Apollo Experience Report Systems and Flight Procedures Development

8/8/2019 Apollo Experience Report Systems and Flight Procedures Development

1/56

M73-3 /7 2N A S A T E C H N I C A L N O T E NASA TN D-7436

M

APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT -SYSTEMS AND FLIGHTPROCEDURES DEVELOPMENTby Paul C. KramerLyndon B, Johnson Space CenterHouston, Texas 77058N A T I O N A L A E R O N A U T I C S A N D S PA CE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N W A S H I N G T O N , D. C. SEPTEMBER 1973


2/56

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No.NASA TN D-7436

4. Title and SubtitleAPOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORTSYSTEMS AND FLIGHT PROCEDURES DEVELOPMENT

7. Author(s)Paul C. Kramer, JSC

9. Performing Organization Name and AddressLyndon B. Johnson Space CenterHouston, Texas 77058

2. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Washington, D. C. 20546National Aeronautics and Space Administration

This report des crib es the pro cess of crew procedures development used in the Apollo Program.The two major categories, Systems Proced ures and Flight Procedur es, are defined, as arethe fo rm s of documentation required. A description is provided of the operation of the proce-du re s change control process, which includes the roles of man-in-the-loop simulat ions and theCrew Procedures Change Board. Brief discussions of significant aspects of the attitude control,computer, electrical power, environmental control, and propulsion subsys tems proceduresdevelopment are presented.Flight procedures are subdivided by mission phase: launch and transl una r injection, rendezvous,luna r descent and ascent, and entry. Procedure s used fo r each mission phase are summarized.

3. Recipient's Catalog No.

5. Report Date

6. Performing Organization CodeSeptember 1973

8. Performing Organization Report No.JSC S-366

10 . Work Unit No.924- 23- 68- 01-72

11 . Contract or Grant No.

13. Type of Report and Period CoveredTechnical Note

14 . Sponsoring Agency Code

17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s1)'Apollo Spacecraf t' Lunar Module' Systems Procedures'Onboard Equipment

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20 . Security Classif. (of this pagel 21 . No. of PagesNone None 55

18. Distribution Statement

22 . RiceDomestic, $3.50Foreign, $6.00


3/56

CONTENTS

Section PageSUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 -Definition of Sys tems Proc edures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Definition of Flight Pr oc ed ur es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Definition of Flight Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PROCEDURES DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

Developmental Pr oc es se s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Verification Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Change Controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

APOLLO OPERATIONS HANDBOOK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Normal Backup P roce dures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Malfunction Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3Emergency Pro cedu res . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5Lunar Module Malfunction Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5

SYSTEMS PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Attitude Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Computers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Electrical Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 0Environmental Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '22Propulsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 4

iii


4/56

S e c t i on PageFLIGHT PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Launch and Transluna r Injection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Rendezvous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Lunar Des cen t and Asc ent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

. CONCLUDING REM ARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

i v


5/56

TABLES

Table PageI MILESTONES FOR CREW PROCEDURES AND TRAINING. . . . . . . 511 FLIGHT PROCEDURES VERIFICATION FACILITIES . . . . . . . . . 7

ID HANDBOOK CONTENTS FOR CSM SYSTEMS PROCEDURES . . . . . 1 3IV ORBITAL-ATTITUDE-CONTROL MODES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 .V ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEM DISPLAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

VI FLIGHT PROCEDURES PUBLICATION SCHEDULE . . . . . . . . . . 25VII GENERAL PROCEDURES DURING LUNAR POWERED DESCENT. . . 39VIII SUMMARY OF MONITORING CHECKS FOR LUNAR-RETURNENTRIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42IX TYPICAL MISSION TIME LINE FOR A NOMINAL RANGETARGET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

FIGURES

Figure1 Pro cedur es development cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Organization cha rt f or development of Apollo flight plans . . . . . . .3 Example of normal/backup procedures in the AOH

(a) Command and se rv ic e module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(b) Lunar module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Example of malfunction pro cedures in the AOH . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Example of Apollo electri cal power displays . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 A p o l l o S P S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Apollo launch-abort modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page66

1 0111 422e2426

8 Geometry fo r concentric flight plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

V


6/56

Figure9

1 011- 1 2 1

1 314

Measurement geometry for terminal phase initiation backup . . . . . . .Terminal phase initiation backup c har t for Apollo 11 mission . . . . . .Concentric sequence initiat ion backup table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .View from LM window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ascent monitoring card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Entry monitor system g -V scroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vi

Page323335404145


7/56

APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORTSYSTEMS AND FLIGHT PROCEDURES DEVELOPMENT

By P a u l C. K r a m e rLyndon B. J o h n s o n S pa ce C e n t e rS U M M A R Y

The participation of many engineering specialists w a s required to determine ef-Two distinct lines of procedural development were required. The firstfective crew procedures because of the complex nature of the Apollo spacecraft sy st em sand missions.of these, sy st ems procedures, encompassed all of the various sys tems operating modesand w a s generally independent of the mission plan. The second category, flight pro-cedures, produced an optimum crew time line for each mission phase by incorporatingmission constraints and requirements into appropriate system operating modes.

Verification of flight crew procedures was often accomplished simultaneouslywith crew training in man-in-the-loop simulators. Pr oced ures in the final flight planswe re fu rther veri fied during simulations that involved the NASA Manned Space FlightNetwork and the Mission Control Center as well as the flight crews. Changes in pro-cedures could be made during the mission definition phase, during the procedures ve ri -fication phases, or within the final flight plans.During the Apollo Program, it was found that a procedures control board w a snecessary to maintain co rr ec t crew procedures when changes were made in the missionand systems . The operation of thi s board ensured that every organization concernedwith mi ssion operations was provided with current and complete information on crewoperation of the spacecra ft, that all proposed procedural changes received a thoroughreview, and that management was provided with sufficient information concerning thenumber and nature of procedural changes.During procedures development for the Apollo Program it was learned that thecrew, given certai n basic flight displays, could monitor and a sse ss the performanceof automated s ys tems during normal operation; accomplish the prim ar y mission ob-jectives despite a variety of possible subsystem failures or degraded situations; andmake real-time decisions during emergencies to abort the prima ry mission and retu rnsafely to eart h, to accomplish alternate missions, or to continue the pr imar y missionusing manual backup techniques, thereby enhancing crew safety and miss ion succes s.


8/56

INTRODUCTIONThe major contributors to this repor t and their respective areas of responsibil-ity were: Charles C. Thomas, guidance and control systems; John F. Whitely, elec-trical power systems; David R. Brooks, communications syst ems; Jame s L. Baker,

environmental control sys tems ; William A. Chanis, propulsion syst ems; Michael R.Wash, launch and transl unar injection (TLI); Clark M. Neily, rendezvous; Charles 0.Lewis, lunar descent/ascent; and Ja me s 0. Rippey, entry.

ScopeThe development of sy st ems and flight procedures is described in this r eport,and the information gained through the period ending with the Apollo 11 mission issummarized. Detailed development, formats of flight plans, and proced ures fo r photo-graphic and extravehicular activity are beyond the scope of this repor t.

De f i n i t i on o f Sys tems Procedu resThe operational modes of each spacecraft syst em were defined by NASA andpri me contractor personnel during syst em design, development, and testing. Systemsprocedures were defined as the sequence of crew actions necessa ry to opera te a space-craft system.handbook before miss ion plans were defined in detail . This handbook was a baselineo r cont rol document for Apollo missions , and it included modifications to sy st em sprocedures that were based on previous mission experience. Alt ernate modes of op-eration were described from which particular modes could be selected for specificmission requirements. Malfunction procedure s al so we re developed, verified, and

documented. These syst ems procedures we re the building blocks for mission-dependentflight procedures and flight plans.

The systems procedures were compiled into a spacecr aft operations

D e f i n i t i o n of F l i g h t P r o c e d u re sFlight procedures wer e defined as the timed sequence of all crew actions neces-sa ry t o accomplish a particular mission task. Flight procedures prepared for time-critical or extremely involved crew activities we re developed by combining sys temsprocedures and specific mission requirements. Several iterations of the basic missiontask we re necessary to establish the detailed ste ps required of the crewmen and to en-s u re compatibility with available flight consumables. The flight procedure s w ere

highly dependent on the mission definition and were constrained by such factors aselapsed time, mission rules, and interactions of the different spacecraft sy stem s.Separate flight procedures documents were published, and these documents formed thebas is fo r the procedures included in the flight plan or in the onboard data for eachApollo mission. Appropriate sys tem s procedures were combined for the normal mis-sion.profi le and for contingency situations.

2


9/56

D e f i n i t i o n o f F l i g h t P l a n sFlight plans integrated the relevant systems procedures and flight proceduresinto an overall time line and schedule for t h e effective accomplishment of a specificmanned space mission. Essentia lly, the flight plan provided the sequences by which

separate tasks were performed and the schedule by which critical mission maneuverswere controlled.

PROCEDURES DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUESBecause of its complexity and scope, the Apollo Progr am allowed more auton-omy for the flight crew than had existed for the c rew s of previous space flight pro-grams. Communications between ground control and the spa cec raf t would not bepossible when the vehi cles wer e behind the moon. Rapid flight crew decisions wouldbe necessary i n some situations in which neither adequate time nor complete informa-

tion w a s available for ground-based decisions. A s a resu lt , the development of com-plete, accurate, and accessible flight crew procedures w a s v i t a l for mission success.The technique used to develop flight crew procedures wa s basically a progressiveprocess. Systems operating procedures were provided by the equipment contractor s.Flight procedures were developed from the syste ms procedures when all the goals,requirements, and traje ctori es of a specific mission had been established. Port ionsof the flight plan and the onboard data were developed from the flight procedures. Theprocedures were subjected to verification tests and simulations, were documented,and were rigidly controlled with respect to additions or changes. The flight crew swere train ed to follow the establi shed procedures in the use of all syste ms and in thevarious mission phases.

Devel opment a l Processe sSystems procedures. - A comprehensive knowledge of the specif ications to whichthe equipment w a s designed and fabricated, of the limits on equipment applications, andof the operating configurations and sequences of the syst em w a s necessary to the estab-lishment of operating procedures. Details on such activities as activating a system,performing the tas ks neces sary to operate a syst em in the cor rect sequence, and in-terp retin g system- monitoring indicators were included in the operating procedures.Proc edur es fo r operating each spacecraft system were first written by the manufac-turer of that system.Syst ems procedures included normalfiackup operational conditions of spacecra ftsy st ems together with abort, malfunction, and emergency operations.backup pro ced ure s consisted only of activating secondary s yst ems o r backup equipment.Malfunction procedures, in par ticula r, required detailed knowledge of the st ructureand operation of the system. Systems-fa ilure modes fo r as many malfunctions aspossible were grouped under the symptoms they could be expected to cause. Symptomsand fail ur es we re then grouped to facilitate location and cor recti on of problems. Mal -function pro cedu res were subjected to repeated reviews, tests, and simulations.

Frequently,

3


10/56

A s syst ems operating procedu res were developed fo r each Apollo spacecr aft,they were reviewed by syst ems engineers and subjected to te st s and systems-orientedsimulations. E r ro r s , equipment malfunctions, constraints, and gaps in the proce-du re s were identified and either corre cted or noted. The cycle of review, test, andamendment of sy st em s procedures continued through the flight procedures developmentphase.Flight procedures. - Flight procedures were, essentially, sys tem s procedures.applied to mission-oriented t asks , maneuvers, and tr aj ec to ri es . The development offlight procedures can begin only after the requirements, rul es, and tra jec tor ies fo r aspecific mission have been established. The flight procedures were developed on a-step-by-step basis from the sys tem s procedures and were timed and sequenced appro-priately fo r each activity o r phase of the mission. The preparat ion of flight proceduresinvolved t h e generation of onboard ch ar ts , definition of propellant requ iremen ts, andperformance of digital computer checkruns to confirm the feasibility and accuracy.The development process demanded attention to a wide spectrum of fac tor s, such asmission goals and rule s, constraints to theoperation of individual syst em s and to thesimultaneous operation of interac ting multiple sys tems , time requirements fo r specific

tasks, consumables budgets, most efficient maneuvering rates, and crew re st periods.Some of these factors imposed constraints on certain activities or conflicted with otherfa ctor s. Such facto rs were subjected to additional analysis, testing, and reformula-tion of flight procedures.Because of the variety of systems , crew activities, and mission fa ctor s to beconsidered, a broad span of ski lls w a s required fo r flight proced ures development.Specialized knowledge and contributions were provided by syste ms engineers, syste msanalysts, mission planners, flight controllers, test and simulation specialists, andflight crews. Prel imina ry f l i g h t procedures were reviewed and tested repeatedly inman-in- the-loop simulations.The activities for specific mission p hases wer e checked out in mission-phasesimulations and in integrated spacecraft sys tem s simulators to establish flight pro-cedure compatibility with the time to be available during the mission, variations inthe mission (such as dispe rsed trajecto ries) , and contingency situations resultingfi om degraded system performance o r from failed components.sion Control Center o r other ground-support systems, such as the Manned Space FlightNetwork, were a lso included in the simulations.

Eventually, the Mi s -

A s flight procedures became firmly established, they became the ba si s fo r flightcr ew training. The training activity, in turn, resulted in significant improvementsand modifications to the procedures. The schedule fo r development of s ys te ms andflight procedures and the organizational relationships involved in the development aredetailed in table I and in figure s 1 and 2.

4


11/56

VI

CrdaM1E

d

2

mh4V0aME2.r(

.C

mmEc-Cr

-5


12/56

Systemsdesign an dcapabi y

integrated tests,and simulations

Systems Mission performance requirements,character- rules,andistics trajectoriesMissionPlanningAnalysisDivision

and onboard Operationsdocuments

-Apo l l oSpacecraft ApolloProgram contractorsOffice

Review cycles, crew, other users

Missionru lesOperationaltrajectory

Mission requirementsloper ationa l traject ory Mission

Figure 2. - Organization cha rt fo rdevelopment of Apollo flightplans.

Systemsdata

Figure 1. - Procedures developmentcycles.

Individualsystem -procedures

Verif ication Processes

Apol lo PreliminaryOperations - light Final flightHandbook procedures - rocedures -

Verification of procedu res continuedthroughout the procedures developmentprocess. During the design, fabrication,

1

and testing of the spacecraft components and systems, te st and simulation facilitie swe re developed to establish sy ste ms procedures and operating ch aracteristics.The contractor suppl iers of spacecraft sy st ems developed important tes t andsimulation facilities. A high-fidelity, digital simulation facility for flight computerprograms was built in Cambridge, Massachuse tts, to check out various digital routines,verify program modifications, and define operations fo r the us e of the onboard Apollocomputer. Major cont racto r simulation faci lities also included the Mission Evaluatorat Downey, California , and the Full- Mission Engineering Simulator at Bethpage, NewYork.

*

After individual spacecraft syst ems proce dures wer e verified, simulations thatcombined two o r more individual syst ems we re conducted to verify the compatibilityof the operational pro cedures of the combined sys te ms . The facilities used to v erifyfligh! procedures a r e listed in table II.

Systems procedures review,tests,and simulations fli ght procedures review,----- analysis, and simulations

Mission simulations with the Mission Control Center and the Manned Space FlightNetyork in the simulation loop verified flight pro ced ure s for cri tic al mission p has esand maneuvers. For example, air- o-ground communications we re tested in a highlyelaborate Simulation that included ground- track ing cove rage and network functions,

6


13/56

TABLE II. - FLIGHT PROCEDURES VERIFICATION FACILITIES

ProcedureLaunch and translunar injection

Rendezvous

Entry

Lunar ascent

Lunar descent

FacilityCommand module simulator (missionDynamic crew pr ocedures simulatorsimu lation)

Command module simulatorLunar module simulator (missionCommand module procedures simu latorLunar module procedures simulatorDocking trainer

simulation)

Command module simulatorDynamic c rew procedur es simulatorCommand module procedures simulatorLunar module simulatorLunar module procedures simulatorDocking trainerLunar module simulatorLunar module procedures simulatorLunar landing training vehicle

spacecraf t traj ectories, telemet ry, up-link and voice communications, and all majorspacecr aft system s operations. The simulation w a s accomplished by coupling theApollo mis sio n simulator (the spacecraft simulato r of the highest fidelity available) toa simula tion of the Manned Space Flight Network. The Mission Control Cente r w a sused to verify the procedur es and to provide training for flight crews and ground-support personnel. Additional verification of flight crew procedures wa s developedwith the completion of each Apollo mission. Flight crew debriefings included the re -cording of crew procedures information that se rve d as either a validat ion of the exist-ing procedur es or a bas is for improvement of the procedures for the next mission.Documentation

Systems procedures were developed, tested, and verified for each Apollo space-cr af t and documented in the respective Apollo Operations Handbook (AOH). The cger-ational procedures were organized within the handbook under normal/backup proceduresand under contingency procedures. Abort, malfunction, and emergency procedur eswere subc lassifi ed under contingency procedures. The AOH wa s issued 9 months be-fo re a scheduled mission and w a s updated 7 months before launch.

7


14/56

Flight procedures were produced by integrating specific mission rules and re-quirements with the procedures f rom the AOH. Final flight procedure s we re developedfo r each mission phase, and the flight procedur es fo r a specific mission were com-bined and integrated into the flight plan.The number of mission phases covered by flight procedures inc reased as ren-

dezvous and lunar act ivities wer e added to the mission goals. The flight proceduresdocuments included launch-abort, rendezvous, lunar descent and ascent, and ear th-ent ry procedures. To ens ure the acquisit ion of useful documentation, it w a s essentialthat procedures be developed on a timely schedule. Prel imina ry draft s of the proce-dur es were prepared for test and review cycles. Final procedures were prepared forcrew training and for' input s to the data packages and checklists used on board thespacecraft. Flight procedures were validated 5 months before launch, and final docu-ments were issued 3 months before launch. The prel imina ry flight plan was issued4 months before launch, and the final flight plan wa s issued 2 months before launch.Onboard data packages used by each mission crew were pr epar ed f rom the AOH, theflight procedures, and the final flight plans.

Change Control sCrew procedures fo r operating spacecraft s yst ems were closely interrelatedand interdependent. Often, the changing of a ce rt ai n procedure would affect other pro-cedures, crew training, or activity schedules. As a result of this interdependence,overall control of procedural changes w a s critical . Three leve ls of procedures con-tro l w er e established: first, the branch chief of the organization responsible for apart icular procedures document; second, the Crew Pr oced ures Control Board; and,third, the Apollo Configuration Control Board.For each proposed change, the branch chief responsible for the specific proce-

dure provided relevant information fr om earl ie r manned space flights: the relation-ship between the proposed change and the existing procedure; definitions of anyconflicfs involving spacecraft capabilities, propellan t budgets, miss ion rules, tra-jectories, o r abort criteri a o r limits; and a plan for resolving any conflicts.The C r ew Pr ocedur es Control Board was authorized to approve changes thataffected crew training schedules, onboard data packages, o r mission simulators . Theboard, chaired by the Director of Flight Crew Operations, was composed of re pre-sentatives from the Apollo Spacecraft Pro gr am Office and from each director ate of theNASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Cente r (JSC), for me rl y the Manned Spacecraft Center(MSC). For the Apollo 11 mission, this board met weekly to consider proposed changesin cr ew procedures. The Apollo Configuration Control Board was responsible f or auth-

orizing any change that alt er ed mission objectives; necessitated changes in spacecrafthardware or software; resulted in a change to a mission rule, trajecto ry, o r limit line;increased a propellant requirement or spacecraft weight; or affected the launch schedule.The normal Crew P roc edu res Control Board pro ce ss proved adequate f or review,approval, and implementation of proposed changes until approximately 1 month beforelaunch. From then on ther e was insufficient time f or the entire review proc ess to beaccomplished. The few changes proposed within the last month were transmitted

8


15/56

dir ect ly to the Director of Flight Crew Operations, who w a s frequently in contact withthe flight crew and key personnel from the other organizations affected. This methodprovided adequate consideration for all proposed procedural changes with minimaldelay.

APOLLO OPERAT IONS HANDBO O KDetailed descriptive material on the spacecraft sys tem s and equipment w a s pub-lished in volume 1 of the AOH. Volume 2, bound separately, contained bas ic flightcrew procedu res for operating all spacecraft systems. The prim e contractors fo r thecommand and se rv ice module (CSM) and the lunar module (LM) pre par ed the ini tialoperational procedures. Two is su es of the handbook were produced and updated fo reach mission: one for the CSM and one for the LM. Each iss ue contained the two vol-umes described previously. The s yst ems procedures in the handbook consisted ofnormal/backup proc edures and contingency procedures. Normal procedures were used

when all sys tem s wer e operating properly. Backup procedur es were applicable if asystem failure o r some other anomaly prevented the use of normal procedures. Con-tingency proce dur es cons isted of act ions to be taken for abnormal situations that mightoccur during the missions. These procedures enabled the crew to abort the mission,implement an alternate mission, or continue the planned mission under degraded con-ditions. The contingency procedures, consisting of necessa ry immediate actions andthe limitations that might be imposed on subsequent acti viti es fr om such actions, wer edivided into three classes: abort procedures (considered a specialized fo rm of backupprocedur es involving ea rly mission termination); malfunction procedures (encompassingrecognition and diagnosis of sys tem malfunctions and appropriate co rrect ive action);and emergency procedure s (procedures other than abort procedure s that would requ ireinstant implementation if the cr ew were in immediate danger).

The AOH w a s written to accommodate differences in specific spacecraft . Changesand upda tes wer e made by changing pages or r eissu ing the enti re handbook. The CSMhandbook contained certain pages applicable only to specific vehicles or selected seriesof vehicles. Therefore, some pages were repeated in modified fo rm to reflect mate-rial unique to specific vehicles. A manual for use on a specific vehicle could thus beprepared by supplementing a complete set of common pages wi th pages marked specif-ically for that vehicle. The LM handbook was similarly written.

Normal lBackup P roceduresSystems procedures f or normal/backup operations were presented in the AOH intabu lar for m and in numerica l sequence. An example of a page from the normal/backuppr oc edur es sect ion of the CSM handbook is shown in figure 3(a). The column headingswer e STA/T (station/time), STEP, PROCEDURE, PANEL, and REMARKS. An exam-ple of the LM handbook format, which was slightly different from that of the CSMhand-book, is shown in figure 3(b). The column headings we re CREWMAN, PNL (panel),PROCEDURES, and REMARKS.

9


16/56

SH?A-C3-BLOCK 11-(2)APOLLO OPERATIONS HANDBOOK

r l (u I - a l

8

5- 5.EaJ m o0 I Iu)

- e;e I II -8Basic Date 20 Fcb 1969 Change Date 17 April 1969 Page 4-609

Q,43E20

a,0.r(Q,rnaccdaccdEE0ucdhv

x92Q,

r:rna,k1aa,u0kaa3cd

cdk0cw0Q,

.r(

2n1E

4zicdI

c*)Q,8tz

10


17/56

lMA790-3-LMAPOLLO OPERATIONS HANDBOOK

:: " , p .d U P u4 " e m E 0 0d 0 . O U +3 u U N va m a cc m c --a u

m4Pv

Ca0I

r J...2s3,VIUe3

4e2v)3

I>>a

r:rnaliInwc3

P- 0

UCVIN2

Apollo Experience Report Systems and Flight Procedures Development

Documents

Transcript of Apollo Experience Report Systems and Flight Procedures Development