . As indicated i n f i g u r e 5. The funct i o n a l d e s c r i p t i o n and accuracies of t h i s system have been discussed i n a preceeding paper. The o r b i t a l mechanics aspects have been discussed i n t h e preceeding section. and (d) t h e descent propulsion system. It soon becomes obvious . If t h e crew i s t o perform any assessment of t h e landing area or out-the-window s a f e t y of f l i g h t during the approach. i s met i n e i t h e r case when t h e i n e r t i a l system performs within s p e c i f i c a t i o n . which i s a considerable increase over t h e i n f i n i t e t h r u s t requirement. A scaled t r a j e c t o r y p r o f i l e of t h i s t h e o r e t i c a l LM powered descent i s shown i n f i g u r e 4.landing dispersion e l l i p s e s a r e shown i n f i g u r e 7 f o r cases where t h e lunar o r b i t navigation was done by t h e MSFN and a l s o onboard t h e C M The e l l i p s e s a r e q u i t e S . i f t h e LM i s r o t a t e d about i t s t h r u s t axis. including t h e crew. it i s obvious t h a t the l a t t e r portion of the t r a j e c t o r y must M be shaped so t h a t a d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e of the L can be used during t h e approach. can look down a t t h e surface.l e s s d e l t a V due t o t h e pericynthion a l t i t u d e increase. but they are never able t o see i n t h e d i r e c t i o n they a r e going. and t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c performance of available systems need t o be w e l l known. The major f a c t o r s t h a t must be considered i n t h i s strategy are t h e problems brought about by t h e o r b i t a l mechanics of t h e landing maneuver. t h e landing dispersions w i l l be a function of t h e i n i t i a l condition u n c e r t a i n t i e s brought about from lunar o r b i t navigation coupled with t h e i n e r t i a l system drift during t h e powered descent. o r . i s t h e subject of t h i s paper.

showing t h e limits as viewed from the commander's design eye p o s i t i o n . - LM window system . The landing radar i l accuracy i s given i n f i g u r e 10. t h e antenna i s physically switched t o the second p o s i t i o n making t h e a l t i t u d e beam p a r a l l e l t o t h e X .2. o r f u r t h e r back. Two p o s i t i o n s of t h e landing radar antenna provide both a l t i t u d e and v e l o c i t y measurements over a wide range of spacecraft a t t i t u d e s . The f i r s t antenna p o s i t i o n i s t i l t e d back from t h e t h r u s t axis by approximately f o r t y . which among o t h e r things provide d i g i t a l readout information from t h e guidance system.000 f t . Figure ll i n addition t o showing t& window system. The p l o t shows t h e azimuth and elevation v a r i a t i o n s of possible viewing l i m i t s referenced from a point where t h e p i l o t would be looking dead ahead. f o r t h e zero point.a x i s of t h e The landing radar w i l l begin t o provide a l t i t u d e measurements a t an approximate a l t i t u d e of 40. window.be unconstrained i s a l s o shown on f i g u r e 7 . The M trimming system reduces undesirable torques from the descent engine i n order t o conserve RCS p r o p e l l a n t . these l i m i t a t i o n s change slightly. and t h e other t h r e e beams measure t h e t h r e e components of v e l o c i t y .I n t h i s case t h e downrange or major axis of t h e e l l i p s e i s primarily a function of t h e t h r u s t u n c e r t a i n t i e s of t h e f i x e d .t h r o t t l e p o s i t i o n of the descent engine that w i l l be discussed subsequently. The center beam measures the a l t i t u d e . They are operated as c o n t r o l couples f o r t h r e e . i t i s used t o eliminate t h e guidance system altitude dispersions and. two p a i r s of control couples are a v a i l a b l e f o r each axis. Design considerations. i s a very important p a r t of t h e landing s t r a t e g y because it i s through this window t h a t t h e crew must observe t h e landing a r e a t o confirm t h e adequacy of t h e surface f o r touchdown. . o r t h e command p i l o t ' s . however. a l s o . As can be seen i n f i g u r e 8. t h e descent engine was capable of being t h r o t t l e d over a range from 10 t o 1. These angular limits a r e displayed i n f i g u r e l. This produces a l a t e r a l component of acceleration from t h e descent engine t h r u s t i n t h e desired d i r e c t i o n which i s stopped by r e t u r n i n g t o v e r t i c a l and reversed by t i l t i n g i n t h e opposite d i r e c t i o n . I I The guidance system i s coupled with t h e window system through g r i d markings so t h a t t h e p i l o t can observe t h e intended landi n g a r e a by a l i g n i n g h i s l i n e . w i l l s t i l l provide accurate a l t i t u d e information.s i g h t with t h e g r i d marking according t o information displayed from t h e guidance system. I n i t i a l l y . As indicated e a r l i e r .o f . The method of providing t r a n s l a t i o n a l c o n t r o l while i n t h e hovering condition i s t o tilt the spacecraft by means of t h e a t t i t u d e control system.000 f t .The LM window. The engines are l o c a t e d on an axes system r o t a t e d about the LM descent engine t h r u s t a r e a 45' from the spacecraft axes. t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s of knowing t h e a l t i t u d e from t h e lunar surface p r i o r t o beginning the descent. with respect t o LM body axes ( p a r a l l e l t o t h e Z-body a x i s ) . Figure 8 shows t h e a t t i t u d e t h r u s t e r f i r i n g combinations t o c r e a t e controlmoments. Although t h e window i s not l a r g e i n s i z e . The r a d a r v e l o c i t y updates wl begin at approximately 15.000 f t . M . The L landing radar i s a &-beam dopple system with the beam M configuration shown i n f i g u r e 9. ll. These a l t i t u d e measurements w i l l be used t o update t h e i n e r t i a l system s t a r t i n g at an a l t i t u d e of about 25. This f i g u r e shows t h a t a t t h e start - L. Descent propulsion system The descent engine i s an extremely important system t o the design of the LM descent s t r a t e g y . shows t h e l o c a t i o n of the Display and Keyboard. The LH landing r a d a r system i s important i n landing s t r a t e g y . t h e p i l o t ' s eye p o s i t i o n i s normally very close t o t h e window so t h a t the angular limits provided a r e q u i t e wide. The window i s t r i a n g u l a r i n shape and skewed so t h a t it provides maximum viewing angles f o r t h e landing approach maneuver. The crossrange a x i s i s equal t o t h a t of t h e 3C e l l i p s e s f o r guidance t o a s p e c i f i c point and i s determined by t h e method of lunar o r b i t navigation. The physical configuration of t h e LM window i s shown i n f i g u r e T h i s photograph w a s made from within t h e LM cockpit showi-ng t h e l e f t hand. although perhaps not normally considered a system. have made it necessary t o l m t t h e t h r o t t l e c a p a b i l i t y t o i i t h a t shown i n f i g u r e 13. The primary c o n t r o l system s t a b i l i z a t i o n u t i l i z e s d i g i t a l a u t o p i l o t mode of the guidance computer. A s t h e L M approaches the landing maneuver.a x i s a t t i t u d e control. Landing radar system The c o n t r o l of t h e LM during the descent t o t h e surface can be provided automatically through s t e e r i n g commands generated by the guidance system and a l s o manually by the crew by i n p u t s through an a t t i t u d e c o n t r o l l e r . During t h e descent t h e a t t i t u d e c o n t r o l system i s a l s o coupled t o a slow moving gimbal actuator system of t h e descent engine t o enable a means of trimming t h e descent engine t h r u s t direct i o n so t h a t it passes through the L center of gravity. The procedures f o r u t i l i z i n g t h e s e i n t e g r a t e d systems f o r landing s i t e designation and redesignation w i l l be discussed l a t e r i n t h i s paper. It i s pogsible f o r t h e p i l o t t o see downward a t an angle of about 65 from the normal eye p o s i t i o n and t o t h e l e f t s i d e by approximately 800 I f t h e p i l o t moves h i s head e i t h e r c l o s e r t o t h e window. hence.t h r e e degrees so t h a t t h e a l t i t u d e beam w i l l be n e a r l y v e r t i c a l during the e a r l y portions of the descent and.

of t h r u s t . and includes an i n d i c a t i o n of t h e spacecraft a t t i t u d e a t various milestones along t h e t r a j e c t o r y . The second phase i s termed t h e F i n a l Approach Phase. and he can conduct t h e reduction i n v e l o c i t y at a t t i t u d e s t h a t allow great e f f i c i e n c y . t h e associated strategy i s not g r e a t l y d i f f e r e n t than t h a t f o r t h e requirement assumed because t h e t r a j e c t o r y shaping requirements would be t h e same f o r t h e terminal portion of the trajectory'. o r perhaps another type of spacecraft. w i t h the implication t h a t t h e a r e a could be quite l a r g e . The scaled p r o f i l e of t h e design descent t r a j e c t o r y i s shown i n f i g u r e 16 a. The subsequ.t h r o t t l e .ight. I n t h e region of 6300 l b . Objectives and c o n s t r a i n t s The objective of t h e braking phase. The t o t a l t r a j e c t o r y covers on t h e order of 250 n. such as landing w i t h 100 f t . a three-phase t r a j e c t o r y design l o g i c was chosen. and would r e q u i r e some means of e s t a b l i s h i n g contact with t h e intended landing p o s i t i o n during t h e approach. The a t t i t u d e chosen i s flown so as t o provide t h e crew with v i s i b i l i t y f o r a d e t a i l e d assessment of t h e landing s i t e . It i s d e s i r a b l e t o use the maximum t h r u s t of t h e descent engine as long as possible i n order t o provide e f f i c i e n t u t i l i z a t i o n of t h e f u e l . .t h r o t t l e s e t t i n g . however. can be increased i n s i z e t o t h e point t h a t downrange p o s i t i o n control i s not of primary importance. The change from a f u l l y t h r o t t l e a b l e engine i n t h e upper region of t h e t h r u s t l e v e l t o a f i x e d . t h e start of t h e Landing Phase. The l o g i c of t h e braking phase i s designed f o r t h e e f f i c i e n t reduction of velocity. but. This phase i s terminated a t what i s c a l l e d a Hi-gate position. and i s terminated at what i s c a l l e d t h e Lo-gate p o s i t i o n . The f i n a l approach and landing phases together cover only about 2 per cent of t h e t o t a l t r a j e c t o r y range. The present s t r a t e g y i s primarily based upon t h e second consideration. The f i r s t consideration i s a requirement t o land at any s u i t a b l e point within a specified =ea. there i s an upper fixed p o s i t i o n of t h e t h r o t t l e which would nominally provide about 9700 l b . as i n d i c a t e d i n f i g u r e 17. as w i l l be explained later. t h e a t t i t u d e s can be chosen so t h a t t h e spacecraft would have e f f i c i e n t u t i l i z a t i o n of descent engine t h r u s t f o r reducing v e l o c i t y . t o approximately 1050 -1b. That i s . of coKse. The following sections w i l l discuss i n d e t a i l t h e l o g i c of t h e design o f t h e t h r e e phases and w i l l summarize t h e d e l t a V budget f o r the descent. The descent engine i s a l w a y s t h r o t t l e a b l e . t h e general l o g i c i s indicated i n f i g u r e 1 5 . i s t o provide e f f i c i e n t reduction of t h e h o r i z o n t a l v e l o c i t y e x i s t i n g at t h e i n i t i a t i o n of t h e powered descent. Obviously. as indicated i n f i g u r e 14.of Dowered f l. t h e t r a j e c t o r y i s shaped t o a l l o w an a t t i t u d e from which t h e p i l o t can v i s u a l l y acquire and assess t h e landing s i t e . constrained i n s i z e primarily by t h e guidance dispersions.m. t h e r e i s expected t o be approximately 1 percent uncertainty i n t h e t h r u s t a t t h i s f i x e d . although t h e time spent within t h e s e phases w i l l be about 30 per cent of t h e t o t a l time.p o s i t i o n t h r u s t of t h e descent engine. During t h e f i n a l approach phase. The landing phase i s flown very much as a VTOL type o f a i r c r a f t would be flown on t h e e a r t h t o allow t h e p i l o t vernier c o n t r o l of t h e p o s i t i o n and v e l o c i t i e s at touchdown. Mission Landing Position Requirement Important s t r a t e g y considerations axe t h e types of requirements t h a t are placed on t h e landing position. of t h r u s t . Eraking Phase " _. i s termed t h e Braking Phase. 3. t h a t of landing i n areas of t h e s i z e compatible with t h e guidance system dispersions. however.t h r o t t l e position a f f e c t s t h e guidance procedures during t h e i n i t i a l powered descent. A t t h e start of t h e powered f l i g h t . The second type of requirement i s t h a t of landing a t any s u i t a b l e p o i n t within a reasonably s m a l l area. d i c t a t e t h a t t h e s i z e of t h e area chosen w i l l be compatible with t h e c a p a b i l i t i e s of t h e guidance and navigation system. P W X D D S E T DESIGN C EE ECN After consideration of a l t h e t r a d e o f f ' s t h a t could be l i d e n t i f i e d as worthy o f consider-ation during t h e LM powered descent. T h i s would. The t h i r d consideration i s t h a t of landing a t a prespecified point. of the p o s i t i o n of a surveyor spacecraft. i f t h e asea i s l a r g e enough. t h e landing area. The major c o n s t r a i n t o f t h i s t r a j e c t o r y phase i s l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by t h e f i x e d .The f i r s t phase following powered descent i n i t i a t i o n at 50. It i s obvious t h a t t h i s l a t t e r consideration imposes t h e h g r e a t e s t requirements on t e s t r a t e g y and a l s o t h e guidance system. since there i s no necessity f o r p i l o t v i s i b i l i t y of t h e landing area i n t h i s phase. of t h r u s t . There i s . The l o g i c of t h i s three-phase t r a j e c t o r y design w i l l be discussed i n t h e subsequent s e c t i o n s . A n additional requirement met'by t h i s phase i s t o provide t h e p i l o t with a view of t h e t e r r a i n a t such a time t h a t he can confirm t h e f l i g h t s a f e t y of t h e t r a j e c t o r y p r i o r t o committing t o a landing. If.OOG f t . t h e a l t i t u d e i s high enough so t h a t t h e p i l o t does not have t o worry about t h e t e r r a i n v a r i a t i o n s . an i n i t i a l segment - . The uncertainty grows up t o 2 percent after approximately 300 seconds of fixedt h r o t t l e usage. During most of t h i s phase.ent discussions of t h i s paper w i l l be based primarily upon a landing a r e a s i z e compatible with guidance system dispersions. t h r u s t magnitude w i l l vary according t o t h e nominal s o l i d l i n e .) and b ) . A s long as t h e t h r o t t l e i s maintained i n t h i s f i x e d position. t h e requirements on t h e guidance system would be diminished considerably.

s e t t i n g . The f i c t i t i o u s t a r g e t i s ' b a s e d upon t h e nominal t h r u s t p r o f i l e when t h e descent engine i s i n the fixed.to.gate state. before increasing t h r u s t t o t h e maximm. instead of maximum t h r u s t . This w i l l nominally occur at t h e f i c t i t i o u s t a r g e t position.weight case i s shown f i r s t . t h e r e i s a delay i n time and range i n g e t t i n g down t o t h e region where t h e commanded t h r u s t reaches t h e t h r o t t l e a b l e region.to. t h e L system during t h i s phase w i l l M respond t o comands of a t t i t u d e change. determines t h e f i c t i t i o u s t a r g e t t h a t can be used i n the guidance system i n t h e first p o r t i o n of t h e t r a j e c t o r y . I n order t o prevent l a r g e moments due t o c. t h e descent engine w i l l remain i n i t s fixed or upper l m t i i position. I g n i t i o n Logic The l o g i c f o r i g n i t i n g t h e descent engine f o r i n i t i a t i o n of t h e braking phase i s as follows. F i r s t . Thus. even though i n t h e upper t h r u s t region t h e descent engine i s not responding t o these commands.gate position. t h e t r a j e c t o r y must be planned so t h a t the guidance system wl begin t o c a l l f o r t h r u s t i l - l e v e l s i n t h e region i n which t h e descent engine can be t h r o t t l e d (below 6300 l b s . This i s t o provide c o n t r o l over t h e v e l o c i t i e s when t h e Hi-gate p o s i t i o n i s reached. This p o i n t .of. Next.gate. a f t e r t h e switchover p o i n t . i n e f f e c t . e s s e n t i a l l y preplanned by f l y i n g backward from t h e hi. b u t . but not implemented.gravity o f f s e t s . t h e engine i s i g n i t e d a t t h e low 10 percent l e v e l . t h e guidance computer sends t h e engine on signal t o t h e descent propulsion solution. b u t as long as t h e guidance system i s c a l l i n g f o r a t h r u s t above 6300 l b .t h r o t t l e p o s i t i o n . F i n a l l y . t h e period of t i m e being determined by t h e -p o s s i b l e magnitude of t h e uncertainty of t h e descent engine. This l e v e l i s held f o r some 28 seconds t o trim t h e engine gimbal through t h e c. then.thrust p o s i t i o n . from t h e standpoint of t h e guidance system.gate p o s i t i o n . f i r s t of all. t o match both t h e v e l o c i t y and t h e p o s i t i o n desired a t hi. t h e guidance t a r g e t i n g i s switched from t h a t of t h e f i c t i t i o u s t a r g e t t o t h a t of the hi. I n i t i a l l y .gate. The l o g i c of t h i s guidance scheme i s shown i n f i g u r e 19. i s only a few seconds p r i o r t o hi. This.to.t h r o t t l e .weight m a g n i tude wl gradually decrease mtil it i s within t h e region i l i n which t h e descent engine can be t h r o t t l e d .weight r a t i o where t h e a c t u a l value of t h e t h r u s t i s below t h a t of t h e expected nominal. If t h e t h r u s t v a r i a t i o n of the descent engine a t t h i s fixed t h r o t t l e p o s i t i o n were known exactly. A t an intermediate position. The f i g u r e shows t h e p r o f i l e of t h e t r a j e c t o r i e s as a function of range. i n t h i s region.weight of the descent engine allows choice of i n i t i a l conditions and t h e guidance equations t o be u t i l i z e d i n such a way as t o s e l e c t a time t o go f o r t h e e n t i r e phase t h a t w i l l use t h e approximate thrust-to-weight of t h e upper limit of the descent engine. From hi.to. The - .g. The l o g i c of t h e guidance i s perhaps b e s t explained by comparing t h e actual value of t h r u s t with t h a t commanded by t h e guidance system. The guidance system then has a number of seconds. p r i o r t o t h e switchover p o i n t . p r i o r t o t h e hi. P r i o r knowledge of t h e i n i t i a l thrust. .gate t a r g e t .t h r o t t l e p o s i t i o n during t h i s phase. I n view of t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s of t h e descent engine. and t h e guidance system computes t h e commanded v a r i a t i o n of thrust. il Figure 20 i l l u s t r a t e s t h e t h r u s t p r o f i l e s (commanded and a c t u a l ) f o r low and high thrust.gate posFtion of t h e trajectory. continuously with the advanced LM s t a t e s as i n i t i a l conditions. g. o f f s e t . using a t h r u s t i n t h e t h r o t t l e a b l e range t o go back f o r a period of time. The nominal thrust. t h a t solution i s chosen f o r i n i t i a t i o n of braking. t h e LM s t a t e ( p o s i t i o n and v e l o c i t y ) i s i n t e g r a t e d ahead i n time. when t h e LM reaches t h e p o s i t i o n and v e l o c i t y s t a t e t h a t yielded t h e proper t h r u s t solution. since. The d i s c o n t i n u i t y seen i n t h e commanded p o s i t i o n has no e f f e c t on t h e system. This low l e v e l of t h r u s t i n g i s accounted f o r i n t h e i g n i t i o n logic.to. When t h e guidance s o l u t i o n requires t h e l e v e l of t h r u s t equal t o the expected t h r u s t of the f i x e d . The nominal t h r u s t to-weight v a r i a t i o n follows t h e s o l i d l i n e . i s t o u t i l i z e t h e same type of guidance equations t h a t a r e appropriate f o r t h e t h r o t t l e d phases which follow. It i s s t i l l d e s i r e d t o vary t h e s t a t e vector of t h e LM from i t s value at t h e s t a r t of powered descent t o the s t a t e s p e c i f i e d a t t h e hi. both t h e nominal value and t h a t Commanded by t h e guidance system as a function of range.of the powered descent which i s flown at reduced t h r o t t l e t o insure t h a t t h e descent engine gimbal t r i m mechanism has nulled out of t r i m moments due t o center. I f the thrust. it i s seen t h a t t h e i n i t i a l commanded t h r u s t has t h e same type of v a r i a t i o n as t h e nominal.weight does remain nominal. t h e commanded thrust.gate on. t h e t r a j e c t o r y could be preplanned t o obtain t h e desired h i gate s t a t e vector. t h e descent engine t h r o t t l e i s not responding t o t h e guidance system. o r f i x e d . I n a c t u a l operation.weight r a t i o s . the guidance problem f o r t h e braking phase i s solved. t h e commanded t h r u s t wl be at o r below the m a x i m u m i n t h e t h r o t t l e a b l e range. and t h e t r a j e c t o r y i s . modifications i n t h e t a r g e t i n g are required t o allow f o r t h e u t i l i z a t i o n of t h e f i x e d . however. see f i g u r e 18. ) p r i o r t o reaching Hi-gate p o s i t i o n . Guidance with Limited T h r o t t l e The general approach of tlie braking phase. and a l s o a p r o f i l e of t h e descent engine t h r u s t .weight shown on t h e figure. I n t h e case of t h e low thrust-to. The guidance equations would normally determine t h e t h r u s t l e v e l o r a c c e l e r a t i o n l e v e l and a t t i t u d e required i n order t o make an e f f i c i e n t change i n t h e s t a t e .to. t h e guidance system i s t a r g e t e d t o a f i c t i t i o u s t a r g e t upstream of t h e hi.

gate t a r g e t . M IU e r r o r s . After each complete (3components) v e l o c i t y updating. t h e a t t i t u d e begins t o change (nearly l i n e a r ) t o s a t i s f y t h e ne= v e r t i c a l a t t i t u d e desired j u s t p r i o r t o the v e r t i c a l descent t a r g e t (TVD. . a l t i t u d e j .gate i s reached. when t h e v e l o c i t y i s reduced t o about 1550 f t / s e c . and i s continued a t each twosecond i n t e r v a l f o r t h e remainder of t h e approach. I n e f f e c t .free type of guidance i s e s s e n t i a l l y t h e percentage uncertainty thrust-to-weight value times t h e t o t a l range t r a v e l . no DPS u n c e r t a i n t i e s ) are shown i n Zigure 23. m. therefore. of f u e l i s the penalty paid f o r reducing t h e landing dispersions from t h a t associated with t h e range. For t h e case of 5 2 percent average t h r u s t uncertainty and a nominal range of 250 n. The t e r r a i n p r o f i l e used i s shown i n f i g u r e 24 and i s applicable f o r an approach t o a s i t e a t 0°20'N l a t i t u d e and 12'30'E longitude. The a l t i t u d e updating i s continued along with t'ne v e l o c i t y components.to. The left. The t r a j e c t o r y presented i n t h e figure i s not t h e nominal design t r a j e c t o r y . The e f f e c t of landing radar update i s a continuing e f f e c t throughout t h e t r a j e c t o r y once t h e i n i t i a l update a l t i t u d e i s reached. Velocity updates are i n i t i a t e d at about 15.The. descent e n g i n e -t h r u s t u n c e r t a i n t i e s . means t h a t t h e region p r i o r t o hi. some aspects of t h e following discussions w i l l touch on the f i n a l approach phase as w e l l as t h e braking phase.g a t e p o s i t i o n was reached. about 500 f t . no 7Mo. as determined by the primary guidance system. as shown i n p a r t (b) of t h e f i g u r e . i n i t i a l condition and system e r r o r s i s shown i n f i g u r e 25.gate t a r g e t point (HG). Landing Radar Updating . This p a r t i c u l a r t r a j e c t o r y has a higate a l t i t u d e of 6100 f t .weight uncertainty expressed i n f percentages. This allows a much longer time t o a f f e c t t h e desired velocity cond i t i o n a t the hi.weight. An example e f f e c t of the t e r r a i n . m.extreme low thrust-to. The p i t c h p r o f i l e e x h i b i t s a slope d i s c o n t i n u i t y at t h e f i c t i t i o u s t a r g e t point (TF) f o r t h r o t t l i n g t h e engine. the horizontal scale shows t h e b i a s time of t h e f i c t i t i o u s t a r g e t back from t h e hi. of f u e l penalty. .cost of 45 f t / s e c . but i s adecpate t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e e f f e c t s o f landing radar update. t h e p i t c h angle undergoes "lLe r a p i d pitchup t o t h e constant a t t i t u d e desired f o r f i n a l I>_ near constant (about 35O of the v e r t i c a l ) . then. landing radar e r r o r s and a t y p i c a l t e r r a i n p r o f i l e approaching t h e landing s i t e . of range uncertainty which can be eliminated a t the. however. an a l t i t u d e upd a t e only i s performed. This case i s considered somewhat extreme i n t h a t t h e a l t i t u d e uncertaizty o f -1600 f e e t i s about a 3c~magnitudei f CSM landmark type s i g h t i n g s have been maae on the landing s i t e and i n a d i r e c t i v e such t h e t e r r a i n e f f e c t s a r e additive -with t h e i n e r t i a l system a l t i t u d e uncertainty tending t o accentuate t h e p i t c h angle and t h r u s t v a r i a t i o n s from t h e i d e a l case. no L e r r o r s . Figure 2 1 shows t h e d e l t a V penalty vari&c. t o t h a t i n which a desired p o s i t i o n a t hi. The p r o f i l e i s terminated a t t h i s point. The weighting f a c t o r s f o r LR a l t i t u d e and v e l o c i t y updates a r e i l l u s t r a t e d i n f i g u r e 22 as l i n e a r functions of t h e parameter being updated. t h i s results i n approximately + 5 n. would be t h a t i n which t h e commanded t h r u s t would reach t h e t b z o t t l e a b l e region t h r u s t exactly at the time t h e h i .free type of guidance.000 f t . t h e 45 f t / s e c . p r i o r t o hi. .hand s c a l e i n d i c a t e s t h e d e l t a V penalty. i n two-second i n t e r v a l s (6 seconds f o r a complete update). and t h e r e s u l t i n g changes i n a t t i t u d e and t h r o t t l e required by t h e change i n solution of t h e guidance equations.weight i s higher than nomin a l . A t t h e hi. a l t i t u d e ) . 10' o f f the v e r t i c a l . Both a proDer1y scaled p r o f i i e and an expanded a l t i t u d e s c a l e prof i l e are shown. For the case where the thrust. A t t h e low-gate t a r g e t (TLG. This. and the r i g h t hand scale i s the thrust. and a t h r o t t l e period of 80 sec. then the v e l o c i t y updating i s continued. This i s t h e case t h a t involves t h e g r e a t e s t penalty i n f u e l .gate position. The v e l o c i t y is updated a a s i n g l e component a t a time.gate i s being flown a t a much lower thrust-to-weight r a t i o f o r a longer period of time than would be desirable from a standpoint of f u e l e f f i c i e n c y . I n addition t o t h e e f f e c t of t h e t e r r a i n t h e other i n i t i a l predominent e r r o r included was an a l t i t u d e uncertainty of about minus 1600 f e e t .e r r o r s . The magnitude of additional v a r i a t i o n i n t h e landing point t h a t would be associated with range. The guidance commands f o r an i d e a l descent (no i n i t i a l cond i t i o n e r r o r s .squares estimation.gate. The f i g u r e i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e 2 2 percent unc e r t a i n t y of t h e descent engine w i l l require a b i a s time of approximately 65 seconds and w i l l invoke a b i a s d e l t a V pena l t y on the order of 45 f t / s e c . no t e r r a i n variaR t i o n s .ion due t o fixed.to. The a l t i t u d e update i s i n i t i a t e d at 25. about 100 f t .. and. The time h i s t o r i e s o f p i t c h angle and t h r u s t magnitude are presented i n f i g u r e 25 and include t h e i d e a l case t o provide a b a s i s f o r comparison. e f f e c t of landing radar (LR) updating on t h e guidance commands i s important from t h e standpoint of eliminating a l t i t u d e u n c e r t a i n t i e s . t h e commanded t h r u s t w i l l reach t h e t h r o t t l e a b l e p o s i t i o n a number of seconds p r i o r t o t h a t f o r nominal t h r u s t . These a r e l i n e a r approximations t o optimum weighting based upon least. The same t r a j e c t o r y has been analyzed f o r cases with i n i t i a l condition e r r o r s .thrust uncertainties.000 f t .

The nominal f u e l expenditure during t h e braking phase i s 5206 f t / s e c . I n t h e f i r s t portion of t M s phase.gate and i s about equivalent a f t e r hi. This i s done by checking the s o l u t i o n of the primary guidance system with t h e s o l u t i o n of p o s i t i o n and v e l o c i t y obtained from the abort guidance system. The second is t o provide t h e crew with an opportunity t o a s s e s s t h e f l i g h t s a f e t y of t h e t r a j e c t o r y before committing t h e contin-. it a l s o w i l l be very e f f e c t i v e i n providing an independent v o t e i n t h e event t h a t onboard differencing i n d i c a t e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of a guidance f a i l u r e .000 f e e t . however. Because t h e Mznned Space F l i g h t Network w i l l be very e f f e c t i v e i n measuring t h e a l t i t u d e r a t e of t h e spacecraft. I n a d d i t i o n . such as t h e p o s s i b i l i t y ua of reduced v i s i b i l i t y . For t h e random t h r u s t u n c e r t a i n t i e s of t h e descent engine a 36random f u e l expenditure of 2 20 f t / s e c .gate p o s i t i o n . f o r a 3000 f t . The t o t a l procedures f o r t h i s guidance monitoring are s t i l l i n t h e formative stages and a r e c u r r e n t l y being i n v e s t i g a t e d i n simulations conducted by t h e Manned Spacecraft Center. analysis has shown t h a t navigation u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n a l t i t u d e . and t o provide adequate time t o a s s e s s t h e landing a r e a . I n t h i s a t t i t u d e .000 f t . a l t i t u d e r a t e . a 3 6 random f u e l expenditure of i 60 f t / s e c . The a t t i t u d e during t h e phase i s normally such t h a t the t h r u s t v e c t o r i s close t o being aligned w i t h t h e f l i g h t path angle.weight i n i t i a l l y is only abaut one-half of that of t h e descent engine i n t h i s phase.gate. t h a t it w i l l take g r e a t e r than t h e extremes of 36 performance of the abort and primary guidance s o l u t i o n s t o l e a d t o an unsafe t r a j e c t o r y p r i o r t o the hi. t h e p i l o t i s not able t o look i n the d i r e c t i o n of t h e intended . The f i r s t o b j e c t i v e i s t o provide t h e crew with out-the-window v i s i b i l i t y . and t h e a l t i t u d e from 50. t h e r o l l a t t i t u d e w i l l be such t h a t t h e windows w i l l be o r i e n t e d away from t h e surface i n order t o provide a more favorable a t t i t u d e f o r t h e landing radar operation and t o prepare f o r t h e pitch-up maneuver a t the hi. The a s c e n t engines thrust.A important f u n c t i o n of t h e crew n during t h e braking phase i s t o monitor t h e performance of the guidance system onboard. As t h e L approaches t h e position at which landing M radar w i l l begin operating. The pr-ry c o n s t r a i n t s on t h e strategy i n this pbase a r e again t h e d e s i r e t o keep t h e f u e l expenditure t o a mininnun and t h e l i m i t a t i o n of t h e L window.to. i n order t o provide the crew with v i s i b i l i t y of t h e landing area. Delta V Budget . i s budgeted. The a l t i t u d e l o s s during v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t y a u l l i n g a s a f'unction of nominal t r a j e c t o r y a l t i t u d e and v e l o c i t y must be included in t h e consideration f o r a s a f e staged a b o r t . To t h i s an a d d i t i o n a l 1 5 f t / s e c .weight between the descent and ascent engines must a l s o be considered as a c o n s t r a i n t .landing area. And t h i r d l y . The objectives of t h e f i n a l approach phase a r e enumerated i n f i g u r e 27. t o provide a r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e viewing platform i n order t o b e s t accomplish t h e f i r s t and second objectives. Analysis has shown. The a l t i t u d e r a t e parameter i s perhaps t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t parameter t o monitor because t h i s i s t h e one t h a t c a l lead t o a t r a j e c t o r y t h a t v i o l a t e s the f l i g h t s a f e t y zonsiderations.m. TO account f o r t h i s . u a t i o n of the landing. Descent Guidance Monitoring .The p i t c h angle v a r i e s by s l i g h t l y more than 10 degrees at a maximum p r i o r t o hi. Mission planning wl determine i f t h e i n i t i a l a t t i t u d e w i l l allow t h e crew t o look down on t h e l u n a r surface t o check the progress over t h e t e r r a i n . l a s t i n g about $50 seconds.to. . from the standpoint o f t h e s t r a t e g y . In the M event that t h e a s c e n t engine mst be used f o r a b o r t during this approach t o t h e surface. As i n d i cated i n f i g u r e 26.gate. It i s primarily i n t h i s phase t h a t t h e traj e c t o r y i s shaped at a cost of f u e l . i s added t o account f o r possible mission changes t h a t would r a i s e t h e CSM a l t i t u d e 10 n. I n the event t h a t no landmark sightings near t h e landing s i t e axe performed i n lunar o r b i t . The o t h e r c o n s t r a i n t s t a must be considered a r e t h e problems of ht - - . t h r o t t l e commands above 60 percent and l a r g e a t t i t u d e deviations (up t o 70') occur i n some i n stances i n the t h r o t t l e down region p r i o r t o hi. covers some 243 n a u t i c a l miles during which t h e v e l o c i t y i s reduced from 5500 f t l s e c . the crew begins t o be confronted with some of the possible unknowns of t h e l nr environment. uncertainty. Further i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h i s problem i s proceeding. t h e difference i n thrust. I n v e s t i gations of the a b i l i t y of t h e LR t o update t h e s e l a r g e a l t i t u d e u n c e r t a i n t i e s have indicated t h a t 100 f p s of a d d i t i o n a l d e l t a V i s required. has been a l l o t t e d on the f u e l budget. t h e LM could assume any desired r o l l i l a t t i t u d e about t h e X o r t h r u s t a x i s . F i n a l Approach Phase The f i n a l approach phase is Objectives and Constraints perhaps t h e most important phase.000 f e e t t o about 9. w i l l change f u e l consumption by about 60 f t / s e c . The p i t c h angle deviations a r e of concern because of possible e f f e c t upon landing radar operation and because of increased expenditure of descent engine p r o p e l l a n t s . t h i s i s accomplished by p e r i o d i c d i f f e r encing of t h e primary and abort guidance s o l u t i o n s of a l t i t u d e . I n t h i s phase. on 3 r b a s i s ) i n t h e braking a l t i t u d e can e x i s t . t o approximately 600 f t / s e c . Summary of Braking Phase The braking phase.gate p o s i t i o n t h a t w i l l allow a view forvrard t o the landing a r e a . lnaneuvering should be kept t o a minimum. In o t h e r words. and l a t e r a l v e l o c i t i e s . Furthermore. The t h r u s t l e v e l shows generally t h e same l e v e l of command. although eventually eliminated by t h e landing radar. l a r g e u n c e r t a i n t i e s (up t o 10.

g a t e a l t i t u d e o-Jer case 2 due t o t h e mcderate increase i n PGNCS uncertaint i e s from onboard navigation (which includes t h e landing s i t e update) as opposed t o MSFN navigation.gate a l t i t u d e . considered. is t h e hi. t h e r e w i l l be an a p p r o x i d t e 1500 f t of alti. t h e -. I d 3 uncertainty. and t h e r e f o r e a l l of t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s and biases a r e mmm ai u . - Both of these q u a n t i t i e s a r e established a s one kilometer Id b a s i s at t h i s time. and l a r g e l y as a r e s u l t of some of t h e data from t h e Ranger spacecraft x k s i o n s . i f t h e viewing range t o t h e t a r g e t landing area w s so g r e a t that t h e d e t a i l of the area could a n o t be observed. both t h e b i a s and t h e random u n c e r t a i n t i e s .gate results from t h e f a c t that no t e r r a i n updating occurs anytime during t h e mission. M This r e s u l t s in a l t i t u d e b i a s e s of 700 t o 800 f r (3 I Y ) over t h e ranges of u n c e r t a i n t y of t h e l a n d i i g p o s i t i o n . a high system r e l i a b i l i t y . A t h i r d consideration i s t h a t of f l i g h t s a f e t y requiremeqts with regard t o t h e u n d e r t a i n t i e s of t h e t e r r a i n a l t i t u d e considering the operating r e l i a b i l i t y of t h e landing r a d a r and i t s a b i l i t y t o lu@ate t h e guidance system ( t h e i n e r t i a l system).gate a l t i t u d e em be determined by combining t h e a l t i t u d e 3 6 u n c e r t a i n t i e s and b i a s e s previously discussed. and f l i g h t s a f e t y d i c t a t e s the choice a l t i t u d e . Tnis again considers t h e l w t a t i o n o f t h e L window.p p m c h t r a j e c t o r y w i l l be l a r g e l y governed by t h e m g n i t u d e of t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n a l t i t u d e above t h e t e r r a j n . depends upon t h e navigational updating in o r b i t (with CSM o p t i c s o r M F ) and during t'ne powered descent (with L ) SN R. The second f a c t o r i s t h e time that t h e crew w i l l require t o adequately a s s e s s t h e landing area. The f i r s t case i s based upon M F o r b i t navigation and no SN LR updating and represents t h e l a r g e s t hi. the a l t i t u d e a t which hi. M Perhaps t h e f i r s t f a c t o r that Determination of HI-gate must be chosen.gate a l t i t u d e s a t i s f y i n g crew s a f e t y without LR i s approximately 9000 f t .gate a l t i t u d e . and a l s o considering t h e a b o r t b a u n k r i e s associa t e d with the ascent engine ( s e e f i g u r e 3 ) . on t h e order of 1 0 seconds. i n the proximity of t h e landing site. Prelimirnary estimates were =de of a l l t'nese f a c t o r s and considering a d e s i r e t o be a b l e t o g e t t o hi. there i s a l a r g e u n d e r t a i n t y i n t h e l n r r a d i u s ua mgnitude. A t t h e present time. if f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s of t h e landling of "gate radar operations indicates. This extreme and impractical hi. 32. In addition. considering t h e ranges of u n c e r t a i n t y of t h e landing p o s i t i o n . Fi8m-e 28 lists t h e f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g t h e choice of t h e hi. an operational hi. Results f o r the various combinations a r e given i n f i g u r e 31. The m e r in which t h e s e f a c t o r s a r e combined.tnde u n c e r t a i r t y on a oce sih s i s .gate a l t i t u d e w m l d be s e l e c t e d on the b a s i s of t h e f i r s t two cor?siderations. however.gate a l t i t u d e . The t h i r d case shows a moderate increase i n h i . The minimum hi. then t h e f l i g h t s a f e t y r e q i r e m e n t s w i l l be s a t i s f i e d and t h e hi. o r approximately 3200 f t . i n order t o design t h e f i n a l approach phase. This case assumes that o r b i t navigation of t h e CSM s t a t e i s accomplished by MSFN and LR updating during t h e powered descent i s not available. These u n c e r t a i n t i e s include that of t h e guidance and navigation system which considering that onboard lunar o r b i t navigation i s accomplished. the t h i r d r e q u i r e ment predominates. E l ~ m caxcgaation is conducte& by t h e r I%mne&Space Flight Network. R:gure 30 l i s t s t h e present expected u n c e r t a i n t i e s .t h e l i g h t i n g of t h e lunar t e r r a i n . . a r e provided in order t o update t h e p o s i t i o n ( r a d i u s ) of t h e landing s i t e . f o r a s s e s s i n g t h e s i t u a t i o n . The f i r s t f a c t o r i s t h e range from which t h e landing area caxn be If t h i s were t h e o n l y f a c t o r t o be assessed adequately. The primary v a r i a b l e s that m y be traded-off during t h i s approach phase include t h e p i t c h a t t i t u d e . reduction over case 1 This i s because the landing s i t e update eliminates t h e lunar r a d i u s b i a s and reduces t h e random u n c e r t a i n t i e s in r a d i u s s i g n i f i c a n t l y . The f l i g h t s a f e t y o f ?he fLnal a . The preceding a n a l y s i s has assumed that the crew would immediately a s s e s s a c o l l i s i o n s i t u a t i o n and t a k e t h e approp r i a t e action. a s u b s t a n t i a l . The minimum hi.600 f t .mcer+ainty w i l l be ay-proxim t e l y 500 f t l e s s .gate f o r t h i s case i s 6700 f t . The minimum hi-gate f o r this case is 7500 f t . our present mission planning allows f o r a t e r r a i n p r o f i l e along t h e approach p t h l i m i t e d t o a general slope of 2 2 with l o c a l v a r i a t i o n s not t o ' exceed +5 percent o f t h e nominal L t r a j e c t o r y a l t i t u d e . and i t s inherent c o n t r a s t properties which m y make it d i f f i c u l t f o r t h e p i l o t t o s e e and assess the t e r r a i n f e a t u r e s . t h e f l i g h t path angle of t h e t r a j e c t o r y . even i f t h e landing r a d a r i s not updating t h e guidance system. and t h e v a r i a t i o n of look angle t o t h e landing a r e a (referenced t o t h e s p a c e c r a f t t h r u s t axis).gate. it vould of course be unwise t o waste f i e 1 t o provide t h i s a b i l i t y . x The second case d i f f e r s from t h e first only i n t h a t two s i g h t i n g from o r b i t on a landmark.gate o r t h e t r a n s i t i o n a l t i t u d e i s chosen. Allowing a finite time. Iunar Surface TecLnology personnel have indicated that t h e i r p r e s e n t c a p a b i l i t y 52 determining t h e slopes i n t h e a r e a s of t h e =ria i s l l h i t e d t o an u n c e r t a i n t y o f approximately 2' on a 3 d b a s i s so t h i s is equivalent t o a 700 f t .

f o r t h i s reason. 5000 f t J and 0 3OOO f t .of. In f i g u r e 33. - turn. however. The f o o t p r i n t c a p a b i l i t y n a t u r a l l y shrinks t h e c l o s e r t h e approach i s made t o t h e landing area. The present s t r a t e g y i s based upon having a high p r o b a b i l i t y that t h e intended landing area wl be il generally s u i t a b l e . t h e r e wl be a i l o p r o b a b i l i t y of requiring l a r g e redesignations of t h e l w landing position. and. a given budgeted amount of fuel provides an area that subtends very c l o s e l y t o t h e same angular view fo r m the p i l o t ' s viewing position. Because t h e LM p i l o t can only see down 65 fo his s t r a i g h t ahead viewing rm positiog. on t h e l e f t .gate p o s i t i o n has rm been increased by approximately. the major d e l t a V penalty is incurred f o r increasing t h e look angle.gate a l t i t u d e requirement has been s e t a t approximately 9000 f t . The other l i n e s i n d i c a t e t h e s i d e window v i e w l i m i t a t i o n s experienced by t h e p i l o t o r comnrand p i l o t . and a p p m x i m t e l y 10. t h e look angle t o t h e t a r g e t il aPProx-telY 10 above t h e lower limit of t h e wJndow. The shaping accomplished i n the final approach phase costs approximately 270 f t / s e c of equivalent f u e l . The c o p i l o t m l a have a similar l i m i t a t i o n of s i d e vision toward t h e d i r e c t i o n of the p i l o t . and t h e hi. The f l i g h t p a t h angle i s a l s o important. it mst not be too steep. In order t o see w h a t this h s provided.off i s that t h e hi. noting that a t 5000 f t t h e f u e l optimum t r a j e c t o r y has a v e l o c i t y of about l0 f t / s e c .gate a l t i t u d e costs about 250 fg/sec of d e l t a V. t h e d e l t a V penalty f o r v a r i a t i o n s i n f l i g h t p a t h angle f o r varicus look angles i s i l l u s t r a t e d . i s t h e zero-zero range position. t h e line. t h e acceptable look angle t o the . In addition. Assuming that it w i l l take t h e p i l o t a few seconds t o g e t oriented t o t h e view in f r o n t . f i g u r e 34 shows a comparison of t h e selected t r a j e c t o r y with that of t h e f u e l o t u showing pm m i t h e variations of horizontal ana v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t y a s a m c t i o n of time t o go. Figure 35 shows h t h e a v a i l a b l e f o o t p r i n t a s a f'unction of el required f o r t h i s pu-pose. The s o l i d contour l i n e s a r e t h e ranges that could be reached provided that t h e indicated amount o f f u e l could be expended. t h e primrry d i f f e r e n c e shuws up i n the comparison of horizontal v e l o c i t y a t equiva l e n t a l t i t u d e s . only t h e region bounded by t h e inboard s i d e window limits would be comon t o t h e f i e l d of view of both crew members. The nominal landing point. it is desirable f o r t h e look angle t o be g r e a t e r than 25 above t h e t h r u s t a x i s . The perspective of t h e ' f i g u r e i s that of l o i g d i r e c t l y from overhead the s p c e c m f t perpendicular ok n t o t h e surface where t h e spacecraft p o s i t i o n i s a t t h e apex of the l i n e s . The horizontal l i n e a t t h e bottom of t h e f i g u r e indicates t h e lower window l m t and t h e second i i. &ch trade-off m y a f f e c t t h e s t a t e vector that i s specified a t hi. The v a r i a t i o n of footprint+ c a p a b i l i t y as t h e a l t i t u d e i s decreased during t h e descent i s indicated i n f i g u r e 36. As can be seen from the f i g u r e .gate a l t i t u d e wl be approx%tely 9000 f t . the major trade. therefore. This. For a d e l t a V expenditure of approximately 100 f t / s e c . whereas t h e o0 selected t r a j e c t o r y has a horizontal v e l o c i t y of about - Even though an adequate perspective Redesignation Footprint of t h e landing area and adequate viewing time a r e provided b y t h e s e l e c t i o n of t h e f l i g h t p a t h angle. purely from the standpoint of t h e p i l o t being b e t t e r a b l e t o judge t h e s a f e t y of t h e approach path. an a d d i t i o n a l 8000 f t downrange could be obtained. L i t t l e penalty i s p i a f o r varying t h e f l i g h t path angle f r o m loo up to 20 f o r a given look angle. Contours of f o o t p r i n t c a p a b i l i t y a r e shown f o r an expenditure of 1 0f t / s e c of f u e l a t a l t i t u d e s of 8ooO f t . and. The sum t o t a l of t h e trade. Considering t h e v a r i a t i o n s i n a t t i t u d e that nay come about through t h e guidance system caused by f l y i n g over variable t e r r a i n .gate a l t i t u d e . However. Figure 32 shows t h e penalty of f u e l a s a f'unction of hi. the v e r t i c a l velocity has been &t by approximately a t h i r d u f o r equivalent a l t i t u d e s . The s e l e c t i o n of about 9 0 0 f t a s the hi.sight angle. landing area.gate. 45 seconds. and t h e time required t o a s s e s s t h e landing a r e a . p d t h e f l i g h t path angle w i l l be i n t h e order of 13 t o 1 5 throughout the n a j o r portion of t h e final approach phase. Figure 33 shows that t h e time t o go f o 9000 f t . The angle must not be t o o shallow i n order t o g e t t e proper perspective of t h e landing area a s it i s h approached. o r that point t o which t h e spacecraft i s being guided by the automatic system. l i n e i n d i c a t e s t h e p o s i t i o n 5O above t h e lower window limit. it is s t i l l p e r t i n e n t t o determine how much of t h e area the p i l o t needs t o survey. and t h i s change must be taken i n t o account i n the t o t a l landing descent p r o f i l e planning. a l t i t u d e down t o t h e lo. on t h e contrary.offs that a r e s t i l l needed t o be e s t a b l i s h e d include t h e f l i g h t path angle. a desired look angle of 35' has been chosen providing a nargin of loo over the lower l i m i t of the window.OOO f t in e i t h e r d i r e c t i o n crcssrange.Parameter Trade-offs Considering that t h e hi. . it appears that t h e mximm a l t i t u d e f r m which he could consider a redesignation would probably be l e s s t m 8000 f e e t .gate a l t i t u d e . i n i s a function of how much f u e l t h e p i l o t v1 i 1 have i n order t o change his landiqg s i t e i f he decides t h a t t h e point t o which t h e guidance system i s taking him is unacceptable.

Should t h e desired landing a r e a appear i n another portion of t h e window. can input t h e change i n line. The LMpilot does n o t have t h e opportunity t o s e e t h e footp r i n t a s viewed here. These a t t i t u d e motions a f f e c t t h e l i n e of. The landing s i t e i s a t approx-tely 55' depression o r about 10' above t h e lower limit of t h e window. The p i l o t would then o r i e n t himself t o look a t this number and check t o s e e i f his i n s t r u c t i o n s t o t h e guidmce system had been f u l l y c o r r e c t . A f t e r t h e t r a n s i e n t has s e t t l e d out. =ring t h i s portion of t h e approach. o r the area which t h e @dance system is taking him. i l Thus. The v a r i a t i o n of the l i n e . A f t e r proper alinement of t h e g r i d .has t o look beyond t h e number corresponding t o t h e DSKY readout t o f i n d where on t h e lunar surface t h e automatic system i s guiding t h e spacecraft. For reference purposes a 3000 f t c i r c l e has been drawn about t h e landing p o s i t i o n and t h e landing f o o t p r i n t a s s o c i a t e d w i t h . Because of o r b i t a l navigation e r r o r s and a l s o drifts of t h e i n e r t i a l system &ring t h e powered descent. The process of landing point designation and redesignation is i l l u s t r a t e d i n f i g u r e 40. - . - .sight and become important because of t h e danger of l o s i n g s i g h t of t h e t a r g e t .of.sight t o the intended landing site.It has Seen assumed that a maximum c a p a b i l i t y of designating 3000 f t domrange w i l l be required and this provision of f u e l i s a l l o t b e d f o r redesignation a t 5OOO f t of a l t i t u d e .sight so that he can il look beyond t h e proper number on t h e landing p o i n t designator and see where t h e guidance system i s taking him. comonly c a l l e d t h e landing p o i n t designator (LPD). some refinement i n landing s i t e s e l e c t i o n would then be made. a redesignation If. t h e a c t u a l p o s i t i o n of t h e spacecraft wl n o t be t h e c o r r e c t position. the p i l o t merely . Ehch increment of a hand c o n t r o l l e r i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n causes a 2 l i n e . Figure 37 shows t h e f o o t p r i n t a v a i l a b l e f o r t h i s f u e l allotment. The guidance system always believes that it i s following t h e correct p a t h t o t h e landing s i t e . t h e s i t e chosen i s s h o r t of t h e o r i g i n a l landing s i t e . t h e r e i s an i n s t r u c t i o n t o t h e guidance system t o change t h e landing p o i n t by t h e equiva l e n t of a half. however.o f .gate i s shown f o r t h e nominal case.sight readout from t h e guidance system and t h e new line. The response of t h e s p a c e c r a f t t o redesignations of landing p o s i t i o n is important. W r i n # this phase.sight i n t o t h e guidance computer. The p i l o t view from t h e hi. i f the p i l o t looks along t h e c a l c u l a t e d line.of. The p i l o t wl then o r i e n t his line. then he can i n s t r u c t changes i n t h e guidance system b y incrementing his a t t i t u d e hand c o n t r o l l e r .s i g h t ' change l a t e r a l l y t o t h e landing a r e a . by taking a measurement of t h e angle formed by t h e line. but i n s t e a d from t h e perspective provided by t h e approach f l i g h t p a t h angle.gate a l t i t u d e i s i n d i c a t e d i n f i g u r e 38. Some t m i c a l responses t o changes i n t h e landing point are shown i n f i g u r e 43. Landing Point Designator The p i l o t wl know where t o look il t o f i n d t h e intended landing area. by information earning from This i n f o r the guidance system d i s p l a y and keyboard (DSKY). For example. It has t h e c a p a b i l i t y a t any time t o determine t h e proper look angle o r line. t h e c o p i l o t would n o r m l l y read t h e DSKY again and inform t h e p i l o t w h a t new number t o look f o r t o f i n d t h e a e s i r e d landing area.of.o f .of. t h e horizon i s very near t h e 40 elevation depression angle. The proposed g r i d configuration f o r t h e landing p o i n t -d e s i g n a t o r is shown in f i g u r e 39.of. This r e s u l t s i n a t r a n s i e n t response from t h e spacecraft until t h e new a t t i t u d e and t h r o t t l e s e t t i n g commnds a r e responded to. - wl be a cooperative t a s k between t h e p i l o t and t h e c o p i l o t i l where t h e c o p i l o t wl read t h e DSKY and c a l l out t o t h e il p i l o t t h e numbers corresponding t o t h e landing p o i n t designator. Approximately 45 f t / s e c of f u e l i s required f o r this redesignation c a p a b i l i t y . t h e spacecraft i s pitched 3 c k a p p r o x b a t e l y 40 t h s . E not. t h e spacecraft wl p i t c h c l o s e r t o il the verticral and reduction i n t h r o t t l e w i l l be made so that t h e new p o s i t i o n wl be more c l o s e l y centered in t h e p i l o t ' s i l window. I he i s n o t f s a t i s f i e d with t h i s p o s i t i o n . With each increment that t h e p i l o t makes in moving t h e hand c o n t r o l l e r i n a p i t c h i n g motion.degree of elevation viewing angle. 0 a d e l t a V of 10 f t / s e c i s shown. Iateral changes i n t h e landing p o s i t i o n would be =de by incrementing the hand c o n t r o l l e r t o t h e s i d e i n a motion that would normally c r e a t e r o l l i n g motion of t h e spacecraft.of.sight he would see an area d i f f e r e n t from that o f t h e desired landing area. mation wl be i n t h e form of a d i g i t a l readout that allows il him t o l o c a t e t h e c o r r e c t g r i d number on t h e window.s i g h t t o t h e landing s i t e (looking a n g l e ) w i t h time from hi. t h e guidance system i s f l y i n g the spacecraft automatically so that t h e p i l o t ' s a t t i t u d e hand c o n t r o l l e r i s n o t e f f e c t i v e i n lnaking a t t i t u d e changes. i f the new s i t e s e l e c t e d i s f i r t h e r downrange. then t h e p i l o t .sight ( t o t h e desired point). then t h e spacecraft would have t o p i t c h t a c k and increase t h r o t t l e i n order t o slow down and obtain t h e new desired p o s i t i o n . When t h e guidance system receives these d i s c r e t e i n s t r u c t i o n s it r e c a l c u l a t e s t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e d e s i r e d landing a r e a and comrnands t h e p i t c h o r r o l l a t t i t u d e i n combination with a t h r o t t l e commnd required t o reach t h e desired position.

T u . determines the line. For t h e 3000 f t s h o r t redesignation t h e p i t c h b c k motion of the spacecraft causes the line. i n t e r c e p t point with t h e l n r surface i s a t an e n t i r e l y u a d i f f e r e n t point than t h e intended landing position.of. the guidance dispersion e f f e c t upon a l t i t u d e (provided the landing radar updating i s not c q l e t e ) . It i s obvious that although the landing radar performs a very vt l function ia in redixing the a l t i t u d e dispersions of t h e guidance system.of. t h e guidance system assumes t h e landing s i t e i s a t t h e sane elevation a s . t h e i n e r t i a l measuring u n i t . which. - . it would be t h e n o r m 1 procedure not t o redesignate short by more than t h e equivalent of about 2000 f t a t t h i s a l t i t u d e .of. For this reason. the line.sight angle t o the very t a r g e t a r e a t o be decreaged t o approximately 20' i n i t i a l l y . A t t h e same time.off with o0 regard t o the p r o h b l e magnitude of t h e e r r o r s t h a t vary with a l t i t u d e . and. when t h e crew views this line. a bias allowance of 45 f t / s e c f o r the landing point redesignation capability. S u f f i c i e n t conservatism can be placed on t h i s number t o insure that t h e p i l o t does not waste f u e l t o the extent that the landing could not be completed. however. For crossrange redesignations. A t lower a l t i t u d e s . informs t h e p i l o t t h a t so m y u n i t s of elevation and azjmuth redesignation c a p b i l i t y can be u t i l i z e d . t h e t e r r a i n over which t h e spacecraft is flying. o r from t h e guidance system a l t i t u d e uncertainties. The process of redesignation downrange and redesignation uprange. begins a period of r e l a t i v e navigation where t h e new landing point i s calculated in t h e present reference frame and is not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t e d by whatever i n e r t i a l system o r other navigational e r r o r s that m y have occurred. The e r r o r s other than t h e a l t i t u d e type e r r o r s ( t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n IIvSJ and the p i l o t application e r r o r s ) a l l tend t o be biases. There is no accurate procedure t o account f o r t h i s f i e 1 other than t o interrogate t h e guidance system f o r t h e a o n of mut f u e l remaining. especially if t h e approach t e r r a i n is l i k e l y t o have l a r g e variations of a l t i t u d e s .of.sight look angle i s rnaintained between 35' and 30° throughout t h e phase.sight through that p o i n t . For t h e nominal landing s i t e . t h i s would allow t h e p i l o t a rough assessment of whether o r not the new landing area would be within t h e f u e l budget. There a r e several sources of redesignation e r r o r s . %st f o r this case. To this number is added. For t h e 3000 f t long redesignation the look angle i s increased over t h e nominal case varying between 45O and 35O ( a f t e r the r e s u l t i n g t r a n s i e n t response i s completed). The e f f e c t of the a l t i t u d e e r r o r s whether from the t e r r a i n . hs t h i s f i g u r e does not present t h e t o t a l a t t i t u d e response t r a n s i e n t s f o r the e f f e c t of s i t e redesignations. o r c o r r e c t l y displayed t o the p i l o t . boresight i n s t a l l a t i o n .sight can be interpreted.of. f o r budget purposes. The accuracywith which t h e landing point designation o r t h e redesignation process can be made i s a function of how a c c u r a t e l y t h e line. The guidance computer load i s q u i t e heavy at this time. A important aspect of the redesignation process i s t h e n problem of how t o account f o r the propellant f u e l expenditure. the e f f e c t on t h e look angle is s l i g h t f o r redesignations up t o 3000 f t . t h e r e i s a trade. These downrange e r r o r s wl r e ~ c e il t o the order of 1 0 f t when the redesignations a r e made a t 0 a l t i t u d e s of l o f t o r l e s s . e r r o r s do not a f f e c t t h e l a t e r a l dispersions. These include t h e v a r i a t i o n s i n t e r r a i n along the approach t o t h e landing s i t e . Preliminary t e s t i n g i n d i c a t e s that these e r r o r s could be of t h e order of one-half degree. t h e spacecraft wl require a new bank a t t i t u d e i l (which i s nominally zero f o r in-plane redesignations ). and a 3 g random allowance of 15 f t / s e c f o r refinements i n t h e landing s i t e designation. it i s probable that a r u l e of t u h & approach m y be u t i l i z e d . theref o r e . The redesignations ocw a t an a l t i t u d e of 5000 f t . Dl V k d g e t e t a The f i e 1 expenditure during t h e nominal final approach phase w i l l be an equivalent t o 889 f t / s e c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c velocity. In this case. therefore. i n e f f e c t . When t h i s occurs the guidance system. there i s probability that t h e same landing radar function w i l l update t h e i n e r t i a l system with a f a l s e indication of t h e landing position a l t i t u d e . a s i n d i cated i n f i g u r e 41. r e f e r e n c e misalinement. and t h e e r r o r s of application by the spacecraft crew. a r e shown graphically i n f i g u r e 42. in e f f e c t . Tms.sight t h e . t h i s r a t i o of downrange e r r o r t o a l t i t u d e e r r o r i s approximately 4 t o 1 Altitude .The guidance system wl then recompute the location of t h e il desired landing area. For f l i g h t path angles of about 14O. Again f o r t y p i c a l f l i g h t path angles of about 14' t h i s half degree of application boresight e r r o r w i l l lead t o redesignation e r r o r s downrange on t h e order of 800 f t f o r redesignations occurring i n t h e a l t i t u d e range of 5000 t o 8000 f t . Fbwever. v i s i b i l i t y of t h e landing a r e a would be l o s t f o r a portion of time since t h e l w r window limit o e is 25O. increasing t o about 28 f o r a short-time i n t e r v a l . s h o r t e r range redesignations should be limited t o proportionally l e s s magnitude.

. Modification of this t r a j e c t o r y can be accomplished simply by modifying the p r o f i l e of p i t c h a t t i t u d e i n order t o e f f e c t a landing a t s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s t h a n that associated with t h e nominal descent path. The first objective i s t o allow t h e crew t o make t h e d e t a i l e d assessment. approxTmately 40' back from t h e v e r t i c a l i s . The p i t c h a t t i t u d e i s nominally 10 t o 1 throughout this phase. the descent propellant u t i l i z e d w i l l be equiva- - 4.back a t t i t u d e with associated with t h e final approach phase and t h e near v e r t i c a l a t t i t u d e of t h e landing phase. t h e physical l i d t a t i o n s of t h e window. however. Figure 44 shows a comparison of the nominal a t t i t u d e s f o r those w phases. and required redesignations of t h e landing p o s i t i o n t o more favorable landing t e r r a i n wl be accomplished. The landing phase f l i g h t path i s a continuation of t h e f i n a l approach phase f l i g h t path s o t h a t t h e r e i s no d i s c o n t i n u i t y a t t h e lo. The approach i s a continuous maneuver i n which forward a n d l a t e r a l v e l o c i t i e s would be zeroed a t approximately t h e 100 f t a l t i t u d e p o s i t i o n and t h e descent v e l o c i t y allowed t o continue a t approximately 5 f t / s e c .time t h e p i l o t wl b v e a il continuous v i e w of t h e landing area. A t t h e s t a r t of t h i s phase. The lacding phase p r o f i l e which has r e s u l t e d from almost years of simulating t h e maneuver i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n figure The lo. It i s a very simple matter f o r t h e p i l o t t o e f f e c t such a hover maneuver. t h e v i s i b i l i t y associated with t h e l i g h t i n g . It i s during t h i s time that assessments of t h e landing a r e a w i l l be made.The objectives and c o n s t r a i n t s of the landing phase design are presented i n f i g u r e 45. s t i l l q u i t e extreme f o r approaching t h e lunar surface a t o a l t i t u d e s . of t h e exact il landing point. l w it i s necessary t o provide a d d i t i o n a l shaping in order t o e f f e c t a more n e a r l y v e r t i c a l a t t i t u d e a t t h e termination o f t h e t o t a l descent. t h e a t t i t u d e of t h e spacecraft. b u t t h e a c t u a l t a r g e t point w i l l be a t o r near t h e p o s i t i o n where t h e v e r t i c a l descent begins. and t h e a c t u a l touchdown control procedures. If flown according t o t h e p r o f i l e . however. In order t o accomplish t h i s . t h e t r a j e c t o r y i s m r t h e r shaped a f t e r t h e f i n a l approach phase. and a l s o t o have the opportunity f o r d e t a i l e d assessment of t h e a r e a p r i o r t o the touchdown. The only disadvantage of t h e hover maneuver i s the expenditure of f u e l . a t a position about 1200 f t back from t h e intended landing spot.w r y of Final Approach Phase The final approach phase covers about 5 1 / 2 n a u t i c a l miles during wbich t h e a l t i t u d e i s decreased from 9 0 0 f t t o 5 0 f t . 6 & In t h e final approach phase. t h e l i g h t i n g and associated v i s i b i l i t y of t h e surface. The final approach phase and t h e landing phase a r e then combined with regard t o t h e m n n e r i n which t h e guidance system i s targeted. This leads t o objective m b e r t o i n which it i s d e s i r e d t o allow some w. This boundary defines t h e circustances under which an abort maneuver cannot be performed without the ascent stage h i t t i n g t h e surface. il The Landing Phase Objectives and Constraints The b a s i c purpose o f t h e landing phase i s t o provide a p o r t i o n of f l i g h t a t o v e l o c i t i e s and l w at p i t c h a t t i t u d e s close t o t h e v e r t i c a l so t h a t t h e p i l o t can provide v e r n i e r control of t h e touchdown maneuver.gate p o s i t i o n are m e t . and t h e p i l o t abort. The e f f e c t of t h e p i t c h a t t i t u d e i s t o gradually reduce t h e v e l o c i t i e s as t h e f l i g h t path i s followed i n order t o reach t h e desired p o s i t i o n a t an a l t i t u d e of 103 f t from which a v e r t i c a l descent can be made. This curve i s based upon a combination of v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t i e s . i f a hover condition i s desired near t h e 100 f t a l t i t u d e mark. hence. The r e s u l t i n g p i t c h a t t i t u d e . In order t o accomplish this. The t o t a l maneuver from t h e lo. t h e t r a j e c t o r y w a s shaped i n order t o p i t c h the a t t i t u d e more toward t h e v e r t i c a l so t h a t t h e approach conditions would allow the p i l o t t o view t h e landing s i t e . and a f i n a l s e l e c t i o n .gate p o s i t i o n w i l l normally take approximately 89 seconds. The +argeting design mmld sat-isfy t h e c o n s t r a i n t s of both t h e terminal p o r t i o n of the final approach phase and t h e landing phase by proper il s e l e c t i o n of t h e t a r g e t i n g parameters. b u t r i g i d adherence 1 t o t h i s p i t c h a t t i t u d e i s not a requirement. There wl be a smooth t r a n s i t i o n from t h e extreme pitch.gate point i s a t an a l t i t u d e of approximately 500 f t . Nominal Trajectory The v a r i a b l e s t h a t a r e a v a i l a b l e t o t r y t o s a t i s f y a l l of these constraints and o b j e c t i v e s include v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e approach f l i g h t path and t h e v e l o c i t i e s involved. to . t h e r e wl be some f l e x i b i l i t y i n t h e p r o p e l l a n t budget t o allow o t h e r than a r i g i d following of the design t r a j e c t o r y .staging system reaction time. a l t i t u d e s . . The guidance system i s t a r g e t e d so that the design c o n s t r a i n t s of t h e lo. The time required n o m l l y w i l l be about lo5 seconds during which.gate position. what i s termed t h e staged a b o r t l i m i t i n g boundary. - - maneuvering c a p a b i l i t y and adjustment of t h e landing point. and t h e v e l o c i t y from 600 f t / s e c t o 50 f t / s e c . N a c t u a l hover p o s i t i o n i s o shown i n t h e approach p o r f i l e because t h e v e r t i c a l v e b c i t y o r descent r a t e nominally does not come t o zero. and l a s t . and t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of blowing d u s t maneuvering within the desired a t t i t u d e limits i n order t o r e t a i n t h e advantages of a f a i r l y s t a b l e platform. t h e h o r i z o n t a l v e l o c i t y i s approximately 50 f t / s e c and t h e v e r t i c a l veloc&ty i s 1 5 f t / s e c . The c o n s t r a i n t s are f a m i l i a r ones including t h e f u e l u t i l i z a t i o n . t h e a c t u a l t e r r a i n . This allows a very expeditious t y p e of landing. and i n t u r n .

t h e p i l o t has good v i s i b i l i t y of t h e landing p o s i t i o n u n t i l j u s t before t h e f i n a l v e r t i c a l descent phase. it w i l l be incorporated. I n a d d i t i o n t o being able t o observe the intezded landing s i t e .abort boundary shown i n f i g u r e 47 i s applicable t o t h e s i t u a t i o n i n which t h e descent engine has t o be c u t off and t h e vehicle staged t o a b o r t on t h e ascent engine. t h e r e w i l l be a d i r e c t e f f e c t upon t h e time required t o complete descent and a random 2 65 f t / s e c of equivalent f u e l has b e e n . however. I f t h e r e a r e e r r o r s i n t h e radar v e r t i c a l velocity. t h e p i l o t has ample view of much of t h e l u n a r surface around h i m so t h a t i f t h e o r i g i n a l s i t e i s not s u i t a b l e he can deviate t o t h e o t h e r landing position. A t t h e present tm . This f a c t o r has l e d t o a c o n s t r a i n t upon t h e sun angle a t t h e landing site. The b a s i c system design w i l l allow t h e e n t i r e maneuver t o be conducted automatically. because of t h e expected ease i n which t h e maneuver could be accomplished manually should t h e need be present. Another descent engine f u e l contingency t h a t must be accounted f o r i s the p o s s i b l e v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e p i l o t c o n t r o l technique including t h e deviations from t h e planned f l i g h t p r o f i l e t h e p i l o t might employ. Simulations have shown t h a t here should be no problems involved i f t h e p i l o t decides t o take over from manual c o n t r o l a t any time during t h e terminal portion of t h e f i n a l approach phase o r t h e landing phase. Manual control of t h i s maneuver should present no problem and could be executed a t t h e option of t h e p i l o t . 8 * A p r o f i l e of the a l t i t u d e and a l t i t u d e r a t e of t h e landing phase i s shown i n f i g u r e 47. t r a j e c t o r y i e i s not planned f o r an approach i n order t o Icaintain s i m p l i c i t y of t r a j e c t o r y design. t h i s boundary i s avoided u n t i l t h e p i l o t i s ready t o commit hiplself t o a landing so t h a t it is only i n t h e region of below 100 f t t h a t he i s i n v i o l a t i o n of t h e boundary. A period of 15 seconds of hover t i m e w i l l c o s t about 80 f t j s e c of f u e l equivalent. The a l t i t u d e r a t e i s gradually decreased t o a value of about 5 f t / s e c a t t h e C f t a l t i t u d e p o s i t i o n f o r l3 v e r t i c a l descent. 4. Should. t h a t t h e performance of t h e landing r a d a r may be doubtful. t h e dog-leg be i d e n t i f i e d as a requirement f o r an automatic approach. Mu'ch concern has been generated with regard t o t h e problem of v i s i b i l i t y during t h e landing approach. There i s also t h e p o s s i b i l i t y . t h e a r e a immediately i n f r o n t of and t o t h e s i d e of t h e exact landing p o s i t i o n w i l l be v i s i b l e . t h e landing phase can be f l e x i b l e enough t o accommodate a dog-leg type maneuver t h a t w i l l give t h e p i l o t improved viewing perspective of t h e intended landing position. However. It i s noteworthy t h a t only 30 seconds of hover time has been budgeted and t h a t f o r s p e c i f i c a l l y designated purposes.l e n t t o about 390 f t / s e c of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c v e l o c i t y . The descent r a t e of 5 f t / s e c i s maintained a t t h i s point i n order+to expedite t h e landing. A t approximately 50 f t of a l t i t u d e (. i n which case t h e spacecraft crew might want t o hover i n order t o v i s u a l l y observe and n u l l out t h e v e l o c i t i e s . This would r e q u i r e t h a t the spacecraft h e s i t a t e during t h e approach. t h e IM handling q u a l i t i e s make it a s a t i s f a c t o r y vehicle f o r t h e p i l o t t o c o n t r o l manually. provided t h a t t h e new landing p o s i t i o n i s s b t a i n a b l e with t h e f u e l available. The curve l a b e l e a staged. a l l o t t e d i n t h e f u e l budget. I n the event t h a t t h e p i l o t has some misgivings about t h e a r e a on which he d e s i r e s t o land. It would be possible t o update t h e i n e r t i a l system i n this manner and allow t h e spacecraft t o proceed and l a n d on t h e s u r f a c e with degraded landing r a d a r performance during t h e f i n a l p o r t i o n of t h e descent. During t h e landing approach. with t h e c u r r e n t design. The value of 3% f t j s e c descent r a t e i s then maintained a l l t h e way u n t i l contact with t h e surface is e f f e c t e d and procedures i n i t i a t e d f o r cutoff of t h e descent engine. and t h e penalty involved i s t h e amount of f u e l expended. even during t h e v e r t i c a l descent. Delta V Budget A sunrmary of t h e landing phase f u e l budget is given i n f i g u r e The budget r e f l e c t s allowances f o r s e v e r a l possible contingencies. For example.around the landing point. t h e p i l o t may wish t o p r o ceed t o t h e landing s i t e and spend some time i n s p e c t i n g it before he f i n a l l y descends t o t h e surface. t h a t v e l o c i t i e s can be nulled i n this manner within 1 f t / s e c a f t e r l e s s than 15 seconds of hover time (another 80 f t / s e c of f u e l expenditure). t h e descent r a t e would be decreased s It i s not necessary t o t h e design touchdown v e l o c i t y of 3 f t / s e c . a s w i l l be discussed by t h e paper on S i t e Selection. Simulation experience has i n d i c a t e d a need f o r an average a d d i t i o n of &I f t / s e c of f u e l and a random 103 f t j s e c . f o r this t o be done a t e x a c t l y 50 f t so t h a t u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n the a l t i t u d e of t h e order of 5 t o 10 f t would n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t t h e approach design. It has been found by means of f l i g h t t e s t s i n a h e l i c o p t e r . Figure 46 a l s o shows a nominal sequence of p i l o t views of a 100 f t radius c i r c u l a r area.10 f t ) . However. . The IM f r o n t landing pad is v i s i b l e t o t h e p i l o t . It i s obvious t h a t this boundary must be violated p r i o r t o e f f e c t i n g a normal landing on t h e surface. The s a t i s f a c t o r y nature of t h e LN manual control handling q u a l i t i e s has been demonstrated by fixed base simulation and by f l i g h t simulation a t t h e F l i g h t Research Center using t h e Lunar Landing Research Vehicle and t h e Langley Research Center using the Lunar Landing Research F a c i l i t y . However.

Fuel Budget Summary A summary of the t o t a l -24 descent f u e l budget i s given i n f i g u r e 49. a s indicated i n f i g u r e 51. Because of the expected good handling q u a l i t i e s of t h e I . d i s p l a y system f o r manual only. 8. ) p o s i t i o n . Manual-instrument mode of control does have sources of error. t h e p i l o t has taken over d i r e c t c o n t r o l b u t he has s t a b i l i z a t i o n loops t o provide favorable c o n t r o l response. The need f o r an accurate. IMU accelerometer bias.o f f and t h e nominal descent v e l o c i t i e s . t h e p i l o t has two options. t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of a d d i t i o n a l landing f l e x i b i l i t y can be provided by f u e l tanks. The s o l i d l i n e give t h e b a s e l i n e t r a j e c t o r y and r e s u l t s i n a f u e l remaining of 778 f t / s e c a t touchdown. an o p e r a t i n g -c o n s t r a i n t of having t h e descent engine off a t touchdown has been accepted. No landing a t t i t u d e o r v e l o c i t y c o n t r o l problem i s a n t i c i p a t e d and t h e control should be withi n one f o o t per second l a t e r a l v e l o c i t i e s . I n addition. t h a t a l l of t h e contingency f u e l were u t i l i z e d f o r hovering over t h e landing s i t e . and t a i l . while t h e p i l o t may have used t h e landing point designator t o s e l e c t t h e touchdown point. The inclusion of t h e RSS random contingencies a s a f u e l requirement i s considered a conservat i v e approach i n t h a t each of t h e random congingencies could lead t o a f u e l savings a s well as a f e u l expenditure. The addition f l e x i b i l i t y i s equivalent t o a hover time of about one minute o r t o a d d i t i o n a l downrange landing redesignation c a p a b i l i t y of almost 2D. The f i r s t i s completely automatic. . g . There a r e two control modes by which t h e landing operation can be performed. descent engine shutoff valve closures. t h a t may degrade control and those t h a t have been considered include t h e following: control system response.on s i g n a l informs the p i l o t t h a t ua t h e proper a l t i t u d e -h a s been reached f o r engine cutoff. Within t h e manual landing mode. Thus. Because of possible unsymmetrical nozzle f a i l u r e due t o shock ingestion and a d e s i r e t o l i m i t erosion of t h e landing surface. This leads t o a t o t a l 7053.loading of f u e l can be considered. The sequence of events i s shown i n f i g u r e 52. described a s Contingencies. t h e manual v i s u a l mode should be very s i m i l a r t o f l i g h t of M a VTOL a i r c r a f t here on e a r t h . Perhaps the most important s i n g l e operation i n t h e lunar landing mission i s t h e a c t u a l touchdown maneuver. The second mode i s manual. developed p a r t l y through simulation. however. comand mode t o f u r t h e r a i d t h e p i l o t i n control of t h e touchdown v e l o c i t i e s . The probe l e n g t h must be determined from a consideration of delay times i n p i l o t response. o r i n the i n t e r e s t of weight savings. f o r manual only. Several of these parameters a r e l i s t e d i n f i g u r e 51 a s being of prime importance. i . even though t h e accuracy may be of t h e order of f i v e f e e t . The light. The present tankage would provide up t o 7332 f t / s e c of f u e l o r about 282 f t / s e c more than t h e budget. some off.300 f t a l t i t u d e . t h a t is. The f u e l budget s m a r y i s presented i n f i g u r e 50b a s a HowGoes-It p l o t of t h e expenditure of f u e l both i n equivalent c h a r a c t e r i s t i c v e l o c i t y and pounds a s a function of time and events during t h e descent. I n this mode. (1) land v i s u a l l y . It i s during t h i s maneuver t h a t t h e unce'rtanities of t h e lunar surface become a r e a l problem. The procedures f o r e f f e c t i n g descent engine shutdown w i l l be discussed i n d e t a i l . IMU misalignment. landing radar v e l o c i t y measurement.OM f e e t f o r a redesignation at. t h e p i l o t . t h e manual mode normally w i l l be used i n conjunction with a rate-of-descent. I n considering t h e control of t h e landing. Probable e r r o r s i n a l t i t u d e information from e i t h e r t h e i n e r t i a l system o r from t h e landing r a d a r preclude t h e use of this information f o r t h e engine cutoff function.When these contingencies a r e u t i l i z e d t h e time b a s i s of t h e p l o t w i l l be incorrect. he is not a c t i v e i n t h e a c t u a l c o n t r o l loop. d i s c r e t e i n d i c a t i o n of t h e proper a l t i t u d e t o c u t t h e descent engine off l e d t o t h e adoption of probes extending beneath t h e landing pads rigged t o cause a l i g h t i n t h e cockpit t o t r on upon probe contact with un t h e l nr surface. t h e l a t e r a l v e l o c i t i e s a r e nulled and t h e v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t y controlled t o a prescribed value u n t i l t h e descent engine is cut off j u s t p r i o r t o touchdown. This procedure. landing r a d a r a l t i t u d e measurement. o r ( 2 ) because of such obscurations he would control t h e landing through reference t o f l i g h t i n s t r u ments. and items.0 LUNAR LANDING TOUCHDOWN C N R L AUTCMATIC AND MANUAL O TO. 1 2 3. Adding t h e u t i l i z a t i o n of a l l of t h e budgeted contingency mean values of f u e l i s represented by t h e dashed l i n e . The t o t a l time could extend t o a s much a s (735 seconds) i n t h e event . p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r the time between Lo-Gate and minutes Touchdown. emphasis has been placed on t h e method of timing of s h u t t i n g off t h e descent engine. a s previously described. A recommended procedure f o r c o n t r o l l i n g t h e approach has been developed. .of-gravity ( c . involves reaching a p o s i t i o n a t about 100 f t above t h e landing s i t e and descending v e r t i c a l l y t o t h e lunar surface. The budget i s divided i n t o t h a t required by t h e baseline t r a j e c t o r y requirement t o t a l i n g 6582 f t / s e c . because of t h e d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t on touchdown v e r t i c a i v e l o c i t i e s . but i s aided 5y automatic c o n t r o l loops. which would require t h a t t h e r e be no v i s u a l obscuration a s might come from d u s t o r l u n a r l i g h t i n g constraints. Diring t h e v e r t i c a l descent. and t h e center. t o t a l i n g 353 f t / s e c mean requirement with an a d d i t i o n a l 2 143 f t j s e c random requirement.

9. Additional a n a l y s i s of t h e s e same r e s u l t s f o r t h e c o n t r o l performance f o r a t t i t u d e and a t t i t u d e r a t e s indicated t h a t c o n t r o l within t h e present c r i t e r i a of 6 degrees and 2 degrees p e r second can be expected on a 3 a p r o b a b i l i t y . The r e s u l t i n g contours show t h e almost d i r e c t dependence of touchdown v e l o c i t y e r r o r upon t h e landing r a d a r v e l o c i t y performance . For a conservative analysis. The curves a r e representative i e of a 53-inch f o o t probe being used. The 0. s and 0 . The 0. A simulation study of this maneuver with t h e p i l o t cutoff of t h e descent engine showed t h a t p i l o t reaction times averaged about a. Pilot.of. The dashed l i n e s i n d i c a t e t h e present design c r i t e r i a f o r t h e landing gear. predicted performance. f up t o 1. of course. and radar e r r o r s a t t h e time of f i n a l update a l s o allowed a s l i g h t l y higher descent r a t e . i n probe length. This engine delay time includes t h a t time required f o r t h e e l e c t r o n i c s i g n a l to be generated. t h r o t t l e and descent engine c u t o f f ) . the time required t o i n i t i a t e abort. and t h e control power and c o n t r o l r a t e l i m i t a t i o n s of the ascent stage. accelerometer bias. The heavy dashed l i n e on t h e chart going up on a 45 degree angle i n d i c a t e d a combination of descent r a t e a t probe contact. One s o l u t i o n f o r t h i s s i t u a t i o n would be t o extend the probes t o allow more leeway i n p i l o t reaction tm . and landing r a d a r e r r o r s . but not beyond present landing gear impact l i m i t . t h e c o n t r o l power of the ascent s t a g e i s about 35 deg/sec2 f o r p i t c h and roll a t t i t u d e maneuvers. the advantages of longer probes m u s t be traded off against a probable decrease i n r e l i a b i l i t y and an increased prob a b i l i t y of touching down with g r e a t e r than acceptable v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t i e s . Under emergency manual c o n t r o l where t h e -p i l o t d e f l e c t s his a t t i t u d e hand c o n t r o l l e r . The s p e c i f i c a t i o n performance of t h e landing radar c a l l s f o r each of t h e t h r e e components of v e l o c i t y t o be measured within 1 . 9 contours show t h a t automatic control r e s u l t s i n lower touchdown v e l o c i t i e s . The simulation included t h e major sources of system e r r o r s . I the desired f i n a l r a t e of descent has been achieved. The comparative r e s u l t s between automatic and manual control of t h e landing touchdown v e l o c i t i e s a r e shown i n f i g u r e 58. The p i l o t . The f i g u r e does not. instrument display resolution. The a b i l i t y t o a b o r t w i l l be a function of when the need f o r t h e abort i s recognized. A s shown i n f i g u r e 53. 4. The simulation r e s u l t s of landing v e l o c i t y manual c o n t r o l with s p e c i f i c a t i o n performance by t h e l a n d i n g r a d a r a r e shown i n f i g ure' 56. These increased r a t e s coupled with t h e 0. t h e time involved i n separation of t h e ascent stage. Currect pred i c t i o n s are t h a t t h i s s p e c i f i c a t i o n w i l l be met i n l a t e r a l and forward d i r e c t i o n s and b e t t e r e d by 3/4 f t / s e c v e r t i c a l l y . b u t t h e difference i s much l e s s pronounced f o r t h e degraded r a d a r performance a s compared with t h e predicted r a d a r performance. 0 .25 second t o t a l engine shutoff delay time. i e HrJWeVer. t h e a c t u a l toucMown v e l o c i t y i s just s l i g h t l y more than t h e descent r a t e a t probe contact.i n the-loop studies were made using a s i a a t e d LM cockpit including a l l t h e control a c t u a t o r s ( a t t i t u d e . t h e shutoff valves t o close. The 0 .o f f t o be e s s e n t i a l l y completed. a s shown i n f i g u r e 54.loop and automatic c o n t r o l simulation s t u d i e s have been conducted of the landing c o n t r o l maneuver. I A t staging.3 seconds. The e f f e c t of landing r a d a r performance upon t h e landing v e l o c i t y envelope i s shown i n f i g u r e 57. t h e a t t i t u d e and t h e a t t i t u d e r a t e a t separation. s p e c i f i c a t i o n performance.the.in. t h e r e i s s t i l l an i n t e r e s t i n t h e a b i l i t y t o a b o r t should t h e landing dynamics become unstable. such a s platform misalignment.99 p r o b a b i l i t y contours a r e shown f o r t h e cases of no r a d a r e r r o r s .6 second reaction t e i m would mean not meeting t h e c r i t e r i a of having t h e descent engine off a t touchdown. F a s t e r reaction time would i n c r e a s e t h e f i n a l touchdown veloc i t y .0 ABORT AFICER 'XXTCHDOWN Although a n a l y s i s and simulation t e s t s i n d i c a t e a high p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t t h e landing touchdown maneuver w i l l be within t h e l a n f i n g gear design c r i t e r i a . and t h e t h r u s t t a i l . plus system delay and p i l o t r e a c t i o n times. o r about four f e e t per second. I f manual control allowed a s l i g h t l y higher than desired f i n a l descent r a t e .0 second p i l o t delay time can be t o l e r a t e d and s t i l l have t h e descent engine o f f a t touchdown. t h e predicted performance has been degraded by a f a c t o r o r two. 9 9 p r o b a b i l i t y cont o u r s a r e shown and a r e well within the design envelope. and includes t h e e f f e c t of p i l o t r e a c t i o n tm .The v a r i a t i o n of descent r a t e a t touchdown a s a function of descent r a t e a t probe contact i s shown i n f i g u r e 53. The e f f e c t of changing t h e l e n g t h of t h e l m d i n g probes i s t o a d j u s t t h e v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t y b i a s veloc'ity approximately 1 f t / s e c p e r f o o t change. center.gravity o f f s e t s . r e f l e c t t h e advantage t h a t manual control provides i n c l o s e r s e l e c t i o n of t h e a c t u a l touchdown p o s i t i o n i n t h e event t h a t t h e t e r r a i n i s not uniformly satisfactory. t h e t h r u s t buildup time of t h e ascent stage. and degraded (predicted) performance. The landing r a d a r e r r o r s a r e a prime f a c t o r in t h e touchdown control process and t h e models assumed f o r t h e a n a l y s i s a r e shown i n f i g u r e 55. t h e s e compounded increases might y i e l d descent r a t e s on t h e order of 5 t o 6 f t / s e c . coupled with a 0. t h a t would cause t h e engine t o s t i l l be on a t touchdown. 5 f t / s e c on a 3 W b a s i s .

be t h e r e s u l t s of t h e f i r s t I M landing approach. This w i l l be p a r t l y confirmed o r adjustments made through extensive simulations with t h e I M Mission Simulators. & t a i l s of these l o g i c flow c h a r t s w i l l not be discussed f u r t h e r i n t h i s paper. I n order t o a i d i n the understanding of t h e l o g i c and proposed sequence of decisions. t h e boundary indicated an abort can be made a t an a l t i t u d e of about 63 degrees i f the r a t e i s not g r e a t e r than 13 degjsec. From t h e p i l o t ' s standpoint t h e r e a r e a number of judgments and decisions t h a t w i l l have t o be made i n t h e period from H i Gate t o Lo Gate t o touchaown.impossible. The preceeding s e c t i o n s have described and explained the desi@. o f the IM descent s t r a t e g y and t h e r e s u l t i n g t r a j e c t o r y desi=-. The t h r e e phases t r a j e c t o r y i s designed t o maintain f u e l expenditure efficiency. For t h e other extreme of a t t i t u d e r a t e limit ua (5O/sec) applicable only t o automatic r o l l a t t i t u d e control. a logic-flow chart has been prepared t h a t i s applicable from t h e H i :Gate p o s i t i o n t o landing tauchdown. This budget. t h e r e does not appear t o be a requirement f o r an automatic abort initiation. except i n those regions of the t r a j e c t o r y where such f a c t o r s a s p i l o t assessment of t h e landing a r e a r e q u i r e a judicious compromise of f u e l e f f i c i e n c y . This condition would take more than 4 seconds t o develop a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l contact with t h e l nr surface. t h e r e i s no a t t i t u d e r a t e l i m i t a t i o n .hard-over.0 f l l " ~ ~ y A IM descent s t r a t e g y has been presented which i s designed t o take advantage of t h e 161 system and the IM crew i n order t h a t t h e IM w i l l continually be i n an advantageous p o s i t i o n t o cornp l e t e the l u n a r landing. therefore. An analysis was made of t h e boundary of over. . I n addition t o t h e boundaries. T o boundaries a r e w shown. It is believed t h a t t h e s t r a t e g y allows a l o g i c a l sequence of events and decisions and adequate time f o r t h e p i l o t function. and a l l of t h e energy was converted t o r o t a t i o n a l motion.4 seconds f o r t h e time required f o r t h e p i l o t t o actuate t h e abort control. i f not. The curve labeled Landing Gear Design Envelope Maximum Enegry applies t o the improbable. Both of these a r e considered adequate sources of a t t i t u d e information i n t h e event t h a t t h e spacecraft passes a 43 degree deviation from t h e v e r t i c a l and an abort becomes necessary. case where t h e landing was made a t t h e corner of the v e l o c i t y c r i t e r i a envelope 7 f t / s e c v e r t i c a l and 4 f t / s e c horizont a l . These c h a r t s a r e presented i n f i g u r e s 63a) and b ) f o r t h e information and use of persons i n t e r e s t e d i n d e t a i l e d examination of t h e l o g i c and i n constructing t h e crew loading time l i n e s . Both boundaries apply t o t h e conditions under which an abort The boundaries a c t i o n must be recognized a s being required. one f o r emergency manual a t t i t u d e c o n t r o l which requires t h e p i l o t t o put his hand c o n t r o l l e r hard over and t h e other i i ol f o r a r a t e l m t c o n s i s t e n t with automatic r l response ( j o / s e c ) . of course. Normal manual control commands a r e limited t o a O / s e c and automatic control l i m i t e d t o 10°/sec i n p i t c h and S0/sec i n r o l l . The r e s u l t s of this analysis a r e shown i n f i g u r e 59. 6. allow a t o t a l of 1. t h e boundary i s reduced about 13 degrees i n a t t i t u d e . It is. For t h e emergency manual control. t h e s t a g i n g t o t a k e place. highly improbable t h a t conditions w i l l be encountered t h a t l i e t o t h e r i g h t of t h i s curve. i s approximately 282 f t j s e c l e s s than t h e current tank capacity of t h e I " This margin i s considered ample f o r dealing with p r e s e n t l y unforeseen problems which may be i d e n t i f i e d p r i o r t o t h e lunar landing. The l u n a r landing s t r a t e g y has considered a l i d e n t i f i e d problems l which m h adversely a f f e c t t h e lunar landing and t h e r e s u l t i n g i t g design c a l l s f o r a f u e l expenditure budget of 7350 f t / s e c o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c v e l o c i t y . The p i l o t w i l l have i n d i c a t i o n of a t t i t u d e from kiis winsow view and from the a t t i t u d e instrument display (FDAI). t h e r e i s a l s o a l i n e i n d i c a t l n g t h e n e u t r a l s t a b i l i t y boundary o r t h e s e t s of condition under which t h e spacecraft would j u s t reach t h e t i p o v e r balance point of about 40 degrees. The f i n a l confirmation w i l l . and t h e ascent t h r u s t t o build up t o 9 percent of r a t e d t h r u s t . Considering t h e improbability of landing contact t h a t would r e s u l t i n an unstable post-landing a t t i t u d e and t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t even i n such an event the p i l o t could i n i t i a t e a s a f e abort. These a t t i t u d e r a t e l i m i t a t i o n s a r e important from t h e standpoint of determining how quickly t h e ascent stage a t t i t u d e can be returned t o t h e v e r t i c a l i n t h e event of an impending tipover.turn conditions from which a successful staged abort could be made.

FT) I 01 56 FIGURE 2 I I I I 5a 60 62 64 CHARACTERISTIC VELOCITY.NASA-S-66-6025 MAY Questions and Answers THEORETICAL LM DESCENT IMPULSIVE A V SEPARATION AN D TRANSFER AVc 109 fT/SEC LUNAR EXCURSION MODULF DESCENT Speaker: Donald C.6 6 . M . Cheatham 1.S . a f t e r t h e meeting and resolved t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s on t h e presentation form. INITIAL THRUST-TOWEIGHT RATIO (PERICYNITION ALTITUDE. FPS .:o . Kelly r P r o b a b i l i t y p l o t s of landing v e l o c i t y show constant v e r t i c a l v e l o c i t y f o r a l l p r o b a b i l i t i e s when horizontal v e l o c i t y i s zero. Kelly and M Cheatham discussed t h e data r r .5 0 3 9 JUN VARIATION OF POWERED-DESCENT CHARACTERISTIC VELOCITY WITH THRUST-TO-WEIGHT RATIO E:[ . lMPULSlVE POWERED TERMINATION A V c = 5622 FT/SEC - = - FIGURE 1 TOTAL AVC ERMINAL = 5731 Oo Y N A S A . is this c o r r e c t ? ANSWER M.

000 FT) SEPARATION AND HOHMANN TRANSFER AVc 98 FT/SEC = M A J O R FACTORS ORBITAL M E C H A N I C S P R O B L E M S PERFORMANCE LIMITATIONS O F SPACECRAFT SYSTEMS LUNAR E N V I R O N M E N T . 5 0 4 8 JUNE 1 OPTIMUM POWERED DESCENT NASA-S-66-6503 JUN et = 89OE C =0 S Y= h = 50. A N D IRREGULARITIES <.000 FT h = 1 4 .S .6 6 .000 FT e = 85O t = 120 S E C v = 4400 FT/SEC h n = h 2 3 . H p = 50. 0 0 0 FT e = 700 t = 330 S E C v = 1700 F T / S E C 8= t v h = 5000 FT = 380 S E C = 960 F T / S E C 66O ACCURACY L I I 1 I I D O W N R A N G E (N MI) FIGURE 6A .V I S I B I L I T Y . T E R R A I N U N C E R T A I N T I E S .S-66 6418 JUN THEORETICAL OPTIMUM LM DESCENT (T/W LM LANDING PLANNING STRATEGY 0 OBJECTIVE TO A N T I C I P A T E THE L U N A R E N V I R O N M E N T P R O B L E M S A N D T O P L A N THE L A N D I N G A P P R O A C H SO THAT THE C O M B I N E D S P A C E C R A F T S Y S T E M S I N C L U D I N G THE C R E W WILL M O S T EFFECTIVELY I M P R O V E THE PROBABILITY O F ATTAINING A SAFE LANDING = .3 6023 9" S C WINDOW N A S A .3.000 FT v = 5600 FT/SEC = 47. . 0 0 0 FT t v LM LANDING ACCURACY AFTER THREE ORBITS Y= = 290 S E C = 2300 F T / S E C 10 h = 23.NASA-S-66-6026 M A Y NASA. - -7 TOTAL A Vc 6023 TERMINAL Y 5 9 O = 0 PREDOMINANT S C SYSTEMS GUIDANCE AND CONTROL L A N D I N G RADAR DESCENT PROPULSION FIGURE 5 THEORETICAL FIGURE 3 0.

66. 2 ANTENNA TILT Oo = ORBIT B Y LM 15.65-1606 LM LANDING ACCURACY AFTER T H R E E ORBITS(C0NT) ASSUMPTIONS & ERROR MODELSI1"l 0 LANDING ATTITUDE CONTROL OF LM SITE AT 0" LATITUDE A N D 0" LONGITUDE PRIOR TO LUNAR O R B I T INSERTION T H R E E S l G H T l N G S PER NOTE: IN DECENT THRUST CONFIGURATION MAIN ENGINE GIMBAL IS EMPLOYED FOR TRIMMING THE PITCH AND YAW MOMENT D U E TO CENTER OF GRAVITY SHIFTS 0 MSFN UPDATE 0 T W O LANDMARKS WITH LANDMARK PER PASS 0 LM SEPARATION FROM CSM O N THIRD ORBIT.6 6 .5 .S.06 DEG ~~~~~~~~ . 1 NNA TILT 43 = L 7500 r 7500 I I I 10.S.06 DEG GYRO DRIFT .5050 JUNE 1 LM LANDlE4G 3 0 UNCERTAINTY ELLIPSE AFTER THREE ORBITS LANDING SITE 0" LAT 0" L O N G N A V I G A T I O N IN N A V I G A T I O N IN LUNAR ORBIT BY M S F N LANDING RADAR BEAM CONFIGURATION AND ANTENNA TILT ANGLES +x POSITION NO.03 DEG/HR FIGURE 8 7500 FT FIGURE 68 N A S A .6 5 0 4 JUN NASA.6 6 -6 5 2 2 JUN NASA.000 G U I D A N C E TARGETED FOR N O N C O N S T R A I N E D RANGED" o-2500 .0017 FT/SEC2 .N A S A .5 .000 \5000 0 2500 15.000 SITION NO. PLATFORM ALINEMENT AT 15 MINUTES BEFORE A MANEUVER ACCEL BIAS ALINEMENT ACCURACY (ACT) LANDMARK ACCURACY .5000 7500 FIGURE 7 FIGURE 9 .

UNCERT AINTY . 0 I I LATERAL ANGLE. 2000 2000 .5% t 5 FT ACCURACY 5 . 0 % OR 2 .5% OR 1 . 0 0 0 . 5 % OR 1 .0% OR 1. 6 4 7 9 JUN N A S A .000 2% 1 . FT RANGE TO SURFACE 1.5% t 5 FT 1.S . 200 Z O O . 5 % OR 1 . 'ZA 2.25.5 FPS 3. 0 FPS N /A I FIGURE 12 I LOOKING PARALLEL TO Z BODY ELEVATION ANGLE. 5 FPS 1. DEG -30 t I FIGURE 10 -70 NASA-SW-5140 JUN NASA-S-66-3576 MAY 12 LM FLIGHT CONFIGURATION LM DESCENT ENGINE THRUST CHARACTERISTICS t UPPER LIMIT 3. 40. 5 FPS 2 . " FIGURE 13 FIGURE 11 0' TIME.5% i 5 FT 1.5% OR 3 . 5 FPS 1 . S E C O N D S .N A S A 5 . 6 6 . I DEG I I 40 30 20 10 0 10 I ALTITUDE.6 4 5 0 d 5 JUNE I 1M W I N D O W VIEWING LIMITS FROM C O M M A N D E R ' S DESIGN E Y E POSITION LM LANDING RADAR (30) SPECIFICATION ACCURACY 80 7 0 < . 5 FPS N /A I '"A.000 2 5 . .

000 F .".~~""""- HIGH GATE h = 8600 FT e=46O h=25.ALLOWS EFFICIENT REDUCTION O F MOST O F VELOCITY " " " L " " .@ 0 30 25 20 15 D O W N RANGE.40 eh=25. D O W N RANGE FIGURE 1 4 *PRESENT STRATEGY IS BASED UPON THIS REQUIREMENT FIGURE 16A N A S A .ooo FT e=88o 9=86O T = 2 8 SEC V:5564 FT/SEC T=O SEC V=SSOO FT/SEC y=".000 FT T:454 SEC V-608 FT/SEC Y =-14.S .ALLOWS ACQUISITION A N D ASSESSMENT OF SITE A N D CONFIRMATION O F FLIGHT SAFETY B Y PILOT 0 LANDING PHASE-ALLOWS VERN'IER CONTROL OF POSITION A N D VELOCITIES FIGURE 15 FIGURE 168 . r - ."-~ ". 0 BRAKING PHASE ..O0 Low 250 N M I "( ""2 " . " " " " "" GATE h=5DO FT '1~558 SEC V=52 FT/SEC 1=-I7.6 6 .000 FT e = 6 6 .6 6 . N MI 10 5 0 FINAL APPROACH PHASE .0° "-"""-. " . LR .N A S A .6 4 7 0 JUN VARIATION OF LM L A N D i N G POSITION REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED 0 LM POWERED DESCENT TARGET SWITCHOVER h:43. LANDING AT ANY SUITABLE POINT WITHIN A SPECIFIED AREA LANDING AT ANY SUITABLE POINT WITHIN A SMALL AREA CONSTRAINED IN SIZE PRIMARILY BY GUIDANCE DISPERSIONS* LANDING AT A PRESPECIFIED POINT (SUCH AS A SURVEYOR) 0 MAXIMUM THROTTLE ENGINE IGNITION h = 5 0 . 5 O SEC T=400 V=1067 FT/SEC Y=-4.000 FT =71 1 ~ 3 2 SEC VX2164 8FT/SEC Y =-4.0° 0 t. 5 0 d d JUN LM THREE-PHASED POWERED DESCENT LM POWERED DESCENT ( CONT) APPROACH LR ALTITUDE UPDATE FICTITIOUS TARGET h=16.5 .. . 0 0 0 FT h=50.5O " ~ " " " .2D Y =oo e=800 UPDATE T=228 V-3385 SEC y"1. 7 ' 1 ~ " " i " ~ " .

6 4 1 0 JUN N A S A .6 6 . r .5 .--ACTUAL I I ! \ w FIGURE 18 IGNITION TIME IGNITE IGNITION TIME .LBS DESCENT E N G I N E IS NON-THROTTLEABLE IN MAX THRUST REGION MAXIMUM THRUST OF DESCENT E N G I N E IS INlTlALLY=9700 LBS [T/W%3) FIXED THRUST UNCERTAINTIES MAY REACH 2 2 1/2% FIGURE 19 8000 6000 0 4000 2000 - --- ( N O M IN A L) I I I I J I -\ . 0 0 0 -\COMMANDED CONSTRAINTS 0 10. ~o.5 .5 .6 4 2 5 JUN BRAKING PHASE DESIGN 0 T H R U S T B E H A V I O R F O R LIMITED THROTTLE G U I D A N C E TRAJECTORY PROFILEo o .6 6 .-ACCELERATION PREDICTED AT LITEUP EXAGGERATED CURVATURE ESPECIALLY IN THIS REGION 0 0 THRUST F W " V l O R FOR LIMITED THROTTLE GUIDANCE r BRAKING TRAJECTORY A L FEET T 0 : T : T F FlCTlClOUS TARGET /.HI-GATE TARGET m PROFILE SWITCHOVER /-COMMAND FINAL APPROACH A N D LANDING LOW T/W ACCELERATION COMMAND COMMAND AT ITERATION TIME CASE II THRUST.o ALTIT UDE OBJECTIVES 0 T A R [ T i x S TARGET TARGET REDUCE VELOCITY TO ACCEPTABLE LANDING APPROACH MAGNITUDES MAINTAIN EFFICIENT U S E OF PROPELLANT FUEL REACH A PRESPECIFIED STATE VECTOR AT HI-GATE POSITION /-HI-GATE SWITCHOVER RANGE FEET 0 CASE I NOMINAL T / W FINAL APPROACH AND LANDING I I I ' \ I I 1 2 .6 6 . - 0 FIGURE 17 0 1 I I I I I I I I \ I I I I I I I I RANGE N A S A .6 6 .000 THRUST.5 0 4 2 JUN POWERED DESCENT IGNITION LOGIC .N A S A .S . POUNDS 5000 OMINAL I I I .6 4 7 6 JUN N A S A .

FT 24000 FIGURE 24 -4000 25 t I I I 20 15 IO 5 0 RANGE. LBS 5000 0 200 300 400 0 20 40 60 80 100 BIAS TIME REQUIRED FOR FICTITIOUS TARGET.6 6 .N A S A . SEC FIGURE 21 FIGURE 23 TIME FROM BRAKING.S .8 NASA-5-66-6513 JUN TERRAIN PROFILE DURING APPROACH TO LANDING SITE 0 20' N LAT 12 50' E LONG WVza WYya t3000 VELOCITY WEIGHTING . + I O 0 0 FT 0 -1000 25 ALTITUDE WEIGHTING . SEC NASA-5-66-6A26 JVN L A N D I N G RADAR WEIGHTING FACTORS FOR ALTITUDE A N D VELOCITY UPDATES .FPS 1600 ALTITUDE.INITIATION.3 0 4 3 APR 5 AV P E N A L T Y D U E T O FIXED THRUST UNCERTAINTIES -PERCENT T/W " AV PENALTY ERROR 80 GUIDANCE COMMANDS FOR POWERED DESCENT HI-GATE 6100 FT PERCENT T/W UNCERTAINTY DEG 401 AV = 6281 FPS 20 -0 \ 500 600 AV PENALTY FT/SEC IDEAL CONDITION- 10.4 FACTORS (DOWNRANGE) t 2000 0 400 800 1200 VELOCITY. N MI . 4000 FT 2O k--L---""-SLOPE 0 SCALE0 PROFILE I LANDING SITE 7 I 0 8 000 16000 ALTITUDE.4 FACTOR FIGURE 22 5 EXPANDED ALTITUDE SCALE 20 15 10 5 0 ALTITUDE.000 THRUST.

NASA-S-66-6441 JUN PHASE 1I .S . ALTITUDE RATE M O S T S I G N I F I C A N T F O R A B O R T S A F E T Y 0 ALTITUDE RATE D E V I A T I O N S M O S T S E N S I T I V E T O FAILURE D E T E C T I O N 0 M S F N M E A S U R E M E N T OF ALTITUDE RATE S H O U L D BE S U F F I C I E N T FOR FAILED SYSTEM I S O L A T I O N 0 FLIGHT SAFETY REQUIREMENTS WITH 0 3 o G U I D A N C E D E V I A T I O N S WILL N O T E N D A N G E R F L I G H T P R I O R TO HI. r A V = 6 2 9 7 FPS 0 0 0 I 1 PROVIDE CREW VISIBILITY O F A N D ADEQUATE TIME TO ASSESS LANDING AREA PROVIDE CREW OPPORTUNITY TO A S S E S S FLIGHT SAFETY PROVIDE A RELATIVELY STABLE VIEWING PLATFORM PITCH ANGLE.GATE FIGURE 26 REGARDS TO TERRAIN ALTITUDE UNCERTAINTIES. 600 ----- 400 500 TIME FROM BRAKING INITIATION. 40 0 CONSTRAINTS FUEL LIMITATIONS LM W I N D O W SIZE T / W OF DESCENT A N D ASCENT ENGINE A N D REQUIREMENT FOR SAFE STAGED ABORTS TERRAIN LIGHTING/CONTRAST PROPERTIES DEG 20 I . S E C VARIABLES 0 PITCH ATTITUDE 0 TRANSITION ALTITUDE 0 FLIGHT PATH ANGLE LOOK ANGLE TO LANDING AREA REFERENCED TO 27 THRUST AXIS N A S A 5 . LANDING RADAR OPERATING RELIABILITY.6 4 0 2 JUN FACTORS AFFECTING CHOICE OF HI-GATE ALTITUDE P R O V I D E A S S E S S M E N T OF T R A J E C T O R Y FAILURE D E T E C T I O N A N D I S O L A T I O N ASSURE SAFE ABORT 0 0 TWO T E C H N I Q U E S 0 0 RANGE FROM WHICH LANDING AREA C A N BE ASSESSED 0 TIME REQUIRED T O ASSESS LANDING AREA M O N I T O R I N G T R A J E C T O R Y B O U N D S OF P N G S A N D A G S P E R I O D I C D I F F E R E N C I N G OF P N G S A N D A G S 0 0 ALTITUOE .2000 80 60 u r : .6 6 . 0 IDEAL CONDITIONTYPICAL ERROR CONDITIONS A N D TERRAIN FIGURE 25 THRUST.6 6 .FINAL APPROACH DESIGN GUIDANCE COMMANDS FOR POWERED DESCENT 0 OBJECTIVES . LBS 5000 r 0 200 F 300 I- "_ h l . A N D ASCENT ENGINE ABORT BOUNDARY FIGURE 28 . I I .6 4 0 3 IUN LM P O W E R E D DESCENT GUIDANCE MONITORING 0 P U R P O S E OF M O N I T O R I N G 0 0 N A S A .

S .NA5A.6 6 . 5 0 4 1 JUN N A S A .000 FIGURE M FIGURE 32 . SQUARED FIGURE 31 N A S A .S-66.6 4 7 ! JUN ABORT CAPABILITY BOUNDARIES 6000 r DETERMINATION OF MINIMUM HI-GATE ALTITUDE WITHOUT LR UPDATING JUALTITUDE UNCERTAINTIES. MINIMUM HI-GATE ALTITUDE ALTITUDE 3000 IFTI 3500 1800 32.) (FUNCTION OF LANDING DISPERSIONS) (FUNCTION OF LANDING DISPERSIONS] A V PENALTY F R HI-GATE O ALTITUDE VARIATIONTYPICAL FLIGHT PATH ANGLE = 15" 200 150 AV FPS 100 50 SLOPE A N D f 5 % O F N O M I N A L ALTITUDE 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 HI-GATE ALTITUDE.S .700 1700 9800 4300 700 STAGED ABORT -. FT 10. 6 1 3 3 JUN FACTORS CONTRIBUTING T O UNCERTAINTIES IN ALTITUDE ABOVE TERRAIN 0 GUIDANCE A N D NAVIGATION UNCERTAINTIES 0 LUNAR RADIUS BIAS MAGNITUDE 0 LUNAR RADIUS RANDOM MAGNITUDE 0 PRESENT ABILITY TO DETERMINE MARIA AREA SLOPES (f3' 3-1 0 ALLOWABLE TERRAIN VARIATIONS WITHIN + 2 O 250 r N O M I N A LH I .G A T E ~ O O GFT- 11500 F T ALT 101 (3200 FT ALTl (3200 FT ALT 1.600 3700 6700 4500 1000 1700 800 !8 0 0 7500 FIGURE 29 I 0 50 100 150 200 250 DESCENT RATE IFT/SECl 300 * 3 U UNCERTAINTIES ARE ROOT-SUM. FT I I ORBIT NAVIGATION I I PGNCS TERRAIN LUNAR LUNAR TERRAIN PROFILE RADIUS RADIUS PROFILE 4700 700 13.* FT I 5000 MSFN MSFN B LANDING SITE UPDATE PGNCS & LANDING SITE UPDATE 3700 4000 [ASSUME 4 SEC D ELA Y IN STAGING) ALTITUDE BIASES.6 6 .6 6 .5051 JUN N A S A . 5 .

yAf”pOW A V .6579 JUN AV PENALTY FOR LOOK ANGLE A N D FLIGHT PATH ANGLE (HI-GATE 9000FT) OVERHEAD PROFILE OF FOOTPRINT CAPABILITY FROM 8000 FT ALTITUDE 30XlO’I 1100 LOOK ANGLE TO LANDING SITE.S .FPS 3000 FT REFER- ENCE FT/ 5 E C .ALT 7 DOWN RANGE VERTICAL VELOCITY FT/SEC I 100 50 I I I 101 1 A- FOOTPRINTS FOR AV.NASA 5 6 6 6 4 2 0 IUN NASA-S-66..100 FIGURE 33 I I .6 6 . 6 6 .=lOO 0 1500 r 20 40 60 80 100 TIME.SEC FIGURE 36 ‘‘L A T A L T z 3 0 0 0 FT POSITION OVER SURFACE A T “ A L T = 5 0 0 0 FT POSITION OVER SURFACE A T A L T = 8 0 0 0 FT . S E C .3 0 WINDOW LOWER 25 LIMIT 1 L O W E R W I N D O W LIMIT P O S I T I O N OVER SURFACE AT TIME OF R E D E S I G N A T I O N FIGURE 35 I 1 5 10 15 20 25 FLIGHT PATH A N G L E .S .N O M I N ADESIGN L . D E G N A S A . DEG c D O W N RANGE . r S l D E .% -30 FIGURE 34 TIME.3 2 9 1 APR 1 6 COMPARISON OF DESIGN TRAJECTORY A N D FUEL OPTIMUM 200 r VARIATION OF FOOTPRINT CAPABILITY WITH ALTITUDE 20x103 8 6 0 0 FT.6 I 9 5 JUN N A S A .FUEL O P T I M U M ! I ’ AAz=30 / ‘:: \.

0 Z CL 0 f OI Y I e ? i < s Y L w I m 0 + 0 N + .

6 6 3 0 JUL 6 REDESIGNATION ERROR SOURCES TIME HISTORIES OF LINE OF SIGHT TO LANDING POINT FOR ALTERNATE SITE SELECTIONS AT 5000FT ALTITUDE 50 3000 FT L O N G 7 0 TERRAIN 0 G U I D A N C E ALTITUDE DISPERSIONS LOOK ANGLE DEG NOMINAL 30 20 ( N O N UPDATED) 0 3000 FT S H O R T BORE SIGHT INSTALLATION 10 t I I W I N D O W LIMIT I 0 IMU ALINEMENT 0 APPLICATION ERRORS FIGURE 41 50 TIME[SECI 100 150 FIGURE 4 3 N A S A .N A S A -S .. FEET NOTE: D O W N R A N G E ERROR 1 s APPROXIMATELY 4 TIMES NOTE: C R O S S R A N G E ERROR D O W N R A N G E ERROR F O R ALTITUDE ERROR EQUIVALENT A N G L E I 5 10 15 20x10~ SLANT R A N .T O .0 -0.S .5 . D E G / 8. F E E i 1 ERROR ~~~~~ = FINAL APPROACH PHASE FIGURE 44 LANDING PHASE . G E .o -3 0 l l ' ! l l ! l I I o FlGURE 42 LPD I I ! ERROR 2 3 4 5 ~ 1 0 ~ ALTITUDE.G O .6 6 .6 6 -6 6 2 6 J U L 6 LANDING POINT DESIGNATOR E R R O R SOURCES FLIGHT PATH ANGLE = 14" 3x103 NASA-S-66-6448 JUN LM CREW ATTITUDE RELATIVE TO LUNAR SURFACE 2 Ir i i- ' APPARENT LANDING SITE1 ! LPD ERROR..6 6 -6 4 7 4 JUN N A S A . INTENDED ! 0..5 -1 .5 A.

FT 100 DESCENT RATE SCHEDULE #ec CONSTRAINTS 0 *ec FUEL UTILIZATION W I N D O W A N D LIGHTING VISIBILITY TERRAIN A N D P O S S I B L E DUST LIMITED ATTITUDE FOR M A N E U V E R I N G S T A G E D ABORT B O U N D A R I E S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 DESCENT RATE.3 0 3 2 APP 5 LANDING PHASE DESIGN OBJECTIVES 0 TRAJECTORY CHARACTERISTICS FOR LANDING PHASE FLIGHT PATH ANGLE 1 7 O THRUST ACCELERATION 5 .NASA-S-66-6457 JUN N A S A . FPS MANUAL CONTROL TECHNIQUE VARIATIONS EFFECT OF LANDING RADAR UNCERTAINTIES LANDING SITE INSPECTION MEAN 80 RANDOM ( 3 4 100 e t = = 00 50 SEC NORMAL E Y E LEVEL AND ENTER LINE -.4 6 .S .5 . . e .5 4 0 0 MAY 31 PILOT VIEW DURING LANDING PHASE N A S A ." FUEL DEPLETION MARGIN TOTAL FIGURE 48 119 (RSS) AT LANDING SITE l o o FT 280 FIGURE 46 ..6 6 . F E E T -LANDING -. 4 6 FT/SEC2 PITCH A N G L E .6 4 6 7 JUN LANDING PHASE FUEL BUDGET BASELINE TRAJECTORY ALLOWANCE 390 FPS 0 = 1l0 HOVER POINT ON SURFACE 0 CONTINGENCY ALLOWANCE.P R I N T FOR L A N D I N G P O I N T A D J U S T M E N T = = 0 200 150 ALTITUDE. = l l o A L L O W DETAIL A S S E S S M E N T A N D F I N A L S E L E C T I O N O F L A N D I N G POINT ALLOW S O M E M A N E U V E R I N G CAPABILITY A N D F O O T . 500 FT 15 IFTJSECI 14 " " -p$"25 LUNAR SURFACE 80 80 40 65 1200 900 600 300 0 DOWNRANGE.6 6 . FT/SEC 1 0 0 0 0 FIGURE 45 0 0 FIGURE 47 N A S A .S .

6539 J U N TIME HISTORY O F LM D E S C E N T FUEL EXPENDITURE RSS RANDOM CONTINGENCY UNASSIGNED CONTINGENCY VELOCITY.6 6 ~ D E C A E S P O N S E 0. FT/SEC 6000 NASA S.000 8000 4000 1 PILOT ACTIVATES DE CUT-OFF .6466 JVN DESCENT EE4GIr4E SHUTDOWN SEQUENCE 17.LANDING SITE UPDATE BO 1 0 0 LANDING: MANUAL CONTROL VARIATIONS 80 65 EFFECT O F LR UNCERTAINTIES 80 LANDING SITE INSPECTION FUEL DELETION MARGIN 40 SUBTOTAL 353 143 (RSS] FIGURE 49 TOTAL BUDGET 7050 AV. 0 L A N D I N G G E A R DESIGN LIMITS 0 DESCENT E N G I N E REQUIRED T O BE OFF BY T O U C H D O W N NASA-S-66.200 - 16.--FINAL APPROACH DESCENT COAST -PHASE e ” .000 10.10 S E C O N D S ] R + I I 6000 4000 2000 2000 [ E N G I N E F U E L VALVES C L O S E t 0.1s SECONDS ] I NOMINAL TIME OF POWERED DESCENT. PHASE DESCENT ~ N ~ T ~ A T E BRAKING PHASE H’I L \OUCH b TRANSFER POWERED GATE GATE DOWN DESCENT FIGURE 50 . SEC . DESCENT TRANSFER INCREASE CSM ALTITUDE I O N MI 13 BRAKING: INCREASE CSM ALTITUDE I O N MI 15 48 THRUST DISPERSIONS OF + 2% 60 NAVIGATION ALT DISPERSIONS (3000 FT3al 45 15 FINAL APPROACH .000 600 FUEL L6S 14.000 6 0 0 0 12.2<1( . FPS 97 5135 LM LANDING TOUCHDOWN CONTROL MODES 0 AUTOMATIC 0 M A N U A L -A I D E D BY AUTOMATIC C O N T R O L L O O P S 0 0 6554 932 390 VISUAL I F R ( B E C A U S E OF DUST OR LIGHTING) - MAJOR SOURCES OF SYSTEM ERRORS 0 0 0 0 L A N D I N G R A D A R VELOCITY MEASUREMENT IMU MISALIGNMENT DISPLAY SYSTEM A N D PILOT ( M A N U A L O N L Y ) CG P O S I T I O N CONSTRAINTS FIWJRE5.NASA-S-66-6505 J U N NASA-5-64-6403 J U N SUMMARY OF LM DESCENT BUDGET BASELINE TRAJECTORY ALLOWANCES PHASE DESCENT TRANSFER POWERED DESCENT: BRAKING FINAL APPROACH LANDING SUBTOTAL CONTINGENCY ALLOWANCES MEAN 3.66.

20 ' 0 .5 FT/SEC FT/SEC FIGURE 53 I! DESCENT RATE AT PROBE CONTACT FTISEC FIGURE 55 NASA-5-65-9331 10 ir 1 .50 0.32 SEC MANUAL CONTROL \/ 4- 8 PILOT 0.60 0. FTlSEC .90 0.40 0.oo 0.80 - LM DESCENT ENGINE CUT-OFF PILOT REACTION TIME 0.1 5 4 0.99 PROBABILITY OF PILOT REACTION TIME BEING LESS THAN A GIVEN VALUE (%) I I FIGURE 56 I I I 1 0 HORIZONTAL VELOCITY. FT/SEC 1 2 3 4 5 .1 1.5 FT/SEC LATERAL 1. PROBE / LANDING DESCENl VELOCITY CONTROL USING PROBE FOR DESCENT ENGINE CUT-OFF SIGNAL DESCENT ENGINE ASSUMED LANDING RADAR E R R O R MODEL F O R LANDING C O N T R O L ANALYSIS I SPECIFICATIONT I VERTICAL 1.654 S E C 7 0.0 FIGURE 54 I 10 5 0 80 95 99 99.NASA-S-65-9321 MANUAL E N G I N E C U T .O F F 5 3 IN.9 1. 0 ° 0 ' . 0 ° 0 ' VELOCITIES WITH SYSTEM OF LAND'NG ERRORS 7 VERTICAL VELOCITY.10 0.70 & 9 '\ -\ \ LANDING RADAR 0. --- 6 5 0.30 REACTION TIME(SEC) 0.

. . .9 3 2 9 -- AUTO MANUAL COMPARISON OF AUTOMATIC AND MANUAL CONTROL OF VELOCITIES LANDING D D FIGURE 58 c 0 I I I I I 1 2 3 4 HORIZONTAL VELOCITY.66-6462 JUN NASA-S-65-9330 BOUNDARY OF ACCEPTABLE ANGLES & ANGULAR RATES FOR TILT-OVER ABORT INITIATE LANDING GEAR EFFECT OF LANDING RADAR ERRORS O N VELOCITIES IN MANUAL CONTROL OF LANDING 8 .NASA. . 4 IO 40 50 10 20 : ATTITUDE RATE.PREDICTED\ \ !ADED 80 7 70 60 VERTICAL VELOCITY. 5 FT/SEC I N A S A -5 -6 5 . FT/SEC 5 . STAGING -. 40 p DEGREES 30 INCLUDED FOR TIME.1 I M t U t L A T Ab "ID THRUST BUILD-UP EXAMPLE UNSTABLE CASE e - 5 20 RATE I FIGURE 57 " " 0 FIGURE 59 I I I i . DEGREES 60 I 1 2 3 HORIZONTAL VELOCITY.-.S. . FT/SEC 6 50 ATTITUDE.

.

e . and during t h e lunar rendezvous phases.INTRODUCTION The purpose of the guidance system i s t o control t h e position and v e l o c i t y of t h e vehicle. guidance. An i n e r t i a l guidance system i s fundamentally mechanized as a s p e c i f i c force measuring system using single a x i s accelerometers which operate i n coordinates t h a t a r e determined by gyros. (2) It i s mandatory t h a t t h e spacecraft contain onboard a completely self-contained navigation. ( 3 ) The onboard system i s designed i n such a way t o take maximum advantage of the gromd system and t o include a l l necessary interfaces. Guidance is the process of moving the center of mass of the vehicle along some desired path. Fig. S t a b i l i t y and control a r e associated with motions about t h e center of mass. and control system which evolved f o r t h e command module. and t h r u s t ) i n such a way t h a t the vehicle reaches i t s desired point in space and time. 1 shows a generalized functional diagram of t h e guidance and control system. The navigation process involves t h e determination and indication of position and velocity. The LEN system is very similar and w i l l be discussed l a t e r . The guidance and control systems f o r a l l manned spacecraft have involved a mix of spacecraft systems and ground systems. 3 shows t h e navigation. guidance. and it must respond quickly t o command s i g n a s . 2 shows t h e guidelines used i n t h e Apollo program f o r t h i s m i x of spacecraft and ground systems: (1) It is mandatory t h a t there be a ground navigation c a p a b i l i t y provided i n earth o r b i t . This consists of t h e manned space f l i g h t network (MSFN) comprised of a number of tracking . It i s usual i n t h e theory of dynamics of r i g i d bodies i n t h r e e dimensions t o separate the motion of t h e center of mass from t h e motion of t h e body around the center of mass. i . lunar orbit. Fig. during t h e lunar landing phases. drag. The primary navigation system i n cislunar space i s t h e ground system. In order t o minimize guidance errors the system must reduce t h e effect of interf e r r i n g quantities. and control c a p a b i l i t y t o be =sed i n t h e event that t h e data l i n k with t h e ground is l o s t . ana t h e guidance process involves controlling'these quantities i n a closed-loop fashion. t h e system must change t h e direction and magnitude of cont r o l l a b l e forces ( l i f t . The guidance system operates as a force-vector control system. . cislunar space. Fig.

3 t h e S t a b i l i z a t i o n System) can a l s o drive the reaction control system and t h e SFS gimbals. . A n i n t e g r a l p a r t of both t h e primary system and the backup s t a b i l i z a t i o n system is t h e astronaut. The gains and time constant have been selected f o r the Apollo SCS t o provide t h e desired s i g n a l f o r an average vehicle i n e r t i a during t h e lunar mission. t h e pseudo-rate feedback is switched out during manual maneuvers. The a t t i t u d e jets can be controlled through two paths. scanning telescope. t h e i n e r t i a l measurement u n i t (IMU). The entry monitor system (ENS) is a simplified backup guidance system t o be used during t h e entry phase of t h e mission i n t h e event of f a i l u r e of t h e primary system. . H obtains information from t h e computer by t h e D K and e SY from t h e display panel. The configuration of t h e pseudo-rate feedback f o r t h e Apollo SCS has been developed f o r limit cycle operation During maneuvers t h e e f f e c t of t h e feedback should be t o pulse t h e j e t s p r i o r t o t h e commanded maneuver r a t e being achieved. from t h e G&N system (guidance GP and navigation system) or t h e A A ( a t t i t u d e gyro accelerometer package). I n t h e event t h e primary control system has a f a i l u r e . The term pseudo-rate means t h a t t h e output of t h e switching amplifier (an on-off device) commands a vehicle acceleration which neglects reaction j e t time delays and dynmics. 5. The accelerometers measure specific forces i n t h e three coordinate directions of t h i s i n e r t i a l reference system. The corrugations on t h e outer portion a r e coolant l i n e s through which t h e coolant f l u i d flows t o maintain precision temperature control of t h e M. The SCS ( s t a b i l i z a t i o n and control system) provides an a t t i t u d e reference and a l s o has an accelerometer t o measure AV. The only disadvantage of a t h r e e gimbal platform i s t h a t of gimbal lock i n c e r t a i n orientations. f i l t e r i s indicative of t h e vehicle rate. The basic function of t h i s system is: (1) Drive t h e j e t drivers t o turn on and o f f t h e s m a l l reaction thrusters. The primary guidance and control system operates t h e reaction control system (RCS) which i s used primarily f o r a t t i t u d e cont r o l i n space and during reentry. sextant (SXT). Fig. This i s readily avoided in Apollo by a simple subroutine i n the computer program which torques t h e platform away from p o t e n t i a l gimbal locks as t h e condition approaches. 7. Fig. 8 shows t h e Apollo i n e r t i a l measurement u i (IMU) w i t h t h e nt resolvers on one of t h e outer gimbals removed. Rate and a t t i t u d e information i s used i n conjunction with t h e manual controller t o control t h e a t t i t u d e j e t s and t h e main engine gimbals. ( 2 ) Direct t h e gimbals of t h e service module engine t o orientate properly t h e t h r u s t vector of t h e main engine. The time constant of t h e l a g network determines t h e interval over which t h e output i s a v a l i d indication of t h e vehicle rate. with reference directions determined by t h e o p t i c a l system and gravity. The updata l k provides t h e navigation s t a t e i n The primary vector t o t h e Apollo guidance computer (AGC). and computer. He comunicates with t h e computer through t h e DSKY and is able t o control t h e system through t h e use of t h e engine t h r o t t l e and a t t i t u d e hand controller. guidance and control system consists of t h e AGC. The c&N equipment i s shown i n a handling f i x t u r e i n Fig. The s t a b i l i z a t i o n system i s shown i n block diagram form i n Fig. 6. The p l a t form i s i s o l a t e d from t h e spacecraft by t h e three-gimbal system shown i n Fig. displays and controls. Attitude information comes either. The AGC a l s o activates t h e gimbal servos t o drive t h e service propulsion (SPS) engines. This u n i t i s about t h e s i z e of a basketball and i s very similar t o a P o l a r i s platform. the backup system (labeled i n Fig. The gyros maintain a coordinate system with respect t o i n e r t i a l space in accordance . one path via a deadband l i m i t e r . sextant. pseudo r a t e logic. IU 4. The i n e r t i a l measurement unit is behind t h e panel and i s mated with t h e o p t i c a l system on t h e navigation base. A precise angular r e l a t i o n must be maintained between t h e o p t i c a l system and t h e i n e r t i a l measurement u n i t . This system i s connected ik t o t h e onboard system by way of t h e updata ln and voice communications. power and servo assembly (EA). To avoid t h i s . The short period output o f t h i s s i g n a l through a l a g M. The primary components of t h i s system are the EKY's. and j e t s e l e c t logic t o t h e j e t drivers and t h e other path direct by manual control t o t h e j e t drivers. 7 is a schematic diagram of t h e gimbals of t h e The s t a b l e member houses t h r e e single-degree-of-freedom 25 I R I G gyros and three 16 PIPA 'accelerometers. IU . t h e scanning telescope (SCT). and t h e display and keyboard assembly ( K ) E Y. thus r e s u l t i n g i n an over-damped response. The three-gimballed platform w s chosen a instead of a four-gimballed platform because it could be b u i l t with smaller s i z e and weight. The acceleration measurements a r e integrated i n t h e computer t o give v e l o c i t y and integrated again t o give position.s t a t i o n s around t h e world operating i n conjunction with t h e Houston Mission Control Center (MCC). Fig. The guidance and navigation system is located i n t h e lower equipment bay of t h e spacecraft. t h i s angular r e l a t i o n i s provided through t h e navigation base. Rate information comes from t h e r a t e gyro package (RGP) and i s displayed on t h e display panel. t h e gimb a l position indicators.

and velocity. (2) G&N a t t i t u d e control When t h e computer wishes t o communicate a request f o r data o r signal an alarm t o t h e astronaut. . t h e "verb" and "noun" numbers f l a s h until t h e astronaut takes action. 10 i s a photograph of t h e i n e r t i a l measurement u n i t and the optical system (scanning telescope and sextant) mounted on the precision navigation base which maintains accurate angular orientation between t h e two subsystems. The switch and d i a l at t h e top C M C r i g h t indicate t h e quantity of R S propellant. To the l e f t of t h e FDAI a r e control switches f o r t h e SFS (service module propulsion system). CM R S and S RCS propellant. The vehicle can also be tracked by 30 antennae which use three-way doppler information t o provide position and v e l o c i t y data. and d i c t a t e system modes. 13." The needles above. the DSKY has indicator l i g h t s which. A schematic representation of t h e operation of t h e manned space f l i g h t network tracking system (MSFN) i s shown i n Fig.ball i t s e l f a r e e r r o r needles. The indicator with curved l i n e s and rays a t t h e top l e f t i s t h e entry monitor system. commonly called t h e "8-hd1" or the "gyro horizon. Fig." The "verb" and "noun" displays a r e used together and coded t o give numerous possib i l i t i e s of meaningful phrases o r instructions. Verb". A t t h e bottom a r e t h e control mode select switches f o r t h e SCS (Stabilization and Control System). Directly below t h e entry monitor system i s t h e FDAI ( f l i g h t director a t t i t u d e indicator). The i n e r t i a l measurement unit i s used as a primary a t t i t u d e reference and i s used f o r guidance purposes during a l maneuvers and during reentry. This information i s transmitted t o t h e Mission Control Center i n Houston from which navigation information i s determined. angles. and i n cislunar space. Fig. alter parameters. In addition. and t h e accelerometer and gyro package can be seen i n t h i s picture. below. It can be seen t h a t t h e modes available are: (1) Monitor The t h r o t t l e control is t h e T-handle i n t h e lower left-hand corner o f t h e photograph. lunar o r b i t . It has a memory of 36. and t o the r i g h t of t h e 8. The computer display on t h e DSKY consists of three two-digit displays labeled "Program". The antenna which provides vehicle is illuminated by an 85 range. and "Noun" and three five. (8) SCs reentry . The o p t i c a l system i s used t o align t h e i n e r t i a l system and f o r navigation i n earth o r i b t . H enters data t o the e computer through t h e keyboard which i s on t h e r i g h t hand side of t h e display as seen here. 1 2 shows t h e faceplate of t h e display and keyboard (DSKY). 9 shows t h e IMU with t h e top removed. l 1 Fig. platform electronics.digit general word readouts. The DSKY provides t h e communication l i n k between t h e astronaut and t h e computer. This w i l l be discussed i n more d e t a i l shortly. Examples of t y p i c a l "verb" and "noun" displays are: Verb Display value Compute Read in Noun Velocity Abort velocity Landmark angle . Below t h e SPS switches a r e t h e a t t i t u d e set indicators and controls. Three gimbals.000 words (each of 16 h i t s ) and i s approximately equal t o an IBM 704 i n computat i o n a l capability. The program display indicates t h e major operating mode of t h e computer such as "lunar landing maneuver.display system and computer s t a t u s and alarm. 1 shows the instrument panel i n front of the command p i l o t of t h e C M The switches i n t h e panel t o t h e right control t h e S . Through t h e D S m t h e astronaut can monitor system a c t i v i t y . (6) sCS a t t i t u d e control (7) SCS QV ft. The control panel i n the center is t h e display and keyboard assembly (DSKY). The Apollo computer i s a very powerf u l lightweight computer with t h e l a r g e s t memory of any airborne computer i n history. They a r e microelectronic computers which a r e designed by MIT and produced by Raytheon. ( 3 ) G&N Liv (4) G&N entry (5) sCS l o c a l v e r t i c a l mode ft.Pig. The computer i n both t h e comand module and LEM a r e identical. Directly below the FDAI i s t h e " A V Remaining" counter and t h r u s t and direct ullage switches. The twod i g i t displays a r e coded f o r various modes i n instruction. This system i s discussed i n greater d e t a i l near t h e end of t h i s paper where the entry phase of t h e mission i s discussed.