DOCSLIB.ORG

Apollo Mission Control the Making of a National Historic Landmark

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Apollo Mission Control the Making of a National Historic Landmark Apollo Mission Control The Making of a National Historic Landmark More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/4097 Other Springer-Praxis books by Manfred “Dutch” von Ehrenfried Stratonauts: Pioneers Venturing into the Stratosphere, 2014 ISBN:978-3-319-02900-9 The Birth of NASA: The Work of the Space Task Group, America’s First True Space Pioneers, 2016 ISBN:978-3-319-28426-2 Exploring the Martian Moons: A Human Mission to Deimos and Phobos, 2017 ISBN:978-3-319-52699-7 Manfred “Dutch” von Ehrenfried Apollo Mission Control The Making of a National Historic Landmark Manfred “Dutch” von Ehrenfried Leander, Texas, USA SPRINGER-PRAXIS BOOKS IN SPACE EXPLORATION Springer Praxis Books ISBN 978-3-319-76683-6 ISBN 978-3-319-76684-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76684-3 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018939417 © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover design by Jim Wilkie. Image credit: NASA Project Editor: David M. Harland Printed on acid-free paper This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer International Publishing AG part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Contents Frontispiece................................................................................................................ viii Dedication................................................................................................................... ix Acknowledgments...................................................................................................... x Preface......................................................................................................................... xiv 1 Introduction......................................................................................................... 1 2 Mission Control Concepts.................................................................................. 5 2.1 Flight Operations......................................................................................... 5 2.2 Military Versus Civilian Control................................................................. 6 3 The Original Mission Control Center............................................................... 8 3.1 The Mercury Configuration........................................................................ 8 3.2 The Gemini Modifications.......................................................................... 9 3.3 The Transistion to Houston......................................................................... 11 4 A Control Center for the Future........................................................................ 13 4.1 A New Concept........................................................................................... 13 4.2 A New Organization.................................................................................... 20 4.3 A New Approach to Mission Control.......................................................... 21 4.4 Design......................................................................................................... 22 4.5 Building Phases of the Manned Spacecraft Center..................................... 24 5 From Concepts to Reality................................................................................... 26 5.1 The Mission Control Center-Houston (MCC-H)........................................ 26 5.2 Mission Operations Control Rooms (MOCR)............................................ 30 5.3 Staff Support Rooms (SSR)........................................................................ 39 5.4 Other Support Rooms.................................................................................. 51 5.5 Computer Facilities..................................................................................... 69 5.6 Other Systems and Equipment Rooms........................................................ 79 v vi Contents 6 The Missions........................................................................................................ 84 6.1 Gemini......................................................................................................... 85 6.2 Apollo.......................................................................................................... 94 6.3 Skylab.......................................................................................................... 111 6.4 Space Shuttle............................................................................................... 116 7 The People............................................................................................................ 121 7.1 Flight Controllers........................................................................................ 122 7.2 Simulation Personnel.................................................................................. 126 7.3 Computer Support....................................................................................... 131 7.4 Recovery Personnel..................................................................................... 132 7.5 Science Support........................................................................................... 134 7.6 Systems Analysis Support........................................................................... 136 7.7 Management................................................................................................ 140 7.8 Flight Surgeons........................................................................................... 144 7.9 Public Affairs Officers................................................................................. 147 8 Abandoned in Place............................................................................................ 152 8.1 Time to Move On........................................................................................ 152 8.2 Changes in Technology............................................................................... 153 9 Restoration........................................................................................................... 157 9.1 The Vision................................................................................................... 157 9.2 The National Park Service.......................................................................... 157 9.3 Colorado State University........................................................................... 158 9.4 NASA’s Johnson Space Center................................................................... 159 9.5 Other Supporting Organizations................................................................. 160 9.6 Funding the Project..................................................................................... 163 9.7 Proposed Work............................................................................................ 169 9.8 The Restoration Contractors....................................................................... 175 10 The 50th Anniversary of the First Lunar Landing.......................................... 176 10.1 The Final Goal of the Restoration............................................................... 176 10.2 The Visitor Experience................................................................................ 177 10.3 What It Means to the Nation and the World................................................ 177 Appendix 1 Key Correspondence.......................................................................... 181 Appendix 2 Mission Manning Lists....................................................................... 196 Appendix 3 Women Flight Controllers and Mission Support............................. 213 Appendix 4 Chronology of Events......................................................................... 218 Appendix 5 Photos and Graphics.......................................................................... 221 Appendix 6 Quotes.................................................................................................. 239 Contents vii Appendix 7 The Original MSC Contractors........................................................ 247 Appendix 8 In Memory of Our Colleagues........................................................... 251 References..................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NASA Manned Launch Vehicle Lightning Protection Development
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20090037586 2019-08-30T08:05:42+00:00Z View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NASA Technical Reports Server NASA Manned Launch Vehicle Lightning Protection Development Matthew B. McCollum NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama, USA Steven R. Jones NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama, USA Jonathan D. Mack NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama, USA ABSTRACT understanding of the lightning environment has highlighted the vulnerability of the protection Historically, the National Aeronautics and Space schemes and associated risk to the vehicle, which Administration (NASA) relied heavily on lightning has resulted in lost launch opportunities and avoidance to protect launch vehicles and crew from increased expenditures in manpower to assess lightning effects. As NASA transitions from the Space Shuttle vehicle health and safety after Space Shuttle to the new Constellation family of lightning events at the launch pad. launch vehicles and spacecraft, NASA engineers are imposing design and construction standards on the Because of high-percentage launch availability and spacecraft and launch vehicles to withstand both the long-term on-pad requirements, LCC constraints are direct and indirect effects of lightning. no longer considered feasible.[5] The Constellation vehicles must be designed to withstand direct and A review of current Space Shuttle lightning indirect effects of lightning. A review of the vehicle constraints and protection methodology will be design and potential concerns will be presented as presented, as well as a historical review of Space well as the new catenary lightning protection system Shuttle lightning requirements and design.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 106, May 2006
    37 th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference THE CONFERENCE IN REVIEW Attendance at the 37th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (LPSC) set yet another record for this conference, with 1546 participants from 24 countries attending the meeting held at the South Shore Harbour Resort and Conference Center in League City, Texas, on March 13–17, 2006 (see inset for attendance statistics). Rearrangement of the confi guration of the meeting rooms, along with additional overfl ow seating, allowed conference organizers and staff to accommodate the marked increase in attendance, thereby being able to maintain the current meeting venue and hence the low registration fee, which enables the high number of student attendees. LPSC continues to be recognized among the international science community as the most important planetary conference in the world, and this year’s meeting substantiated the merit of that reputation. More than 1400 abstracts were submitted in consideration for presentation at the conference, and hundreds of planetary scientists and students attended both oral and poster sessions focusing on such diverse topics as the Moon, Mars, Mercury, and Venus; outer planets and satellites; meteorites; comets, asteroids, and other small bodies; Limpacts; interplanetary dust particles and presolar grains; origins of planetary systems; planetary formation and early evolution; and astrobiology. Sunday night’s registration and reception were again held at the Center for Advanced Space Studies, which houses the Lunar and Planetary Institute. Featured on Sunday night was an open house for the display of education and public outreach activities and programs. Highlights of the conference program, established by the program committee under the guidance of co-chairs Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • To All the Craft We've Known Before
    400,000 Visitors to Mars…and Counting Liftoff! A Fly’s-Eye View “Spacers”Are Doing it for Themselves September/October/November 2003 $4.95 to all the craft we’ve known before... 23rd International Space Development Conference ISDC 2004 “Settling the Space Frontier” Presented by the National Space Society May 27-31, 2004 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Location: Clarion Meridian Hotel & Convention Center 737 S. Meridian, Oklahoma City, OK 73108 (405) 942-8511 Room rate: $65 + tax, 1-4 people Planned Programming Tracks Include: Spaceport Issues Symposium • Space Education Symposium • “Space 101” Advanced Propulsion & Technology • Space Health & Biology • Commercial Space/Financing Space Space & National Defense • Frontier America & the Space Frontier • Solar System Resources Space Advocacy & Chapter Projects • Space Law and Policy Planned Tours include: Cosmosphere Space Museum, Hutchinson, KS (all day Thursday, May 27), with Max Ary Oklahoma Spaceport, courtesy of Oklahoma Space Industry Development Authority Oklahoma City National Memorial (Murrah Building bombing memorial) Omniplex Museum Complex (includes planetarium, space & science museums) Look for updates on line at www.nss.org or www.nsschapters.org starting in the fall of 2003. detach here ISDC 2004 Advance Registration Form Return this form with your payment to: National Space Society-ISDC 2004, 600 Pennsylvania Ave. S.E., Suite 201, Washington DC 20003 Adults: #______ x $______.___ Seniors/Students: #______ x $______.___ Voluntary contribution to help fund 2004 awards $______.___ Adult rates (one banquet included): $90 by 12/31/03; $125 by 5/1/04; $150 at the door. Seniors(65+)/Students (one banquet included): $80 by 12/31/03; $100 by 5/1/04; $125 at the door.
    [Show full text]
  • SPEAKERS TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE FAA COMMERCIAL SPACE 15TH ANNUAL John R
    15TH ANNUAL FAA COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION CONFERENCE SPEAKERS COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION http://www.faa.gov/go/ast 15-16 FEBRUARY 2012 HQ-12-0163.INDD John R. Allen Christine Anderson Dr. John R. Allen serves as the Program Executive for Crew Health Christine Anderson is the Executive Director of the New Mexico and Safety at NASA Headquarters, Washington DC, where he Spaceport Authority. She is responsible for the development oversees the space medicine activities conducted at the Johnson and operation of the first purpose-built commercial spaceport-- Space Center, Houston, Texas. Dr. Allen received a B.A. in Speech Spaceport America. She is a recently retired Air Force civilian Communication from the University of Maryland (1975), a M.A. with 30 years service. She was a member of the Senior Executive in Audiology/Speech Pathology from The Catholic University Service, the civilian equivalent of the military rank of General of America (1977), and a Ph.D. in Audiology and Bioacoustics officer. Anderson was the founding Director of the Space from Baylor College of Medicine (1996). Upon completion of Vehicles Directorate at the Air Force Research Laboratory, Kirtland his Master’s degree, he worked for the Easter Seals Treatment Air Force Base, New Mexico. She also served as the Director Center in Rockville, Maryland as an audiologist and speech- of the Space Technology Directorate at the Air Force Phillips language pathologist and received certification in both areas. Laboratory at Kirtland, and as the Director of the Military Satellite He joined the US Air Force in 1980, serving as Chief, Audiology Communications Joint Program Office at the Air Force Space at Andrews AFB, Maryland, and at the Wiesbaden Medical and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles where she directed Center, Germany, and as Chief, Otolaryngology Services at the the development, acquisition and execution of a $50 billion Aeromedical Consultation Service, Brooks AFB, Texas, where portfolio.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Reporter's Handbook Mission Supplement
    CBS News Space Reporter's Handbook - Mission Supplement Page 1 The CBS News Space Reporter's Handbook Mission Supplement Shuttle Mission STS-125: Hubble Space Telescope Servicing Mission 4 Written and Produced By William G. Harwood CBS News Space Analyst [email protected] CBS News 5/10/09 Page 2 CBS News Space Reporter's Handbook - Mission Supplement Revision History Editor's Note Mission-specific sections of the Space Reporter's Handbook are posted as flight data becomes available. Readers should check the CBS News "Space Place" web site in the weeks before a launch to download the latest edition: http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/current.html DATE RELEASE NOTES 08/03/08 Initial STS-125 release 04/11/09 Updating to reflect may 12 launch; revised flight plan 04/15/09 Adding EVA breakdown; walkthrough 04/23/09 Updating for 5/11 launch target date 04/30/09 Adding STS-400 details from FRR briefing 05/04/09 Adding trajectory data; abort boundaries; STS-400 launch windows Introduction This document is an outgrowth of my original UPI Space Reporter's Handbook, prepared prior to STS-26 for United Press International and updated for several flights thereafter due to popular demand. The current version is prepared for CBS News. As with the original, the goal here is to provide useful information on U.S. and Russian space flights so reporters and producers will not be forced to rely on government or industry public affairs officers at times when it might be difficult to get timely responses. All of these data are available elsewhere, of course, but not necessarily in one place.
    [Show full text]
  • PSAD-81-2 Support Service Contracting at Johnson Space
    BY THEU.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTli’JG OFFICE Report To The Administrator, National Aeronautics And Space Administration S@pportService Contracting At Johnson Space Center Needs Strengthening T National Aeronautics and S ace Administration Sl about $175 million annual Py on support service Cl at Johnson Space Center. GAO tested the way si of these contracts are administered and found --a contractor was working without approved llllllllllllllll113606 work orders, --Government-furnished equipment was unac- counted for, --questionable reimbursements occurred for con- tractor costs, I --contract funds increased before the need was justified, I --contracting officers were unaware of their re- sponsibilitres and unfamiliar with contract terms, and I --some contracting officers had a general attitude that small dollar value contracts are not worthy of adequate attention. I ‘/A0 believes overreliance on cost-type contracts which quire greater administration efforts than fixed-price )ntracts contributes to these contracting weaknesses recommends that the National Aeronautics and ace Administration take corrective actions. mp81s2 OCTOBER 21,1900 + Request for copies of GAO reports should be sent to: U.S. General Accounting Office Document Handling and Information Services Facility P.O. Box 6015 Gaithersburg, Md. 20760 Telephone (202) 275-6241 The first five copies of individual reports are free of charge. Additional copies of bound audit reports are $3.25 each. Additional copies of unbound report (i.e., letter reports) and most other publications are $1.00 each. There will be a 25% discount on all orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address. Sales orders must be prepaid on a cash, check, or money order basis.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Shuttle Discovery Launched on the First Post-Columbia Mission on July 26, 2005, 905 Days After the Accident
    AFTERWORD Space shuttle Discovery launched on the first post-Columbia mission on July 26, 2005, 905 days after the accident. Coincidentally, the launch took place at 10:39 A.M. EDT, the same time as Columbia’s launch on its final flight. STS-114 was the culmination of a $1.4 billion effort to improve the shuttle, most notably the External Tank. The bipod foam was replaced with an electrical heater to prevent ice from forming. Marshall Space- flight Center External Tank manager Sandy Coleman promised that no foam larger than a marshmallow would fall off of the improved tank. In the 147-page press kit’s description of all of the improvements to the shuttle, KSC’s acceptance of the industry standard definition for FOD (Foreign Object Debris) is presented as a positive. In a spin doctor- ing attempt it’s described how new FOD procedures improve safety, and ignores that FOD rules existed until two years before the Columbia acci- dent when the rules were reduced in a conscious move to make more bonus money for the contractor. Over 100 tracking cameras viewed Discovery’s launch. The E208 camera in Cocoa Beach, the one that had been “soft focused” on STS- 107, was replaced with a state-of-the-art setup. Cameras were also mounted on Discovery’s External Tank and Solid Rocket Boosters, and The bipod fitting on STS-114, on the right, shows the most significant external change— there is no longer any foam on the bipod fitting. 428 AFTERWORD 429 two aircraft with high-definition cameras offered the unique perspective of a shuttle flying toward the viewer.
    [Show full text]
  • March 21–25, 2016
    FORTY-SEVENTH LUNAR AND PLANETARY SCIENCE CONFERENCE PROGRAM OF TECHNICAL SESSIONS MARCH 21–25, 2016 The Woodlands Waterway Marriott Hotel and Convention Center The Woodlands, Texas INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT Universities Space Research Association Lunar and Planetary Institute National Aeronautics and Space Administration CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS Stephen Mackwell, Lunar and Planetary Institute Eileen Stansbery, NASA Johnson Space Center PROGRAM COMMITTEE CHAIRS David Draper, NASA Johnson Space Center Walter Kiefer, Lunar and Planetary Institute PROGRAM COMMITTEE P. Doug Archer, NASA Johnson Space Center Nicolas LeCorvec, Lunar and Planetary Institute Katherine Bermingham, University of Maryland Yo Matsubara, Smithsonian Institute Janice Bishop, SETI and NASA Ames Research Center Francis McCubbin, NASA Johnson Space Center Jeremy Boyce, University of California, Los Angeles Andrew Needham, Carnegie Institution of Washington Lisa Danielson, NASA Johnson Space Center Lan-Anh Nguyen, NASA Johnson Space Center Deepak Dhingra, University of Idaho Paul Niles, NASA Johnson Space Center Stephen Elardo, Carnegie Institution of Washington Dorothy Oehler, NASA Johnson Space Center Marc Fries, NASA Johnson Space Center D. Alex Patthoff, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cyrena Goodrich, Lunar and Planetary Institute Elizabeth Rampe, Aerodyne Industries, Jacobs JETS at John Gruener, NASA Johnson Space Center NASA Johnson Space Center Justin Hagerty, U.S. Geological Survey Carol Raymond, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Lindsay Hays, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Paul Schenk,
    [Show full text]
  • EXPLORING the MOON in the 21St CENTURY
    CosmoELEMENTS EXPLORING THE MOON IN THE 21st CENTURY Samuel J. Lawrence1 and Clive R. Neal2 DOI: 10.2138/gselements.15.5.360 INTRODUCTION In 2019, we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of NASA’s momentous Apollo expedi- tions to the Moon. The samples brought back by the astronauts, and the fieldwork those astro- The South Pole of the Moon, pictured here in an oblique view from FIGURE 1 NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, is the landing site for the nauts performed on the lunar surface, cemented the Moon’s status as seventh human lunar landing. IMAGE COURTESY OF NAC M1195011983LR (NASA/ the cornerstone of the solar system. It is not an exaggeration to say GSFC/ARIZONA STATE UniVERSITY). that the Apollo expeditions transformed our understanding of our solar system, and, in fact, most of the discoveries made in planetary science since the 1960s can trace directly, or indirectly, from the scientific of the Sun’s evolution and history. Finally, this is another area where results of those Apollo expeditions. the Apollo expeditions represent a strength: there are five decades worth of planetary science hypotheses that lunar geological fieldwork Although some erroneously proclaim that the Moon is “Been there, will address. The lunar surface could also provide a unique and stable done that”, nothing could be further from the truth. After a long long-term platform for astronomy. In particular, manned radio obser- st hiatus, beginning in the first years of the 21 century, there has vatories or optical interferometers on the far side of the Moon could been a resurgence of interest in the Moon, including the Kaguya produce dramatic advances in astrophysics.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Mercury Fact Sheet
    NASA Facts National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 23681-0001 April 1996 FS-1996-04-29-LaRC ___________________________________________________________________________ Langley’s Role in Project Mercury Project Mercury Thirty-five years ago on May 5, 1961, Alan Shepard was propelled into space aboard the Mercury capsule Freedom 7. His 15-minute suborbital flight was part of Project Mercury, the United States’ first man-in-space program. The objectives of the Mer- cury program, eight unmanned flights and six manned flights from 1961 to 1963, were quite specific: To orbit a manned spacecraft around the Earth, investigate man’s ability to function in space, and to recover both man and spacecraft safely. Project Mercury included the first Earth orbital flight made by an American, John Glenn in February 1962. The five-year program was a modest first step. Shepard’s flight had been overshadowed by Russian Yuri Gagarin’s orbital mission just three weeks earlier. President Kennedy and the Congress were NASA Langley Research Center photo #59-8027 concerned that America catch up with the Soviets. Langley researchers conduct an impact study test of the Seizing the moment created by Shepard’s success, on Mercury capsule in the Back River in Hampton, Va. May 25, 1961, the President made his stirring chal- lenge to the nation –– that the United States commit Langley Research Center, established in 1917 itself to landing a man on the moon and returning as the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics him to Earth before the end of the decade. Apollo (NACA) Langley Memorial Aeronautical Labora- was to be a massive undertaking –– the nation’s tory, was the first U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Kevin Metrocavage International Space Station Operations Manager NASA Headquarters 300 E
    Kevin Metrocavage International Space Station Operations Manager NASA Headquarters 300 E. Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20546 ______________________________________________________________________ January 2018 Kevin Metrocavage currently serves as the International Space Station (ISS) Operations Manager. In this role, he is responsible for maintaining overall situational awareness of the planning and execution of ISS complex operations for the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters (HQ) in Washington, DC. Metrocavage manages ISS real-time and contingency support from the NASA HQ Space Operations Center and provides input and status to Directorate and ISS Division leadership as well as external agencies as appropriate. Previously, Metrocavage worked in Mission Control at NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX where he served as a Flight Controller, Instructor, and Manager for the ISS Motion Control Systems group. As an Attitude Determination and Control Officer (ADCO), Metrocavage planned, coordinated, monitored, and executed ISS maneuvers in support of a variety of complex operations. As Instructor, Metrocavage was responsible for training astronauts, cosmonauts, and peers on ISS systems content. Metrocavage supported 18 ISS Assembly Missions and over 45 ISS Expeditions from Houston, Washington D.C. and internationally in Moscow, Russia. He has been recognized by NASA with multiple individual and team awards, most notably the NASA Spaceflight Awareness Award in 2011 which is one of the highest awards presented to NASA and industry personnel. Prior to joining NASA, Metrocavage earned his Bachelor’s degree in Aeronautical & Astronautical Engineering from Purdue University where he also served as Basketball Manager for the three-time Big Ten Champions from 1993-96. He recently served on the University Alumni Board of Directors and currently serves on the Engineering Alumni Board of Directors.
    [Show full text]
  • Lightning Really DOES Strike Twice! the True Story of Apollo 12’S Near Abort Less Than a Minute After Launch
    In This Issue Lightning Really DOES Strike Twice! The True Story of Apollo 12’s Near Abort Less Than a Minute After Launch Cover Photo: Madcow Rocketry’s Torrent Kit Get one now at: http://www.apogeerockets.com/madcow_torrent.asp Apogee Components, Inc. — Your Source For Rocket Supplies That Will Take You To The “Peak-of-Flight” 3355 Fillmore Ridge Heights Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907-9024 USA www.ApogeeRockets.com e-mail: [email protected] ISSUE 295 SEPTEMBER 13, 2011 Lightning Really DOES Strike Twice! The True Story of Apollo 12’s Near Abort Less Than a Minute After Launch By Bart Hennin November 14, 1969 11:23:33 am EST (Mission Time T plus 1 min. 33 sec.) Moments after launch... How things had gone to hell so quickly was anyone’s guess. Mission rules said Apollo 12 should have already aborted. Pete Conrad, mission Commander (and veteran test pilot) continued to hold his hand firmly on the spacecraft’s ‘abort handle’. His mind raced. How could an electrical “short” have caused such widespread failures of so many systems so quickly? The spacecraft’s interior had fallen into darkness for lack of power, save the illumination provided by the myriad of flashing alarm lights! The 3 man astronaut crew couldn’t even tell in which direction their rapidly accelerating machine was heading. They had lost all their “8 balls” - the gyroscopes that track the spacecraft’s position. Yet Conrad resisted flicking his wrist the 1/4 turn that would abort the mission. That small snap of the wrist would instantly set off a series of violent events.
    [Show full text]