What were the problems on the Apollo 11 lunar module?Did the 1202 error and associated reboot prevent disaster on Apollo 11 landing?Why did a phase mismatch between the Apollo 11 LM's RR and AGC generate a large numbers of interrupts?What did Apollo need the crewed Command Module for?Could the Apollo LM abort mode be engaged after touchdown? What would have happened if it was?How were the Flight Journals of the Apollo missions originally transcribed/recorded?What was the colour of the shoes used by the Apollo astronauts in moon landing?What do you call the Apollo LEM plus CM (Command Module) when they are connected?What is the meaning of “Bravo”?Was it really necessary for the Lunar Module to have 2 stages?Did the 1202 error and associated reboot prevent disaster on Apollo 11 landing?Where in orbit was Michael Collins when the LM landed?
Do rainbows show spectral lines from the sun?
Was the whistle-blower's (12 Aug 2019) complaint deemed credible?
SD Card speed degrading and doesn't work on one of my cameras: can I do something?
If a middle class person is expecting a down turn in the market, what percentage of cash should they hold?
What (if anything) could have caused all three shuttle main engines to stop at the same time?
Ball-passing game with a surprise ending
Does quickening a spell change the kind of action it grants?
Why did Leia not want to tell Han about Luke being her twin brother?
Visiting a place in Brussels where Pink Floyd recorded a video
Find the area between the curves
Bash to check if directory exist. If not create with an array
Puzzle Hunt 02: Echoes of Change
What is the purpose of this single box found in Rome B&B room?
Is it possible to keep cat litter on balcony during winter (down to -10°C)
Implement the Max-Pooling operation from Convolutional Neural Networks
How to avoid answering "what were you sick with"?
Do Macs come with any programming language available from the Terminal?
Python Sound visualizer - appreciate feedback
Calculate the sum of interior angles of a polygon
Which modifier shown in the D&D Beyond character sheet do I add to attack rolls with my longbow?
Do modern jet engines need igniters?
Extra long braces with beginarray[t]
Check the validity of a 10-digit telephone number
A professor commented that my research is too simple as compared to my colleagues. What does that mean about my future prospects?
What were the problems on the Apollo 11 lunar module?
Did the 1202 error and associated reboot prevent disaster on Apollo 11 landing?Why did a phase mismatch between the Apollo 11 LM's RR and AGC generate a large numbers of interrupts?What did Apollo need the crewed Command Module for?Could the Apollo LM abort mode be engaged after touchdown? What would have happened if it was?How were the Flight Journals of the Apollo missions originally transcribed/recorded?What was the colour of the shoes used by the Apollo astronauts in moon landing?What do you call the Apollo LEM plus CM (Command Module) when they are connected?What is the meaning of “Bravo”?Was it really necessary for the Lunar Module to have 2 stages?Did the 1202 error and associated reboot prevent disaster on Apollo 11 landing?Where in orbit was Michael Collins when the LM landed?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
$begingroup$
In the movie First Man we see that there were problems with some button, when Buzz said "We should tell them about that." Also there was an alarm, that they then turned off.
lunar-landing apollo-11 lunar-module
$endgroup$
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
In the movie First Man we see that there were problems with some button, when Buzz said "We should tell them about that." Also there was an alarm, that they then turned off.
lunar-landing apollo-11 lunar-module
$endgroup$
13
$begingroup$
I guess we're overdue for a canonical answer about the 1202.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Jul 16 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Russel Borogove not only 1202, but also about some black button (during moon landing).
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:44
1
$begingroup$
@RS I'm not much on watching videos.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 21:04
2
$begingroup$
@RS - since the movie clip you reference starts (with "we should tell them ...") just before they are "GO for powered descent", perhaps it is related to the real Aldrin saying, one minute earlier than the 'GO', "And, Houston, we got a 500 alarm early in the program."
$endgroup$
– amI
Jul 17 at 4:23
3
$begingroup$
The incident in the video does not show up in the voice transcript: apollo11.spacelog.org/phases/5
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Jul 17 at 16:43
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
In the movie First Man we see that there were problems with some button, when Buzz said "We should tell them about that." Also there was an alarm, that they then turned off.
lunar-landing apollo-11 lunar-module
$endgroup$
In the movie First Man we see that there were problems with some button, when Buzz said "We should tell them about that." Also there was an alarm, that they then turned off.
lunar-landing apollo-11 lunar-module
lunar-landing apollo-11 lunar-module
edited Jul 17 at 16:06
Moyli
2041 gold badge2 silver badges6 bronze badges
2041 gold badge2 silver badges6 bronze badges
asked Jul 16 at 19:28
R SR S
2282 silver badges5 bronze badges
2282 silver badges5 bronze badges
13
$begingroup$
I guess we're overdue for a canonical answer about the 1202.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Jul 16 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Russel Borogove not only 1202, but also about some black button (during moon landing).
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:44
1
$begingroup$
@RS I'm not much on watching videos.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 21:04
2
$begingroup$
@RS - since the movie clip you reference starts (with "we should tell them ...") just before they are "GO for powered descent", perhaps it is related to the real Aldrin saying, one minute earlier than the 'GO', "And, Houston, we got a 500 alarm early in the program."
$endgroup$
– amI
Jul 17 at 4:23
3
$begingroup$
The incident in the video does not show up in the voice transcript: apollo11.spacelog.org/phases/5
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Jul 17 at 16:43
|
show 6 more comments
13
$begingroup$
I guess we're overdue for a canonical answer about the 1202.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Jul 16 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Russel Borogove not only 1202, but also about some black button (during moon landing).
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:44
1
$begingroup$
@RS I'm not much on watching videos.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 21:04
2
$begingroup$
@RS - since the movie clip you reference starts (with "we should tell them ...") just before they are "GO for powered descent", perhaps it is related to the real Aldrin saying, one minute earlier than the 'GO', "And, Houston, we got a 500 alarm early in the program."
$endgroup$
– amI
Jul 17 at 4:23
3
$begingroup$
The incident in the video does not show up in the voice transcript: apollo11.spacelog.org/phases/5
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Jul 17 at 16:43
13
13
$begingroup$
I guess we're overdue for a canonical answer about the 1202.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Jul 16 at 19:45
$begingroup$
I guess we're overdue for a canonical answer about the 1202.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Jul 16 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Russel Borogove not only 1202, but also about some black button (during moon landing).
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:44
$begingroup$
@Russel Borogove not only 1202, but also about some black button (during moon landing).
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:44
1
1
$begingroup$
@RS I'm not much on watching videos.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 21:04
$begingroup$
@RS I'm not much on watching videos.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 21:04
2
2
$begingroup$
@RS - since the movie clip you reference starts (with "we should tell them ...") just before they are "GO for powered descent", perhaps it is related to the real Aldrin saying, one minute earlier than the 'GO', "And, Houston, we got a 500 alarm early in the program."
$endgroup$
– amI
Jul 17 at 4:23
$begingroup$
@RS - since the movie clip you reference starts (with "we should tell them ...") just before they are "GO for powered descent", perhaps it is related to the real Aldrin saying, one minute earlier than the 'GO', "And, Houston, we got a 500 alarm early in the program."
$endgroup$
– amI
Jul 17 at 4:23
3
3
$begingroup$
The incident in the video does not show up in the voice transcript: apollo11.spacelog.org/phases/5
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Jul 17 at 16:43
$begingroup$
The incident in the video does not show up in the voice transcript: apollo11.spacelog.org/phases/5
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Jul 17 at 16:43
|
show 6 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
These were the "1202" and "1201" program alarms, which were warning signals that the lunar module's computer was becoming overloaded.
During Apollo 11's descent to the moon, the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on in the "SLEW" mode, so it would be ready if they had to abort the landing.
This meant that the guidance computer was processing the data from the rendezvous radar at the same time as it was trying to run the landing guidance program. This nearly overloaded the computer's processing capability.
When Aldrin asked the computer to compute and display a certain figure called delta-H, this was just enough additional processing load to put the computer over the edge; it began dropping low-priority tasks like updating the display, but the software was designed to keep the high-priority tasks, like steering the lander, running. When it dropped the low-priority task it would activate the master alarm and display an error code, 1202. Aldrin and Armstrong weren't familiar with this code, so asked mission control for an explanation:
102:38:30 Armstrong: (To Houston) It's a 1202.
102:38:32 Aldrin: 1202. (Pause)
102:38:42 Armstrong (onboard): (To Buzz) What is it? Let's incorporate (the landing radar data). (To Houston) Give us a reading on the 1202 Program Alarm.
Fortunately, just days before Apollo 11 launched, the team working on the computer assembled a list of all the possible program alarms, and steps to be taken if they occurred. The notes for 1202 said that if it happened intermittently there was no need to abort. The controllers consulted the list, gave the go to CAPCOM Charlie Duke, who relayed it to Eagle:
102:38:53 Duke: Roger. We got you...(With some urgency in his voice) We're Go on that alarm.
A short while later, the alarm fired again. Aldrin made the connection that the alarm occurred when he was trying to monitor delta-H; mission control told the crew they could monitor delta-H from the ground.
A little later on, the computer started giving 1201 alarms, a very slightly different symptom of the same basic issue, and again they got the go:
102:42:19 Aldrin: Program Alarm. (Pause) 1201
102:42:24 Armstrong: 1201. (Pause) (onboard) Okay, 2000 at 50.
102:42:25 Duke: Roger. 1201 alarm. (Pause) We're Go. Same type. We're Go.
The alarms were very distracting, forcing Armstrong to direct his attention inside the cockpit right as he needed to be focused on finding a good landing site, which may have contributed to the long descent time and high fuel usage of the landing.
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
Note that "the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on" was per the checklist. And it was not that it was "on", it was that the mode was in AUTO or SLEW. "Sunburst and Luminary", Eyles, p. 167 The reboots also blanked the DSKY display.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:08
1
$begingroup$
Note that the difference between the errors is that the 1201 refers to a lack of available core memory, whilst the 1202 refers to a lack of VAC (Vector Accumulator) memory. The jobs requested these for use, with the latter being requested if the core wasn't enough for what the job needed.
$endgroup$
– Dan
Jul 18 at 16:26
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
What happened:
With just seven and a half minutes remaining before they were set to touch down on the moon, Armstrong and Aldrin reported a program alarm. "It's a 1202."
The 1202 alarm indicated that the guidance computer was being overloaded with tasks. It was having trouble completing its work in the cycling time available.
"We looked down at the list at that alarm, and, yes, right, if it doesn't reoccur too often, we're fine," reported Garman.
Give us a reading on the 1202 program alarm," Armstrong radioed, with a bit more urgency in his voice.
"We're go on that, Flight," Bales advised Kranz. Before the flight director could respond, capcom Charlie Duke relayed the news to the crew, "We're 'Go' on that alarm."
The alarms were not over, though. Less than minute later, there was another 1202 alarm, followed by three more — a 1201 and two 1202 alarms — in under 40 seconds.
"When it occurred again [it was] a different alarm but it was the same type," Garman recounted. "I remember distinctly yelling — by this time yelling, you know, in the loop here — "Same type!" and [Bale] yells "Same type!" I could hear my voice echoing. Then [Duke] says, "Same type!"
The cause:
So what was happening during Apollo 11, as I recall, was that repeated jobs to process rendezvous radar data (that of course were not really there) were scheduled because a misconfiguration of the radar switches. Thus, the core sets got filled up and a 1202 alarm was generated. The 1201 that came later in the landing was because the scheduling request that caused the actual overflow was one that had requested a VAC area.
What happened next in either case was what you described as, 'The computer has been programmed to recognize this data as being of secondary importance and will ignore it while it does more important computations.'
On Apollo 11, each time a 1201 or 1202 alarm appeared, the computer rebooted, restarted the important stuff, like steering the descent engine and running the DSKY to let the crew know what was going on, but did not restart all the erroneously-scheduled rendezvous radar jobs.
Root cause:
So what happened? Crossed wires. During the design of the guidance computer at MIT’s Instrumentation laboratory, Buzz Aldrin wanted the computer to be able to simultaneously handle radar data from the lunar surface and the Apollo Command and Service Modules in lunar orbit, just in case Apollo 11 needed to abort the landing and rendezvous with the CSM. Despite discussions, the added capability was never built into the system, to Aldrin’s surprise on July 20th. (Simulations had never fully tested the feature and failed to reveal its absence.)
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
I just read Sunburst and Luminary by the guy who programmed this. His chapter on it is, I think, the definitive write-up, but this is a decent summary. Your last sentence is maybe misleading, though - the problem was found on the ground independently twice before the flight. I'll write a supplemental answer on that.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 19:54
$begingroup$
I think a few details around that go as follows: During training and simulation, the LM rendezvous radar was switched off because it wasn't needed. However, during the Apollo 11 lunar descent, the radar was switched on because the crew thought it to be a wise precaution in case of an abort - a deviation from checklisted and practiced procedures.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:00
1
$begingroup$
@AnthonyX according to Eyles (LEM guidance programmer) the crew was following the checklist.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
@OrganicMarble I'll have to see if I can find my source... maybe wasn't a reliable one.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
It's a common misconception - the Eyles book lists the common misconceptions and goes through each one.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:38
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Supplementary answer (these answers cover it well, but there are a few other things of interest):
For anyone interested in the details of this issue, the book Sunburst and Luminary by Don Eyles has, I think the definitive treatment. Eyles was the LEM descent guidance software programmer!
Eyles explains that the problem was actually found on the ground twice, independently.
The first time was by Grumman running tests at Bethpage on LM-3 in May 1968.
The report correctly diagnosed the problem but then, instead of
proposing a fix, dismissed the issue with the breathtaking
rationalization that the rendezvous radar switch would only ever be in
SLEW or AUTO if the PGNCS had failed - oblivious to the fact that this
unguarded switch had the potential to cause the PGNCS to fail, as it
almost did on Apollo 11.
(S&L, page 168)
The second time was by George Silver, an MIT employee stationed at KSC.
George Silver identified the rendezvous radar interface problem at
Cape Canaveral a month or two after Grumman discovered it in Bethpage.
He wrote up the problem....and devised a solution that required a
small hardware change.....We can only fault Silver for not making a
bigger stink. He might not have gained approval for his fix, but a
larger group would have known about the problem....
(S&L, page 169)
The crew had the radar configured per the checklist, but the checklist had been updated very shortly before flight and therefore had not been exercised very much in training.
The baseline circa 1965 was to have RR on, mode in LGC, and tracking
the CSM during the descent. At some point...the plan became RR off,
mode in LGC...in June 1969...the plan became RR on with mode in AUTO
or SLEW.
(S&L, page 167)
Explanation of the radar mode switch:
The mode switch had three positions: LGC, AUTO, and SLEW.
- LGC (LEM Guidance Computer) - the antenna angle resolvers used as their reference signal an
800-Hz signal from the PGNCS and therefore the data made sense to
the guidance computer - SLEW - Manual slew mode. The 800-Hz reference signal came from LEM
hardware - AUTO TRACK - Antenna tracks an acquired target. The 800-Hz reference
signal came from LEM
hardware
(Image from Apollo Operations Handbook - Lunar Module - LM10 and subsequent - Volume 1)
If the switch was not in LGC and the radar was on, the LGC could have problems processing the data depending on the phase relationship between the two 800 Hz signals, and this relationship was completely random, determined by when the LGC was powered on. The hardware fix proposed by Silver would have synchronized the two signals, eliminating the problem.
(Condensed from S&L pages 159-160)
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Addressing the "problems with some button" part of the question. Following is a quotation from a news source.
“It's generally been reported that when Armstrong returned the lunar module after the moon walk, his backpack broke a circuit breaker switch," said the source, an employee of North American Aviation who is one of the last to see Apollo astronauts before they are locked in their spacecraft.
“When that happened, it knocked out the normal ascent sequence firing
program.”
Fortunately, Aldrin used a pen on the broken part of the switch to get
it to work.
“But if he hadn't been able to, that would have thrown the whole ball
of wax over to the abort guidance sequence," the story continued.
“And unless he could have activated it, there is no back-up for it– they would have had real problems. The only hope would have been the 16 little jets on the reaction control system. And I doubt if that could have taken them back to the command module.”
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I didn't get about "ball of wax", could you explain?
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:37
5
$begingroup$
@RS "the whole ball of wax" is an American colloquial expression meaning "everything" - emphatically. grammarist.com/idiom/whole-ball-of-wax
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:39
2
$begingroup$
@Fred I mean this button (before the walk): youtu.be/XtnIfu1qkoM?t=100
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 21:28
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Regarding the "button" problem you were pointing to more precisely in another comment:
According to the Apollo 11 Journal, around the 102:03:35 mark and before, it seems related to the CWEA switch (Caution and Warning Electronics Assembly)
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f37368%2fwhat-were-the-problems-on-the-apollo-11-lunar-module%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
These were the "1202" and "1201" program alarms, which were warning signals that the lunar module's computer was becoming overloaded.
During Apollo 11's descent to the moon, the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on in the "SLEW" mode, so it would be ready if they had to abort the landing.
This meant that the guidance computer was processing the data from the rendezvous radar at the same time as it was trying to run the landing guidance program. This nearly overloaded the computer's processing capability.
When Aldrin asked the computer to compute and display a certain figure called delta-H, this was just enough additional processing load to put the computer over the edge; it began dropping low-priority tasks like updating the display, but the software was designed to keep the high-priority tasks, like steering the lander, running. When it dropped the low-priority task it would activate the master alarm and display an error code, 1202. Aldrin and Armstrong weren't familiar with this code, so asked mission control for an explanation:
102:38:30 Armstrong: (To Houston) It's a 1202.
102:38:32 Aldrin: 1202. (Pause)
102:38:42 Armstrong (onboard): (To Buzz) What is it? Let's incorporate (the landing radar data). (To Houston) Give us a reading on the 1202 Program Alarm.
Fortunately, just days before Apollo 11 launched, the team working on the computer assembled a list of all the possible program alarms, and steps to be taken if they occurred. The notes for 1202 said that if it happened intermittently there was no need to abort. The controllers consulted the list, gave the go to CAPCOM Charlie Duke, who relayed it to Eagle:
102:38:53 Duke: Roger. We got you...(With some urgency in his voice) We're Go on that alarm.
A short while later, the alarm fired again. Aldrin made the connection that the alarm occurred when he was trying to monitor delta-H; mission control told the crew they could monitor delta-H from the ground.
A little later on, the computer started giving 1201 alarms, a very slightly different symptom of the same basic issue, and again they got the go:
102:42:19 Aldrin: Program Alarm. (Pause) 1201
102:42:24 Armstrong: 1201. (Pause) (onboard) Okay, 2000 at 50.
102:42:25 Duke: Roger. 1201 alarm. (Pause) We're Go. Same type. We're Go.
The alarms were very distracting, forcing Armstrong to direct his attention inside the cockpit right as he needed to be focused on finding a good landing site, which may have contributed to the long descent time and high fuel usage of the landing.
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
Note that "the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on" was per the checklist. And it was not that it was "on", it was that the mode was in AUTO or SLEW. "Sunburst and Luminary", Eyles, p. 167 The reboots also blanked the DSKY display.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:08
1
$begingroup$
Note that the difference between the errors is that the 1201 refers to a lack of available core memory, whilst the 1202 refers to a lack of VAC (Vector Accumulator) memory. The jobs requested these for use, with the latter being requested if the core wasn't enough for what the job needed.
$endgroup$
– Dan
Jul 18 at 16:26
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
These were the "1202" and "1201" program alarms, which were warning signals that the lunar module's computer was becoming overloaded.
During Apollo 11's descent to the moon, the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on in the "SLEW" mode, so it would be ready if they had to abort the landing.
This meant that the guidance computer was processing the data from the rendezvous radar at the same time as it was trying to run the landing guidance program. This nearly overloaded the computer's processing capability.
When Aldrin asked the computer to compute and display a certain figure called delta-H, this was just enough additional processing load to put the computer over the edge; it began dropping low-priority tasks like updating the display, but the software was designed to keep the high-priority tasks, like steering the lander, running. When it dropped the low-priority task it would activate the master alarm and display an error code, 1202. Aldrin and Armstrong weren't familiar with this code, so asked mission control for an explanation:
102:38:30 Armstrong: (To Houston) It's a 1202.
102:38:32 Aldrin: 1202. (Pause)
102:38:42 Armstrong (onboard): (To Buzz) What is it? Let's incorporate (the landing radar data). (To Houston) Give us a reading on the 1202 Program Alarm.
Fortunately, just days before Apollo 11 launched, the team working on the computer assembled a list of all the possible program alarms, and steps to be taken if they occurred. The notes for 1202 said that if it happened intermittently there was no need to abort. The controllers consulted the list, gave the go to CAPCOM Charlie Duke, who relayed it to Eagle:
102:38:53 Duke: Roger. We got you...(With some urgency in his voice) We're Go on that alarm.
A short while later, the alarm fired again. Aldrin made the connection that the alarm occurred when he was trying to monitor delta-H; mission control told the crew they could monitor delta-H from the ground.
A little later on, the computer started giving 1201 alarms, a very slightly different symptom of the same basic issue, and again they got the go:
102:42:19 Aldrin: Program Alarm. (Pause) 1201
102:42:24 Armstrong: 1201. (Pause) (onboard) Okay, 2000 at 50.
102:42:25 Duke: Roger. 1201 alarm. (Pause) We're Go. Same type. We're Go.
The alarms were very distracting, forcing Armstrong to direct his attention inside the cockpit right as he needed to be focused on finding a good landing site, which may have contributed to the long descent time and high fuel usage of the landing.
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
Note that "the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on" was per the checklist. And it was not that it was "on", it was that the mode was in AUTO or SLEW. "Sunburst and Luminary", Eyles, p. 167 The reboots also blanked the DSKY display.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:08
1
$begingroup$
Note that the difference between the errors is that the 1201 refers to a lack of available core memory, whilst the 1202 refers to a lack of VAC (Vector Accumulator) memory. The jobs requested these for use, with the latter being requested if the core wasn't enough for what the job needed.
$endgroup$
– Dan
Jul 18 at 16:26
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
These were the "1202" and "1201" program alarms, which were warning signals that the lunar module's computer was becoming overloaded.
During Apollo 11's descent to the moon, the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on in the "SLEW" mode, so it would be ready if they had to abort the landing.
This meant that the guidance computer was processing the data from the rendezvous radar at the same time as it was trying to run the landing guidance program. This nearly overloaded the computer's processing capability.
When Aldrin asked the computer to compute and display a certain figure called delta-H, this was just enough additional processing load to put the computer over the edge; it began dropping low-priority tasks like updating the display, but the software was designed to keep the high-priority tasks, like steering the lander, running. When it dropped the low-priority task it would activate the master alarm and display an error code, 1202. Aldrin and Armstrong weren't familiar with this code, so asked mission control for an explanation:
102:38:30 Armstrong: (To Houston) It's a 1202.
102:38:32 Aldrin: 1202. (Pause)
102:38:42 Armstrong (onboard): (To Buzz) What is it? Let's incorporate (the landing radar data). (To Houston) Give us a reading on the 1202 Program Alarm.
Fortunately, just days before Apollo 11 launched, the team working on the computer assembled a list of all the possible program alarms, and steps to be taken if they occurred. The notes for 1202 said that if it happened intermittently there was no need to abort. The controllers consulted the list, gave the go to CAPCOM Charlie Duke, who relayed it to Eagle:
102:38:53 Duke: Roger. We got you...(With some urgency in his voice) We're Go on that alarm.
A short while later, the alarm fired again. Aldrin made the connection that the alarm occurred when he was trying to monitor delta-H; mission control told the crew they could monitor delta-H from the ground.
A little later on, the computer started giving 1201 alarms, a very slightly different symptom of the same basic issue, and again they got the go:
102:42:19 Aldrin: Program Alarm. (Pause) 1201
102:42:24 Armstrong: 1201. (Pause) (onboard) Okay, 2000 at 50.
102:42:25 Duke: Roger. 1201 alarm. (Pause) We're Go. Same type. We're Go.
The alarms were very distracting, forcing Armstrong to direct his attention inside the cockpit right as he needed to be focused on finding a good landing site, which may have contributed to the long descent time and high fuel usage of the landing.
$endgroup$
These were the "1202" and "1201" program alarms, which were warning signals that the lunar module's computer was becoming overloaded.
During Apollo 11's descent to the moon, the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on in the "SLEW" mode, so it would be ready if they had to abort the landing.
This meant that the guidance computer was processing the data from the rendezvous radar at the same time as it was trying to run the landing guidance program. This nearly overloaded the computer's processing capability.
When Aldrin asked the computer to compute and display a certain figure called delta-H, this was just enough additional processing load to put the computer over the edge; it began dropping low-priority tasks like updating the display, but the software was designed to keep the high-priority tasks, like steering the lander, running. When it dropped the low-priority task it would activate the master alarm and display an error code, 1202. Aldrin and Armstrong weren't familiar with this code, so asked mission control for an explanation:
102:38:30 Armstrong: (To Houston) It's a 1202.
102:38:32 Aldrin: 1202. (Pause)
102:38:42 Armstrong (onboard): (To Buzz) What is it? Let's incorporate (the landing radar data). (To Houston) Give us a reading on the 1202 Program Alarm.
Fortunately, just days before Apollo 11 launched, the team working on the computer assembled a list of all the possible program alarms, and steps to be taken if they occurred. The notes for 1202 said that if it happened intermittently there was no need to abort. The controllers consulted the list, gave the go to CAPCOM Charlie Duke, who relayed it to Eagle:
102:38:53 Duke: Roger. We got you...(With some urgency in his voice) We're Go on that alarm.
A short while later, the alarm fired again. Aldrin made the connection that the alarm occurred when he was trying to monitor delta-H; mission control told the crew they could monitor delta-H from the ground.
A little later on, the computer started giving 1201 alarms, a very slightly different symptom of the same basic issue, and again they got the go:
102:42:19 Aldrin: Program Alarm. (Pause) 1201
102:42:24 Armstrong: 1201. (Pause) (onboard) Okay, 2000 at 50.
102:42:25 Duke: Roger. 1201 alarm. (Pause) We're Go. Same type. We're Go.
The alarms were very distracting, forcing Armstrong to direct his attention inside the cockpit right as he needed to be focused on finding a good landing site, which may have contributed to the long descent time and high fuel usage of the landing.
edited Jul 16 at 20:13
answered Jul 16 at 19:57
Russell BorogoveRussell Borogove
106k5 gold badges377 silver badges460 bronze badges
106k5 gold badges377 silver badges460 bronze badges
7
$begingroup$
Note that "the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on" was per the checklist. And it was not that it was "on", it was that the mode was in AUTO or SLEW. "Sunburst and Luminary", Eyles, p. 167 The reboots also blanked the DSKY display.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:08
1
$begingroup$
Note that the difference between the errors is that the 1201 refers to a lack of available core memory, whilst the 1202 refers to a lack of VAC (Vector Accumulator) memory. The jobs requested these for use, with the latter being requested if the core wasn't enough for what the job needed.
$endgroup$
– Dan
Jul 18 at 16:26
add a comment
|
7
$begingroup$
Note that "the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on" was per the checklist. And it was not that it was "on", it was that the mode was in AUTO or SLEW. "Sunburst and Luminary", Eyles, p. 167 The reboots also blanked the DSKY display.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:08
1
$begingroup$
Note that the difference between the errors is that the 1201 refers to a lack of available core memory, whilst the 1202 refers to a lack of VAC (Vector Accumulator) memory. The jobs requested these for use, with the latter being requested if the core wasn't enough for what the job needed.
$endgroup$
– Dan
Jul 18 at 16:26
7
7
$begingroup$
Note that "the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on" was per the checklist. And it was not that it was "on", it was that the mode was in AUTO or SLEW. "Sunburst and Luminary", Eyles, p. 167 The reboots also blanked the DSKY display.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:08
$begingroup$
Note that "the crew left the LM's rendezvous radar, which was used to find their way back to the command module, switched on" was per the checklist. And it was not that it was "on", it was that the mode was in AUTO or SLEW. "Sunburst and Luminary", Eyles, p. 167 The reboots also blanked the DSKY display.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:08
1
1
$begingroup$
Note that the difference between the errors is that the 1201 refers to a lack of available core memory, whilst the 1202 refers to a lack of VAC (Vector Accumulator) memory. The jobs requested these for use, with the latter being requested if the core wasn't enough for what the job needed.
$endgroup$
– Dan
Jul 18 at 16:26
$begingroup$
Note that the difference between the errors is that the 1201 refers to a lack of available core memory, whilst the 1202 refers to a lack of VAC (Vector Accumulator) memory. The jobs requested these for use, with the latter being requested if the core wasn't enough for what the job needed.
$endgroup$
– Dan
Jul 18 at 16:26
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
What happened:
With just seven and a half minutes remaining before they were set to touch down on the moon, Armstrong and Aldrin reported a program alarm. "It's a 1202."
The 1202 alarm indicated that the guidance computer was being overloaded with tasks. It was having trouble completing its work in the cycling time available.
"We looked down at the list at that alarm, and, yes, right, if it doesn't reoccur too often, we're fine," reported Garman.
Give us a reading on the 1202 program alarm," Armstrong radioed, with a bit more urgency in his voice.
"We're go on that, Flight," Bales advised Kranz. Before the flight director could respond, capcom Charlie Duke relayed the news to the crew, "We're 'Go' on that alarm."
The alarms were not over, though. Less than minute later, there was another 1202 alarm, followed by three more — a 1201 and two 1202 alarms — in under 40 seconds.
"When it occurred again [it was] a different alarm but it was the same type," Garman recounted. "I remember distinctly yelling — by this time yelling, you know, in the loop here — "Same type!" and [Bale] yells "Same type!" I could hear my voice echoing. Then [Duke] says, "Same type!"
The cause:
So what was happening during Apollo 11, as I recall, was that repeated jobs to process rendezvous radar data (that of course were not really there) were scheduled because a misconfiguration of the radar switches. Thus, the core sets got filled up and a 1202 alarm was generated. The 1201 that came later in the landing was because the scheduling request that caused the actual overflow was one that had requested a VAC area.
What happened next in either case was what you described as, 'The computer has been programmed to recognize this data as being of secondary importance and will ignore it while it does more important computations.'
On Apollo 11, each time a 1201 or 1202 alarm appeared, the computer rebooted, restarted the important stuff, like steering the descent engine and running the DSKY to let the crew know what was going on, but did not restart all the erroneously-scheduled rendezvous radar jobs.
Root cause:
So what happened? Crossed wires. During the design of the guidance computer at MIT’s Instrumentation laboratory, Buzz Aldrin wanted the computer to be able to simultaneously handle radar data from the lunar surface and the Apollo Command and Service Modules in lunar orbit, just in case Apollo 11 needed to abort the landing and rendezvous with the CSM. Despite discussions, the added capability was never built into the system, to Aldrin’s surprise on July 20th. (Simulations had never fully tested the feature and failed to reveal its absence.)
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
I just read Sunburst and Luminary by the guy who programmed this. His chapter on it is, I think, the definitive write-up, but this is a decent summary. Your last sentence is maybe misleading, though - the problem was found on the ground independently twice before the flight. I'll write a supplemental answer on that.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 19:54
$begingroup$
I think a few details around that go as follows: During training and simulation, the LM rendezvous radar was switched off because it wasn't needed. However, during the Apollo 11 lunar descent, the radar was switched on because the crew thought it to be a wise precaution in case of an abort - a deviation from checklisted and practiced procedures.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:00
1
$begingroup$
@AnthonyX according to Eyles (LEM guidance programmer) the crew was following the checklist.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
@OrganicMarble I'll have to see if I can find my source... maybe wasn't a reliable one.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
It's a common misconception - the Eyles book lists the common misconceptions and goes through each one.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:38
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
What happened:
With just seven and a half minutes remaining before they were set to touch down on the moon, Armstrong and Aldrin reported a program alarm. "It's a 1202."
The 1202 alarm indicated that the guidance computer was being overloaded with tasks. It was having trouble completing its work in the cycling time available.
"We looked down at the list at that alarm, and, yes, right, if it doesn't reoccur too often, we're fine," reported Garman.
Give us a reading on the 1202 program alarm," Armstrong radioed, with a bit more urgency in his voice.
"We're go on that, Flight," Bales advised Kranz. Before the flight director could respond, capcom Charlie Duke relayed the news to the crew, "We're 'Go' on that alarm."
The alarms were not over, though. Less than minute later, there was another 1202 alarm, followed by three more — a 1201 and two 1202 alarms — in under 40 seconds.
"When it occurred again [it was] a different alarm but it was the same type," Garman recounted. "I remember distinctly yelling — by this time yelling, you know, in the loop here — "Same type!" and [Bale] yells "Same type!" I could hear my voice echoing. Then [Duke] says, "Same type!"
The cause:
So what was happening during Apollo 11, as I recall, was that repeated jobs to process rendezvous radar data (that of course were not really there) were scheduled because a misconfiguration of the radar switches. Thus, the core sets got filled up and a 1202 alarm was generated. The 1201 that came later in the landing was because the scheduling request that caused the actual overflow was one that had requested a VAC area.
What happened next in either case was what you described as, 'The computer has been programmed to recognize this data as being of secondary importance and will ignore it while it does more important computations.'
On Apollo 11, each time a 1201 or 1202 alarm appeared, the computer rebooted, restarted the important stuff, like steering the descent engine and running the DSKY to let the crew know what was going on, but did not restart all the erroneously-scheduled rendezvous radar jobs.
Root cause:
So what happened? Crossed wires. During the design of the guidance computer at MIT’s Instrumentation laboratory, Buzz Aldrin wanted the computer to be able to simultaneously handle radar data from the lunar surface and the Apollo Command and Service Modules in lunar orbit, just in case Apollo 11 needed to abort the landing and rendezvous with the CSM. Despite discussions, the added capability was never built into the system, to Aldrin’s surprise on July 20th. (Simulations had never fully tested the feature and failed to reveal its absence.)
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
I just read Sunburst and Luminary by the guy who programmed this. His chapter on it is, I think, the definitive write-up, but this is a decent summary. Your last sentence is maybe misleading, though - the problem was found on the ground independently twice before the flight. I'll write a supplemental answer on that.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 19:54
$begingroup$
I think a few details around that go as follows: During training and simulation, the LM rendezvous radar was switched off because it wasn't needed. However, during the Apollo 11 lunar descent, the radar was switched on because the crew thought it to be a wise precaution in case of an abort - a deviation from checklisted and practiced procedures.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:00
1
$begingroup$
@AnthonyX according to Eyles (LEM guidance programmer) the crew was following the checklist.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
@OrganicMarble I'll have to see if I can find my source... maybe wasn't a reliable one.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
It's a common misconception - the Eyles book lists the common misconceptions and goes through each one.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:38
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
What happened:
With just seven and a half minutes remaining before they were set to touch down on the moon, Armstrong and Aldrin reported a program alarm. "It's a 1202."
The 1202 alarm indicated that the guidance computer was being overloaded with tasks. It was having trouble completing its work in the cycling time available.
"We looked down at the list at that alarm, and, yes, right, if it doesn't reoccur too often, we're fine," reported Garman.
Give us a reading on the 1202 program alarm," Armstrong radioed, with a bit more urgency in his voice.
"We're go on that, Flight," Bales advised Kranz. Before the flight director could respond, capcom Charlie Duke relayed the news to the crew, "We're 'Go' on that alarm."
The alarms were not over, though. Less than minute later, there was another 1202 alarm, followed by three more — a 1201 and two 1202 alarms — in under 40 seconds.
"When it occurred again [it was] a different alarm but it was the same type," Garman recounted. "I remember distinctly yelling — by this time yelling, you know, in the loop here — "Same type!" and [Bale] yells "Same type!" I could hear my voice echoing. Then [Duke] says, "Same type!"
The cause:
So what was happening during Apollo 11, as I recall, was that repeated jobs to process rendezvous radar data (that of course were not really there) were scheduled because a misconfiguration of the radar switches. Thus, the core sets got filled up and a 1202 alarm was generated. The 1201 that came later in the landing was because the scheduling request that caused the actual overflow was one that had requested a VAC area.
What happened next in either case was what you described as, 'The computer has been programmed to recognize this data as being of secondary importance and will ignore it while it does more important computations.'
On Apollo 11, each time a 1201 or 1202 alarm appeared, the computer rebooted, restarted the important stuff, like steering the descent engine and running the DSKY to let the crew know what was going on, but did not restart all the erroneously-scheduled rendezvous radar jobs.
Root cause:
So what happened? Crossed wires. During the design of the guidance computer at MIT’s Instrumentation laboratory, Buzz Aldrin wanted the computer to be able to simultaneously handle radar data from the lunar surface and the Apollo Command and Service Modules in lunar orbit, just in case Apollo 11 needed to abort the landing and rendezvous with the CSM. Despite discussions, the added capability was never built into the system, to Aldrin’s surprise on July 20th. (Simulations had never fully tested the feature and failed to reveal its absence.)
$endgroup$
What happened:
With just seven and a half minutes remaining before they were set to touch down on the moon, Armstrong and Aldrin reported a program alarm. "It's a 1202."
The 1202 alarm indicated that the guidance computer was being overloaded with tasks. It was having trouble completing its work in the cycling time available.
"We looked down at the list at that alarm, and, yes, right, if it doesn't reoccur too often, we're fine," reported Garman.
Give us a reading on the 1202 program alarm," Armstrong radioed, with a bit more urgency in his voice.
"We're go on that, Flight," Bales advised Kranz. Before the flight director could respond, capcom Charlie Duke relayed the news to the crew, "We're 'Go' on that alarm."
The alarms were not over, though. Less than minute later, there was another 1202 alarm, followed by three more — a 1201 and two 1202 alarms — in under 40 seconds.
"When it occurred again [it was] a different alarm but it was the same type," Garman recounted. "I remember distinctly yelling — by this time yelling, you know, in the loop here — "Same type!" and [Bale] yells "Same type!" I could hear my voice echoing. Then [Duke] says, "Same type!"
The cause:
So what was happening during Apollo 11, as I recall, was that repeated jobs to process rendezvous radar data (that of course were not really there) were scheduled because a misconfiguration of the radar switches. Thus, the core sets got filled up and a 1202 alarm was generated. The 1201 that came later in the landing was because the scheduling request that caused the actual overflow was one that had requested a VAC area.
What happened next in either case was what you described as, 'The computer has been programmed to recognize this data as being of secondary importance and will ignore it while it does more important computations.'
On Apollo 11, each time a 1201 or 1202 alarm appeared, the computer rebooted, restarted the important stuff, like steering the descent engine and running the DSKY to let the crew know what was going on, but did not restart all the erroneously-scheduled rendezvous radar jobs.
Root cause:
So what happened? Crossed wires. During the design of the guidance computer at MIT’s Instrumentation laboratory, Buzz Aldrin wanted the computer to be able to simultaneously handle radar data from the lunar surface and the Apollo Command and Service Modules in lunar orbit, just in case Apollo 11 needed to abort the landing and rendezvous with the CSM. Despite discussions, the added capability was never built into the system, to Aldrin’s surprise on July 20th. (Simulations had never fully tested the feature and failed to reveal its absence.)
answered Jul 16 at 19:47
HobbesHobbes
108k2 gold badges317 silver badges481 bronze badges
108k2 gold badges317 silver badges481 bronze badges
3
$begingroup$
I just read Sunburst and Luminary by the guy who programmed this. His chapter on it is, I think, the definitive write-up, but this is a decent summary. Your last sentence is maybe misleading, though - the problem was found on the ground independently twice before the flight. I'll write a supplemental answer on that.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 19:54
$begingroup$
I think a few details around that go as follows: During training and simulation, the LM rendezvous radar was switched off because it wasn't needed. However, during the Apollo 11 lunar descent, the radar was switched on because the crew thought it to be a wise precaution in case of an abort - a deviation from checklisted and practiced procedures.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:00
1
$begingroup$
@AnthonyX according to Eyles (LEM guidance programmer) the crew was following the checklist.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
@OrganicMarble I'll have to see if I can find my source... maybe wasn't a reliable one.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
It's a common misconception - the Eyles book lists the common misconceptions and goes through each one.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:38
add a comment
|
3
$begingroup$
I just read Sunburst and Luminary by the guy who programmed this. His chapter on it is, I think, the definitive write-up, but this is a decent summary. Your last sentence is maybe misleading, though - the problem was found on the ground independently twice before the flight. I'll write a supplemental answer on that.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 19:54
$begingroup$
I think a few details around that go as follows: During training and simulation, the LM rendezvous radar was switched off because it wasn't needed. However, during the Apollo 11 lunar descent, the radar was switched on because the crew thought it to be a wise precaution in case of an abort - a deviation from checklisted and practiced procedures.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:00
1
$begingroup$
@AnthonyX according to Eyles (LEM guidance programmer) the crew was following the checklist.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
@OrganicMarble I'll have to see if I can find my source... maybe wasn't a reliable one.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
It's a common misconception - the Eyles book lists the common misconceptions and goes through each one.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:38
3
3
$begingroup$
I just read Sunburst and Luminary by the guy who programmed this. His chapter on it is, I think, the definitive write-up, but this is a decent summary. Your last sentence is maybe misleading, though - the problem was found on the ground independently twice before the flight. I'll write a supplemental answer on that.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 19:54
$begingroup$
I just read Sunburst and Luminary by the guy who programmed this. His chapter on it is, I think, the definitive write-up, but this is a decent summary. Your last sentence is maybe misleading, though - the problem was found on the ground independently twice before the flight. I'll write a supplemental answer on that.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 19:54
$begingroup$
I think a few details around that go as follows: During training and simulation, the LM rendezvous radar was switched off because it wasn't needed. However, during the Apollo 11 lunar descent, the radar was switched on because the crew thought it to be a wise precaution in case of an abort - a deviation from checklisted and practiced procedures.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:00
$begingroup$
I think a few details around that go as follows: During training and simulation, the LM rendezvous radar was switched off because it wasn't needed. However, during the Apollo 11 lunar descent, the radar was switched on because the crew thought it to be a wise precaution in case of an abort - a deviation from checklisted and practiced procedures.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:00
1
1
$begingroup$
@AnthonyX according to Eyles (LEM guidance programmer) the crew was following the checklist.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
@AnthonyX according to Eyles (LEM guidance programmer) the crew was following the checklist.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
@OrganicMarble I'll have to see if I can find my source... maybe wasn't a reliable one.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
@OrganicMarble I'll have to see if I can find my source... maybe wasn't a reliable one.
$endgroup$
– Anthony X
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
It's a common misconception - the Eyles book lists the common misconceptions and goes through each one.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:38
$begingroup$
It's a common misconception - the Eyles book lists the common misconceptions and goes through each one.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:38
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Supplementary answer (these answers cover it well, but there are a few other things of interest):
For anyone interested in the details of this issue, the book Sunburst and Luminary by Don Eyles has, I think the definitive treatment. Eyles was the LEM descent guidance software programmer!
Eyles explains that the problem was actually found on the ground twice, independently.
The first time was by Grumman running tests at Bethpage on LM-3 in May 1968.
The report correctly diagnosed the problem but then, instead of
proposing a fix, dismissed the issue with the breathtaking
rationalization that the rendezvous radar switch would only ever be in
SLEW or AUTO if the PGNCS had failed - oblivious to the fact that this
unguarded switch had the potential to cause the PGNCS to fail, as it
almost did on Apollo 11.
(S&L, page 168)
The second time was by George Silver, an MIT employee stationed at KSC.
George Silver identified the rendezvous radar interface problem at
Cape Canaveral a month or two after Grumman discovered it in Bethpage.
He wrote up the problem....and devised a solution that required a
small hardware change.....We can only fault Silver for not making a
bigger stink. He might not have gained approval for his fix, but a
larger group would have known about the problem....
(S&L, page 169)
The crew had the radar configured per the checklist, but the checklist had been updated very shortly before flight and therefore had not been exercised very much in training.
The baseline circa 1965 was to have RR on, mode in LGC, and tracking
the CSM during the descent. At some point...the plan became RR off,
mode in LGC...in June 1969...the plan became RR on with mode in AUTO
or SLEW.
(S&L, page 167)
Explanation of the radar mode switch:
The mode switch had three positions: LGC, AUTO, and SLEW.
- LGC (LEM Guidance Computer) - the antenna angle resolvers used as their reference signal an
800-Hz signal from the PGNCS and therefore the data made sense to
the guidance computer - SLEW - Manual slew mode. The 800-Hz reference signal came from LEM
hardware - AUTO TRACK - Antenna tracks an acquired target. The 800-Hz reference
signal came from LEM
hardware
(Image from Apollo Operations Handbook - Lunar Module - LM10 and subsequent - Volume 1)
If the switch was not in LGC and the radar was on, the LGC could have problems processing the data depending on the phase relationship between the two 800 Hz signals, and this relationship was completely random, determined by when the LGC was powered on. The hardware fix proposed by Silver would have synchronized the two signals, eliminating the problem.
(Condensed from S&L pages 159-160)
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Supplementary answer (these answers cover it well, but there are a few other things of interest):
For anyone interested in the details of this issue, the book Sunburst and Luminary by Don Eyles has, I think the definitive treatment. Eyles was the LEM descent guidance software programmer!
Eyles explains that the problem was actually found on the ground twice, independently.
The first time was by Grumman running tests at Bethpage on LM-3 in May 1968.
The report correctly diagnosed the problem but then, instead of
proposing a fix, dismissed the issue with the breathtaking
rationalization that the rendezvous radar switch would only ever be in
SLEW or AUTO if the PGNCS had failed - oblivious to the fact that this
unguarded switch had the potential to cause the PGNCS to fail, as it
almost did on Apollo 11.
(S&L, page 168)
The second time was by George Silver, an MIT employee stationed at KSC.
George Silver identified the rendezvous radar interface problem at
Cape Canaveral a month or two after Grumman discovered it in Bethpage.
He wrote up the problem....and devised a solution that required a
small hardware change.....We can only fault Silver for not making a
bigger stink. He might not have gained approval for his fix, but a
larger group would have known about the problem....
(S&L, page 169)
The crew had the radar configured per the checklist, but the checklist had been updated very shortly before flight and therefore had not been exercised very much in training.
The baseline circa 1965 was to have RR on, mode in LGC, and tracking
the CSM during the descent. At some point...the plan became RR off,
mode in LGC...in June 1969...the plan became RR on with mode in AUTO
or SLEW.
(S&L, page 167)
Explanation of the radar mode switch:
The mode switch had three positions: LGC, AUTO, and SLEW.
- LGC (LEM Guidance Computer) - the antenna angle resolvers used as their reference signal an
800-Hz signal from the PGNCS and therefore the data made sense to
the guidance computer - SLEW - Manual slew mode. The 800-Hz reference signal came from LEM
hardware - AUTO TRACK - Antenna tracks an acquired target. The 800-Hz reference
signal came from LEM
hardware
(Image from Apollo Operations Handbook - Lunar Module - LM10 and subsequent - Volume 1)
If the switch was not in LGC and the radar was on, the LGC could have problems processing the data depending on the phase relationship between the two 800 Hz signals, and this relationship was completely random, determined by when the LGC was powered on. The hardware fix proposed by Silver would have synchronized the two signals, eliminating the problem.
(Condensed from S&L pages 159-160)
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Supplementary answer (these answers cover it well, but there are a few other things of interest):
For anyone interested in the details of this issue, the book Sunburst and Luminary by Don Eyles has, I think the definitive treatment. Eyles was the LEM descent guidance software programmer!
Eyles explains that the problem was actually found on the ground twice, independently.
The first time was by Grumman running tests at Bethpage on LM-3 in May 1968.
The report correctly diagnosed the problem but then, instead of
proposing a fix, dismissed the issue with the breathtaking
rationalization that the rendezvous radar switch would only ever be in
SLEW or AUTO if the PGNCS had failed - oblivious to the fact that this
unguarded switch had the potential to cause the PGNCS to fail, as it
almost did on Apollo 11.
(S&L, page 168)
The second time was by George Silver, an MIT employee stationed at KSC.
George Silver identified the rendezvous radar interface problem at
Cape Canaveral a month or two after Grumman discovered it in Bethpage.
He wrote up the problem....and devised a solution that required a
small hardware change.....We can only fault Silver for not making a
bigger stink. He might not have gained approval for his fix, but a
larger group would have known about the problem....
(S&L, page 169)
The crew had the radar configured per the checklist, but the checklist had been updated very shortly before flight and therefore had not been exercised very much in training.
The baseline circa 1965 was to have RR on, mode in LGC, and tracking
the CSM during the descent. At some point...the plan became RR off,
mode in LGC...in June 1969...the plan became RR on with mode in AUTO
or SLEW.
(S&L, page 167)
Explanation of the radar mode switch:
The mode switch had three positions: LGC, AUTO, and SLEW.
- LGC (LEM Guidance Computer) - the antenna angle resolvers used as their reference signal an
800-Hz signal from the PGNCS and therefore the data made sense to
the guidance computer - SLEW - Manual slew mode. The 800-Hz reference signal came from LEM
hardware - AUTO TRACK - Antenna tracks an acquired target. The 800-Hz reference
signal came from LEM
hardware
(Image from Apollo Operations Handbook - Lunar Module - LM10 and subsequent - Volume 1)
If the switch was not in LGC and the radar was on, the LGC could have problems processing the data depending on the phase relationship between the two 800 Hz signals, and this relationship was completely random, determined by when the LGC was powered on. The hardware fix proposed by Silver would have synchronized the two signals, eliminating the problem.
(Condensed from S&L pages 159-160)
$endgroup$
Supplementary answer (these answers cover it well, but there are a few other things of interest):
For anyone interested in the details of this issue, the book Sunburst and Luminary by Don Eyles has, I think the definitive treatment. Eyles was the LEM descent guidance software programmer!
Eyles explains that the problem was actually found on the ground twice, independently.
The first time was by Grumman running tests at Bethpage on LM-3 in May 1968.
The report correctly diagnosed the problem but then, instead of
proposing a fix, dismissed the issue with the breathtaking
rationalization that the rendezvous radar switch would only ever be in
SLEW or AUTO if the PGNCS had failed - oblivious to the fact that this
unguarded switch had the potential to cause the PGNCS to fail, as it
almost did on Apollo 11.
(S&L, page 168)
The second time was by George Silver, an MIT employee stationed at KSC.
George Silver identified the rendezvous radar interface problem at
Cape Canaveral a month or two after Grumman discovered it in Bethpage.
He wrote up the problem....and devised a solution that required a
small hardware change.....We can only fault Silver for not making a
bigger stink. He might not have gained approval for his fix, but a
larger group would have known about the problem....
(S&L, page 169)
The crew had the radar configured per the checklist, but the checklist had been updated very shortly before flight and therefore had not been exercised very much in training.
The baseline circa 1965 was to have RR on, mode in LGC, and tracking
the CSM during the descent. At some point...the plan became RR off,
mode in LGC...in June 1969...the plan became RR on with mode in AUTO
or SLEW.
(S&L, page 167)
Explanation of the radar mode switch:
The mode switch had three positions: LGC, AUTO, and SLEW.
- LGC (LEM Guidance Computer) - the antenna angle resolvers used as their reference signal an
800-Hz signal from the PGNCS and therefore the data made sense to
the guidance computer - SLEW - Manual slew mode. The 800-Hz reference signal came from LEM
hardware - AUTO TRACK - Antenna tracks an acquired target. The 800-Hz reference
signal came from LEM
hardware
(Image from Apollo Operations Handbook - Lunar Module - LM10 and subsequent - Volume 1)
If the switch was not in LGC and the radar was on, the LGC could have problems processing the data depending on the phase relationship between the two 800 Hz signals, and this relationship was completely random, determined by when the LGC was powered on. The hardware fix proposed by Silver would have synchronized the two signals, eliminating the problem.
(Condensed from S&L pages 159-160)
edited Jul 17 at 16:29
answered Jul 16 at 20:06
Organic MarbleOrganic Marble
85.2k4 gold badges265 silver badges370 bronze badges
85.2k4 gold badges265 silver badges370 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Addressing the "problems with some button" part of the question. Following is a quotation from a news source.
“It's generally been reported that when Armstrong returned the lunar module after the moon walk, his backpack broke a circuit breaker switch," said the source, an employee of North American Aviation who is one of the last to see Apollo astronauts before they are locked in their spacecraft.
“When that happened, it knocked out the normal ascent sequence firing
program.”
Fortunately, Aldrin used a pen on the broken part of the switch to get
it to work.
“But if he hadn't been able to, that would have thrown the whole ball
of wax over to the abort guidance sequence," the story continued.
“And unless he could have activated it, there is no back-up for it– they would have had real problems. The only hope would have been the 16 little jets on the reaction control system. And I doubt if that could have taken them back to the command module.”
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I didn't get about "ball of wax", could you explain?
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:37
5
$begingroup$
@RS "the whole ball of wax" is an American colloquial expression meaning "everything" - emphatically. grammarist.com/idiom/whole-ball-of-wax
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:39
2
$begingroup$
@Fred I mean this button (before the walk): youtu.be/XtnIfu1qkoM?t=100
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 21:28
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Addressing the "problems with some button" part of the question. Following is a quotation from a news source.
“It's generally been reported that when Armstrong returned the lunar module after the moon walk, his backpack broke a circuit breaker switch," said the source, an employee of North American Aviation who is one of the last to see Apollo astronauts before they are locked in their spacecraft.
“When that happened, it knocked out the normal ascent sequence firing
program.”
Fortunately, Aldrin used a pen on the broken part of the switch to get
it to work.
“But if he hadn't been able to, that would have thrown the whole ball
of wax over to the abort guidance sequence," the story continued.
“And unless he could have activated it, there is no back-up for it– they would have had real problems. The only hope would have been the 16 little jets on the reaction control system. And I doubt if that could have taken them back to the command module.”
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I didn't get about "ball of wax", could you explain?
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:37
5
$begingroup$
@RS "the whole ball of wax" is an American colloquial expression meaning "everything" - emphatically. grammarist.com/idiom/whole-ball-of-wax
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:39
2
$begingroup$
@Fred I mean this button (before the walk): youtu.be/XtnIfu1qkoM?t=100
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 21:28
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Addressing the "problems with some button" part of the question. Following is a quotation from a news source.
“It's generally been reported that when Armstrong returned the lunar module after the moon walk, his backpack broke a circuit breaker switch," said the source, an employee of North American Aviation who is one of the last to see Apollo astronauts before they are locked in their spacecraft.
“When that happened, it knocked out the normal ascent sequence firing
program.”
Fortunately, Aldrin used a pen on the broken part of the switch to get
it to work.
“But if he hadn't been able to, that would have thrown the whole ball
of wax over to the abort guidance sequence," the story continued.
“And unless he could have activated it, there is no back-up for it– they would have had real problems. The only hope would have been the 16 little jets on the reaction control system. And I doubt if that could have taken them back to the command module.”
$endgroup$
Addressing the "problems with some button" part of the question. Following is a quotation from a news source.
“It's generally been reported that when Armstrong returned the lunar module after the moon walk, his backpack broke a circuit breaker switch," said the source, an employee of North American Aviation who is one of the last to see Apollo astronauts before they are locked in their spacecraft.
“When that happened, it knocked out the normal ascent sequence firing
program.”
Fortunately, Aldrin used a pen on the broken part of the switch to get
it to work.
“But if he hadn't been able to, that would have thrown the whole ball
of wax over to the abort guidance sequence," the story continued.
“And unless he could have activated it, there is no back-up for it– they would have had real problems. The only hope would have been the 16 little jets on the reaction control system. And I doubt if that could have taken them back to the command module.”
answered Jul 16 at 20:03
FredFred
3,2052 gold badges9 silver badges28 bronze badges
3,2052 gold badges9 silver badges28 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
I didn't get about "ball of wax", could you explain?
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:37
5
$begingroup$
@RS "the whole ball of wax" is an American colloquial expression meaning "everything" - emphatically. grammarist.com/idiom/whole-ball-of-wax
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:39
2
$begingroup$
@Fred I mean this button (before the walk): youtu.be/XtnIfu1qkoM?t=100
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 21:28
add a comment
|
1
$begingroup$
I didn't get about "ball of wax", could you explain?
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:37
5
$begingroup$
@RS "the whole ball of wax" is an American colloquial expression meaning "everything" - emphatically. grammarist.com/idiom/whole-ball-of-wax
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:39
2
$begingroup$
@Fred I mean this button (before the walk): youtu.be/XtnIfu1qkoM?t=100
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 21:28
1
1
$begingroup$
I didn't get about "ball of wax", could you explain?
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:37
$begingroup$
I didn't get about "ball of wax", could you explain?
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:37
5
5
$begingroup$
@RS "the whole ball of wax" is an American colloquial expression meaning "everything" - emphatically. grammarist.com/idiom/whole-ball-of-wax
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:39
$begingroup$
@RS "the whole ball of wax" is an American colloquial expression meaning "everything" - emphatically. grammarist.com/idiom/whole-ball-of-wax
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 20:39
2
2
$begingroup$
@Fred I mean this button (before the walk): youtu.be/XtnIfu1qkoM?t=100
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 21:28
$begingroup$
@Fred I mean this button (before the walk): youtu.be/XtnIfu1qkoM?t=100
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 21:28
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Regarding the "button" problem you were pointing to more precisely in another comment:
According to the Apollo 11 Journal, around the 102:03:35 mark and before, it seems related to the CWEA switch (Caution and Warning Electronics Assembly)
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Regarding the "button" problem you were pointing to more precisely in another comment:
According to the Apollo 11 Journal, around the 102:03:35 mark and before, it seems related to the CWEA switch (Caution and Warning Electronics Assembly)
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Regarding the "button" problem you were pointing to more precisely in another comment:
According to the Apollo 11 Journal, around the 102:03:35 mark and before, it seems related to the CWEA switch (Caution and Warning Electronics Assembly)
$endgroup$
Regarding the "button" problem you were pointing to more precisely in another comment:
According to the Apollo 11 Journal, around the 102:03:35 mark and before, it seems related to the CWEA switch (Caution and Warning Electronics Assembly)
edited Jul 18 at 12:20
answered Jul 18 at 11:29
WizouWizou
112 bronze badges
112 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f37368%2fwhat-were-the-problems-on-the-apollo-11-lunar-module%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
13
$begingroup$
I guess we're overdue for a canonical answer about the 1202.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Jul 16 at 19:45
$begingroup$
@Russel Borogove not only 1202, but also about some black button (during moon landing).
$endgroup$
– R S
Jul 16 at 20:44
1
$begingroup$
@RS I'm not much on watching videos.
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Jul 16 at 21:04
2
$begingroup$
@RS - since the movie clip you reference starts (with "we should tell them ...") just before they are "GO for powered descent", perhaps it is related to the real Aldrin saying, one minute earlier than the 'GO', "And, Houston, we got a 500 alarm early in the program."
$endgroup$
– amI
Jul 17 at 4:23
3
$begingroup$
The incident in the video does not show up in the voice transcript: apollo11.spacelog.org/phases/5
$endgroup$
– Hobbes
Jul 17 at 16:43