DOCSLIB.ORG

Footprints on Mars Presentation to Boeing REACH

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Footprints on Mars Presentation to Boeing REACH National Aeronautics Footprints on Mars and Space Administration Presentation to Boeing REACH Bret G. Drake 12 June, 2013 NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center 1 Mid-20th Century Fascination with Space Wernher von Braun and Chesley Bonestell prediction of the future in 1951 Illustration by Robert McCall Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 2 Dr. Wernher von Braun’s Manned Mars Landing Presentation to the Space Task Group - 1969 Nuclear Thermal 640 Total Days Venus Swing-by Propulsion 60 Days on Mars Propulsive Earth Return Collectors Guide Publishing December 1, 2006 100 in LEO 48 on Moon 48 on Surface 24 in Orbit Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 3 So What Happened? Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 4 1 = ( 1) N 1 1 − ∆ = + + ∗ ∗ − ∗ −∗ = � − � =1 = ∆ 1 + α N ∆ � ∗ − − ∗ = + − � − � � � � � =1 = * α = + � = * − = * = * − = = * ∆ ∗ Space, Especially Mars, is Hard = 1 1 = + + + ∆ ∗ 1 = � − � ( ) ∗ = 1 − 1 = g * = * 1 + α − ∆ − − ∗ ∗ − ∗ −∗ − � − � � � � � N N = + + =1 = + + =1 � and, unfortunately, � = + 1 = + = ( 1) 1 N − = + −∗ N =1 ∗ − ∗ = g * = * α = + � =1 The Laws of Physics Can’t be Rewritten � = + + + 1 ∆ ∗ = ∆ = � − � = * ∗ − 1 + α ∆ − − = g * ∗ − � − � � � � � = + + + = 1 ∗ Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013− 5 Human Exploration of Mars Key Challenges Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 6 A Brief History of Human Exploration Beyond LEO A trail of studies … to Mars America at DPT / NEXT NASA Case the Constellation National Studies Threshold Program Lunar Review of Commission First Lunar Architecture U.S. Human on Space Outpost Team Spaceflight Plans Committee Columbia Challenger 1980 1990 2000 2010 Bush 41 Bush 43 Obama Speech Speech Speech Report of the 90-Day Study on Human Exploration of the Moon and Mars National Aeronautics and Space Administration November 1989 Global Leadership Exploration and 90-Day Mars Design Mars Design Roadmap America’s Study Reference Mars Design Reference Future in Mission 1.0 Reference Exploration Architecture Space Mission 3.0 System 5.0 Exploration Architecture Blueprint Study Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 7 Why Do We Want To Explore Mars? • Long-standing curiosity, particularly since it appears that humans could one day visit there Goals and Objectives • A NASA chartered group, Mars Summary Implications Exploration Program Analysis Group, The first three human missions to has organized a set of four primary Mars should be to three different goals: geographic sites — Determine if life ever arose on Mars — Understand the processes and history Maximize mobility to extend the of climate on Mars reach of human exploration — Determine the evolution of the surface beyond the landing site and interior of Mars Maximize the amount of time that — Prepare for human exploration the astronauts spend exploring • Two additional goals considered as the planet well: Provide subsurface access — Preparing for sustained human presence Return a minimum of 250 kg of — Ancillary science such as heliophysics, samples to Earth space weather, astrophysics Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 8 Mars Trajectory Classes • A trip to Mars with a return back to Earth is a double rendezvous problem — Mars round-trip missions are flown in heliocentric space — Relative planetary alignment is a key driver in the mission duration and propulsion required Example “Short-Stay” Example “Long-Stay” Opposition Class Mission Conjunction Class Mission MARS ARRIVAL MARS ARRIVAL MARS DEPARTURE EARTH RETURN SUN γ SUN γ MARS DEPARTURE EARTH RETURN EARTH DEPARTURE EARTH DEPARTURE VENUS SWING-BY Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 9 Synodic Period – Variation in Delta-V • The difference in orbits of the Earth and Mars influence the mission delta-v and timing — Earth departure opportunities occur approximately ever 26 months — The Earth departure “window” lasts a few weeks and is highly dependent on the propulsion system choice — The round-trip mission delta-v varies over a 15-year cycle (the Synodic Cycle) — Although “good” opportunities occur in 2018, 2033, and 2047, the ability to conduct missions in any opportunity across the Synodic Cycle will reduce programmatic risk Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 10 Advanced In-Space Transportation Options, options, options…. High Thrust: Chemical Propulsion High Thrust: Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) Advantages: Advantages: • More “state of the art” • Good combination of high thrust • Multiple destinations and high efficiency (Isp) • Low architectural mass Challenges: • Both long and short stay missions • High Mass / Lots of Launches • Has been demonstrated (NERVA) • Long-term storage of cryogenic propellants, particularly H2 Challenges: • Configuration and integration • Long-term storage of cryogenic H2 challenges • Large launch volume (due to H2) • Long-stay missions only • Nuclear regulatory compliance/testing Low Thrust: Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) Low Thrust: Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) Advantages: Advantages: • Low architectural mass • Low architectural mass • Multiple destinations • Both long-stay and short-stay (if power is high) missions Challenges: Challenges: • Limited to long-stay missions • No experience base for space • Configuration and integration based high power, high efficiency, challenges (large solar arrays) nuclear reactors • Long operating times (spirals) • Configuration and integration challenges (large radiators) • Nuclear regulatory compliance/testing • Long operating times (spirals) Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 11 Propulsion Technology Comparisons Crew Vehicle Mass as a Function of Trip Time – Short Stay Opposition Missions ISS Reference: ~2,800 t for 31 Assembly Flights ~4,500 t to date, 131 Total Flights 1 Earth Departure Dates from 2028 - 2045 1,200 Chemical Isp=465 sec 1,000 SEP Isp=4000 sec 800 NTP Isp=900 sec 600 NEP Isp=1800-4000 sec 400 [Mass of Landers not Included] not Landers of [Mass Total Crew Vehicle Mass in Earth Orbit (t) Orbit in Mass Earth Vehicle Crew Total 200 0 360 400 440 480 520 560 600 640 680 720 760 800 840 880 920 1 Total Round-Trip Mission Duration (Days) As of February 2013 Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 12 SLS Architecture Block Upgrade Approach 130 t 384 ft. 105 t 314 ft. 70 t Payload Fairings 321 ft. Launch Abort System Orion Interim Cryogenic Upper Stage Propulsion Stage (ICPS) 27.5 ft. (8.4 m) 27.5 ft. (8.4 m) with Interstage J-2X Core Stage Core Stage Engines Solid Rocket Boosters Advanced Boosters RS-25 Core Stage Engines (Space Shuttle Main Engines) Starting with Available Assets and Evolving the Design Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 13 Example Launch Packaging Diameter and Volume are also Key Landers Nuclear Thermal Solar Electric Nuclear Electric and Other Propulsion Propulsion Propulsion Payloads SLS SLS SLS SLS 105 t 105 t 130 t 130 t Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 14 Orion Crew Transfer / Earth Return Vehicle • Crew Delivery to Earth Departure Point — Provide safe delivery of 4-6 crew to Earth departure point for rendezvous with the Mars Transfer Vehicle • Delivery and return of checkout crew prior to the mission • Delivery of the mission crew • End of Mission Crew Return (Mars Block) — Provide safe return of 4-6 crew from the Mars-Earth transfer trajectory to Earth at the end of the mission • 12 km/s entry speed (13+ km/s for short-stay mission) • 900 day dormant operations • 3 day active operations • Much smaller service module (~300 m/s delta-v) for re- targeting and Earth entry corridor set-up Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 15 Challenges of Supporting Humans in Deep Space Human missions to Mars are demanding from a human health and • performance perspective • Long-Duration: 600 days minimum, 900 days most probable • Deep-Space: Micro-gravity and harsh environment • Remote: No logistics train, no fast return aborts • Categories of Key Human Support Challenges • Ocular Syndrome: Intercranial pressure • Toxicity: Dust and other hazards • Autonomous Emergency : Response to system emergencies (e.g. life support system failure) • Radiation: Solar Proton (solutions exist), Galactic Cosmic Radiation (currently no standards for exploration) • Behavioral Health and Performance: Remote isolated missions with no real-time communications. • Autonomous Medical Care: Response to medical issues • Nutrition: Food with adequate nutrition for long missions • Hypogravity: Adjusting to the gravity of Mars • Musculoskeletal: Muscle atrophy and bone decalcification • Sensorimotor: Sensory changes/dysfunctions Drake – Footprints on Mars Boeing REACH – 12 June, 2013 16 Challenges of Landing on Mars • The Atmosphere of Mars Technology Options — The Good: Mars has an atmosphere that can help slow the entry Hypersonic Inflatable vehicle down Aerodynamic — The Bad: The atmosphere is thick enough that it requires a heat Decelerator (HIAD) shield, but not thick enough to provide substantial drag (density 1% Hypersonic Inflatable of Earth’s) Aerodynamic — Atmospheric dust may prohibit ability or timing of landing at Decelerator (HIAD) designated landing sites • The Current Mars
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • The Future Is Now at Johnson Space Center
    THE FUTURE IS NOW AT JOHNSON SPACE CENTER By Mike Coats, Center Director, NASA Johnson Space Center NASA has continued to explore and discover space for fifty years, and since its establishment in 1961, the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) has been a major contributor to the agency’s success. Originally called the Manned Spacecraft Center, this federal institution was born out of the early space program’s need for a location to house the Space Task Group at the beginning of the Apollo Program. After President John F.Kennedy announced that the U.S. would put a man on the moon by the end of the decade, the site in Houston was selected to provide test facilities and research laboratories suitable to mount an expedition to the moon. Since then, the Center has continued to make history in space exploration, highlighted by scientific and technological advancements as well as engineering triumphs. This rich tradition continues each and every day, and here is a summary of how it is reflected. From JSC’s inception, it was to be the primary center for U.S. space missions involving astronauts; however, through the years JSC has expanded its role in a number of aspects in space exploration. These include serving as the lead NASA center for the International Space Station (ISS)—a sixteen-nation, U.S.-led collaborative effort that is constructing and supporting the largest, most powerful, complex human facility to ever operate in space. Home to NASA’s astronaut corps, JSC trains space explorers from the U.S. and our space station partner nations, preparing these individuals as crew members for space shuttle missions and long-duration Expedition missions on the ISS.
    [Show full text]
  • Photographs Written Historical and Descriptive
    CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, INDUSTRIAL AREA, HABS FL-583-D HANGAR S HABS FL-583-D (John F. Kennedy Space Center) Cape Canaveral Brevard County Florida PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior 100 Alabama St. NW Atlanta, GA 30303 HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY CAPE CANAVERAL AIR FORCE STATION, INDUSTRIAL AREA HANGAR S HABS NO. FL-583-D Location: Building 1726, Hangar Road, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) Industrial Area. USGS Cape Canaveral, Florida, Quadrangle, Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinates E 540530 N 3151415 Zone 17, NAD 1983 Present Owner: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Present Use: Vacant Significance: Hangar S served as the home of NASA’s Pre-Flight Operations Division of Project Mercury from 1959-1963. In Hangar S, the Mercury spacecraft capsules were received, tested, and prepared for flight. The hangar housed astronauts’ pre-flight training and preparation, including capsule simulator training, flight pressure suit tests, flight plan development, and communications training. The astronaut crew quarters were located on the second floor of the hangar’s south wing. Hangar S is directly associated with events that led to the first U.S. manned sub-orbital space flight of Alan B. Shepard in 1961 and the orbital flight of John Glenn in 1962. Hangar S was determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) at the national level of significance under Criterion A in the area of Space Exploration. Hangar S is also NRHP eligible under Criterion B for association with the training activities of the original Mercury Seven astronauts, including Alan B.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Narrative Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas
    HISTORICAL NARRATIVE LYNDON B. JOHNSON SPACE CENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center The Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) officially opened in June 1964 as the Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC). This approximately 1,620-acre facility is located about 25 miles from downtown Houston, Texas, in Harris County. Many of the buildings are specialized facilities devoted to spacecraft systems, materials research and development, and astronaut training. JSC also includes the Sonny Carter Training Facility, located roughly 4.5 miles to the northwest of the center, close to Ellington Field. Opened in 1997, this facility is situated on land acquired through a lease/purchase agreement with the McDonnell Douglas Corporation. In addition, NASA JSC owns some of the facilities at Ellington Field, which are generally where the aircraft used for astronaut training are stored and maintained. The origins of JSC can be traced to the summer of 1958 when three executives of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), Dr. Hugh L. Dryden, Dr. Robert R. Gilruth, and Dr. Abe Silverstein, began to formulate a space program.1 Almost immediately, Gilruth began to focus on manned spaceflight, and subsequently convened a group of his associates at Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, in Hampton, Virginia. This group compiled the basics of what would become Project Mercury, the first U.S. manned space program. Eight days following the activation of NASA (October 1, 1958), with the approval of NASA’s first administrator, Dr. T. Keith Glennan, the Space Task Group (STG) was created to implement this program.2 The group was formally established on November 3, 1958, with Gilruth named as Project Manager.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Task Group August 3, 1959
    NASA - Space Task Gro,,p l.angley Field, Virginia. August}, 1959 MEMOP.ANDUM for Staff Subject: Organization ot Space Task Group l. Effective this date, the following organization of the Space Task Group is established: OFFICE OF DIRECTOR Director of Project Merci.try, Robert R. Gilruth Assistant Director of Project Mercury, Charles J. Donlan Jacquelyn B. Stearn, Secretary to Director Staff Assistants Paul E. Purser, Special Assistant James A. Chamberl.in, Technical Assistant Raymond L. Zavasky, Executive Assistant Col. Keith G. Lindell, USAF Lt. Col. Martin L. Raines, USA Cdr. Paul L. Ha.venstein, US?l w. Kemble Johnson, Langley Research Center Public Affairs Officer Lt. Col. John A. Powers, USAF Staff Services Burney H. Goodvin, Personnel Assistant Betty s. Knox, Secretary Guy w. Boswick, Jr., Head, Administrative Services Jo Ann s. Fountain, Receptionist Ann w. Hill., AlterDate Receptionist Files and Library Norma L. Livesay, Head Carole A. Howard Mary c. Morrison Doris w. Reid Shirley P. wa.tkins Semuel s. Westbrook, Jr. Stenographic Pool Margaret B. Bu:rcher, Head Nancy C, Alexander - 2 - Nor.ma C. Eacho Irene J. Hel.terbran Ann W. Hill Patricia H. Murpey Technical Services Jack A. Kinzler, Technical. Services Assistant 18vid L, McCraw Orrin A. Wobig Astrooa.uts and Training Group Col. Keith G, Lindell, USAF, Head Lt. Col.. William K. DousJ.,as, USAF, Flight Surgeon Lt. Robert B. Voas, USN, Training Officer (Warren J, North will continue to participate in all astronaut activities as representative of the Office of Space Flight Development) Astronauts Lt, Malcolm s. carpenter, USN Capt. Leroy G. Cooper, Jr., USAF Lt, Col.
    [Show full text]
  • Walking the High Ground: the Manned Orbiting Laboratory And
    Walking the High Ground: The Manned Orbiting Laboratory and the Age of the Air Force Astronauts by Will Holsclaw Department of History Defense Date: April 9, 2018 Thesis Advisor: Andrew DeRoche, Department of History Thesis Committee: Matthew Gerber, Department of History Allison Anderson, Department of Aerospace Engineering 2 i Abstract This thesis is an examination of the U.S. Air Force’s cancelled – and heretofore substantially classified – Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL) space program of the 1960s, situating it in the broader context of military and civilian space policy from the dawn of the Space Age in the 1950s to the aftermath of the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. Several hundred documents related to the MOL have recently been declassified by the National Reconnaissance Office, and these permit historians a better understanding of the origins of the program and its impact. By studying this new windfall of primary source material and linking it with more familiar and visible episodes of space history, this thesis aims to reevaluate not only the MOL program itself but the dynamic relationship between America’s purportedly bifurcated civilian and military space programs. Many actors in Cold War space policy, some well-known and some less well- known, participated in the secretive program and used it as a tool for intertwining the interests of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) with the Air Force and reshaping national space policy. Their actions would lead, for a time, to an unprecedented militarization of NASA by the Department of Defense which would prove to be to the benefit of neither party.
    [Show full text]
  • Forecast of Upcoming Anniversaries-- October 2018
    FORECAST OF UPCOMING ANNIVERSARIES-- OCTOBER 2018 60 Years Ago - 1958 October 1: First day of NASA operations, Washington, D.C. October 4: Vandenberg AFB, CA dedicated. October 7: Space Task Group (STG) formally organized and given control of Project Mercury, Washington, D.C. October 11: Pioneer 1 launched on a Thor Able from Cape Canaveral, Fla, at 4:42 a.m., EST. A project inherited from the US Air Force, Pioneer 1 was the first spacecraft launched by the new NASA. An attempted lunar probe, the rocket failed at 70,700 ft. October 15: X-15 rocket plane rollout, North American Aviation plant, Los Angeles, CA. 55 Years Ago - 1963 October 16: Vela 1 and 2 launched by Atlas Agena at 2:24 UTC, Cape Canaveral, Fla. Sponsored by the US Air Force (USAF) and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), the satellites were designed to detect nuclear tests from orbit. Vela satellites were also used to warn NASA astronauts of potentially dangerous solar flare activity. 50 Years Ago - 1968 October 11-22: Apollo 7 launched aboard a Saturn 1B at 11:02 a.m., EDT, KSC. Crew: Walter M. Schirra Jr., Donn F. Eisele, and Walter Cunningham. A flight of many firsts: first manned flight of Apollo Project, first test of Apollo Command/Service Module in Earth orbit operated by astronauts in flight, first three member crew mission flown by the US, first launch from Launch Complex 34, first manned launch of a Saturn IB, first CSM rendezvous & station-keeping maneuvers, first flight of Block II Apollo spacecraft, first live network TV broadcast from space during a manned flight, first astronauts to come down with an illness during a space flight, first flight of the redesigned Apollo space suits, and first crew to drink coffee in space.
    [Show full text]
  • ID Purchaser First Name Purchaser Last Name
    ID Purchaser_First_Name Purchaser_Last_Name Inscribed_First_Name Inscribed_Last_Name Biographic_Infomation 2069 Suzy Tabor 07 Pine Crest Chaperones 1313 Lewis Maness Officers & Men of 47th INF 9th Division To the Officers and Men of the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry 9thDivision during WW II. This battalion captured, intact '8' GermanV-2 missiles. These missiles were shipped to the United States, where they were studied and thus played a great part in establishing the U.S. Missile Program and NASA. 1147 Eugene Abruzzo Eugene Abruzzo 1328 Carl F. Acker Carl F. Acker Contributor To: Lunar Module Program as Instrumentation and Calibration Engineer for vehicle and ground support equipment. Grumman Aerospace Corp. Cassini Mission to Saturn and Hubble Telescope Programs as Program Quality Assurance Manager for the reaction wheel and electronic assemblies and rate gyro assemblies Allied Signal Corp. 183 Trudy S. Adams Chuck Keith Adams The Space Program had a very special person in Chuck, who served with dedication, skill and the highest of standards as an Engineer with Lockheed. In this way he can always fell he is still a part of this exciting program. 1213 Sammi Adams Mac C. Adams Dr. Mac C. Adams played a major role in solving the problem ballistic missile reentry and helped to develop the theory which determines the type & amount of ablating material needed to protect spacecraft & ballistic missile heat shields. From 1965-1968,Dr. Adams was Associate Administrator, Advanced Research &Technology for the National Aeronautics & Space Administration in Washington D.C Received Exceptional Service Medal in 1968 1941 Your Family Loves You! Richard "Dick" Adams Mr. Richard "Dick" Adams is an extraordinary tour guide and has been since 1969.
    [Show 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 50 Years Ago on the Moon Behind the Flight of Apollo 11
    SpaceFlight A British Interplanetary Society publication Volume 61 No.7 July 2019 £5.25 50 years ago on the Moon Behind the flight of Apollo 11 Subscriber copy 07> Engineering challenges Landing dramas 634089 The shadow of JFK 770038 9 Subscriber copy CONTENTS Features 12 Engineering the first Lunar Landing The challenges facing NASA in the week up to the first landing centred on getting to the surface. All other phases had already been rehearsed on earlier flights. 12 20 Flight of the Eagle Letter from the Editor Even as Apollo 11’s Lunar Module descended to the Moon, computer readouts and fuel quantity The 50th anniversary of the first levels revealed a vulnerability discovered only humans to land on the Moon is minutes from touchdown. being celebrated in many ways. Here at SpaceFlight we know you want inside stories, anecdotes, 24 So what went wrong? personal reflections and deeper Just how close did Armstrong and Aldrin come insights behind the scenes. In this to crashing on the Moon – not nearly as close as issue and the next we do just that. believed at the time but it was a near thing. I am particularly delighted to 20 include the outstanding 27 Unsung hero contribution of a key figure in the Space professional Fabrizio Bernardini FBIS Apollo engineering fraternity and reflects on the lasting contribution of Howard play the “what if” game regarding Tindall Jr, to the success of Apollo. President Kennedy’s flagging interest in Space. Would he have 30 What if JFK had lived? abandoned the effort if he had lived? Dwayne Day looks at President Kennedy’s record Issues over the Apollo 11 on Space and muses over the possibility that the Apollo programme may have been cancelled had EAGLE mission itself occupy fifteen pages of this magazine and provide JFK not been assassinated.
    [Show full text]
  • Hidden Figures
    Hidden Figures Name: Nathaniel Nsiah ​ 1. As the film opens, a young Katherine is counting and identifying prime numbers. What is a prime number? A prime number is a even ​ number. 2. What year is the film set? 20 centuries 3. Why would Katherine, Mary and Dorothy have to sit in the back of the bus in 1960s America? Because they are black and back then black people were not aloud to sit in the front because it was segregated. 4. Where do they work? The work at NASA ​ 5. The actor who plays Paul Stafford is in which TV programme? The ​ actor that plays Paul Stafford is in the TV programme is the tonight show. 6. What does IBM stand for? IBM stands for International Business ​ ​ Machines 7. What happens to Mary just before they test a capsule? Her heels got stuck and then it messed up the test because she was not able to take it out intime. 8. What type of necklace is Katherine allowed to wear in Space Task Group? She is aloud to wear a short necklace. 9. Why does Paul go over some of his work with a marker? So that they know ahead of time and so that they are aware that ​ whatever happened that day they knew that is was going to happen. 10. Why does Katherine’s oldest daughter get her own bed? She get ​ her own bed because she is the oldest one. 11. What’s happened to Katherine’s husband Katherine’s husband died 12. What is their job title at NASA? Latching and calculating the distance that it will take to get there.
    [Show full text]