Documents / Document

Apollo 11 Technical Crew Debriefing, Volume 1 (scan)

NASA via ibiblio · 1969-07-31 · 251 pages · text by OCR

This is Volume 1 of NASA's Apollo 11 Technical Crew Debriefing, dated July 31, 1969. The Mission Operations Branch of the Flight Crew Support Division at the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston prepared it, and it was originally classified Confidential. In it Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins go phase by phase through suiting, launch, powered flight, Earth orbit and lunar surface activities. They comment on suit fit, vibration, checklists, lunar dust, footing and poor sleeping conditions in the lunar module. A section titled Visual Sightings appears in the table of contents.

  • p. 30 …It was impossible to read an effect on any indicator in the cockpit. COLLINS This is…
  • p. 38 …the expected altitude was 174 and we read 176. The EMS was 3.3 plus. ARMSTRONG…
  • p. 39 …There's no way that the EMS could read 99.1 at docking. As I recall…
  • p. 40 ## CONFIDENTIAL Then I thrusted minus X until the DELTA-V counter read minus 100.5. I…
  • p. 46 …Neil and I both read a memo put out by MPAD, saying that for some failure…
  • p. 50 …We gave daily dosimeter readings, which as far as I'm concerned fall in a sort…
  • p. 51 …COLLINS And the dosimeter we just gave them a once-a-day reading on that dosimeter…
  • p. 68 …When you read me the numbers, you didn't note that I read star number 2…
  • p. 79 …The cabin temperature (translunar) was slightly warmer than we would like it, although the gage readings…
  • p. 130 …We had good helium pressure and read that out to MSFN. We went through the RCS…
  • p. 132 …the AGS, and give you an erroneous reading so you wouldn't pass. In any case…
  • p. 134 …There is a bad amount of data that the ground reads up to you in that…
  • p. 151 …They did approach the maximum numbers with a reading of approximately 94. Anyway, they weren't…
  • p. 169 …with time as evidenced by successive LPD readings. FCOD REP. Do you recall when you proceeded…
  • p. 170 …again, although at the time we were reading relatively low tank pressures. I think the OX…
  • p. 172 …We read the sine and cosine out of AGS (and I'm sure they copied that…
  • p. 175 …we were going to launch, so we read through the remainder of the simulated countdown and…
  • p. 235 …same exercises such as pressure-integrity check, reading the cabin down, and configuring the ECS. I…
  • p. 236 …We used a sequence of marking that involved an onboard averaging of five successive cursive readings…
## CONFIDENTIAL

I think it's all unfortunate that the first mark, the first star set that we had, was changed in the flight plan.

Well, that's another thing. We didn't mark correctly. Sometime between the last time we simulated it and the first time we pulled this out in the flight, star number 2 had been moved from the number 1 position down to number 4 position, and they had done it just by changing the 1 to a 4 and drawing a little arrow. When you read me the numbers, you didn't note that I read star number 2 and it was the same old star I had always marked on first. That was just a bad area. A little bit of work could have cleaned that up before the flight, and I just didn't have the time or the inclination to sit down and hammer it out with the people required, and I should have.

Well, we were fine the next day only because the Earth was so much smaller. If you have a little Earth and you're supposed to be marking on this point and you're at this point, it's no big deal to move from here over to here. But the Earth is big and you're supposed to be marking on this point, and you're really over there; that requires a big maneuver. The same problem existed the next day. However, a tiny maneuver on my part solved

## CONFIDENTIAL

About this file

Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. The text was read from the page images by an OCR model; expect the odd misread word. 251 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.