July 20, 2004
Geek Cool:
Before there were computer simulators for training...
By Jack Grant...we still managed to land on the moon.
Here is one of the ways NASA overcame the difficulties presented by the last 300 feet to the moon.
One of my earliest memories is watching a fuzzy picture on the TV in the living room, a man in a bulky white space suit walking on the surface of the moon. It is one memory I hope I never lose.
It was thirty-five years ago:
On July 16, Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins climbed into the Apollo. The unit's Saturn V rocket, equipped with the most powerful engines ever built, blasted them into space.Their trajectory took them around Earth and toward the moon when a third-stage rocket fired. Two modules -- the Eagle, for landing, and the Columbia, a command and service center -- entered the moon's orbit July 19.
A day later, Armstrong navigated a course that included a potentially deadly crater and boulder field before successfully touching down in flat terrain.
"Houston, Tranquility Base here," he said. "The Eagle has landed."
Armstrong, soon joined by Aldrin, spent 21 hours on the lunar surface. The two sampled rocks, surveyed terrain, set up experiments and famously planted an American flag in the soil. A plaque they left read: "Here men from the planet Earth first set foot upon the Moon. July 1969 AD. We came in peace for all mankind."
The pair then re-entered the Eagle, reuniting with Collins and the Columbia module before returning home by splashing down in the Pacific Ocean.
Within six months, the United States had landed a second team of astronauts on the moon. For the next three years, at six-month intervals, NASA sent more manned missions to the moon. The sixth and final one, Apollo 17, left the moon December 14, 1972 -- the last time humans set foot on another celestial body.
There is something that is often forgotten in the memories of that success:
Apollo 11, and the six subsequent lunar missions (except for Apollo 13, during which U.S. astronauts averted disaster but returned home without setting foot on the moon), marked a stunning climax after years of tribulations and smaller successes.The U.S. space program, under the Pioneer and Ranger missions, made repeated attempts to hurl a satellite toward the moon starting in 1958. The first 10 U.S. robotic missions to the moon failed due to booster rocket misfires, faulty computers and other malfunctions.
On July 28, 1964, Ranger 7 finally succeeded. The craft beamed 4,316 images back to Earth before crashing on the lunar surface. More fly-bys and reconnaissance missions followed, paving the way for Apollo 11.
We are too easily deterred now. If the same risk-averse culture existed then as over-rides all now, we would never have landed on the moon during that wonderful July in 1969. Posted by Jack Grant at 12:14 on 20 July 2004
"Simulators also played a major role in training astronauts. The Apollo Mission Simulator allowed astronauts to simulate the operation of what was then the most sophisticated vehicle ever built, the Apollo spacecraft. In the late 1970s, Link also developed a Space Shuttle Mission Simulator that simulated launch and landing of the Shuttle."
Full context here.
I also highly recommend Gene Kranz's book, Failure Is Not An Option.
Bottom line... there were some computers running simulations to train the astronauts, Jack. Though I take your point otherwise!
Posted by: John of Argghhh! at July 23, 2004 09:23 PMYes, it's a bit of an exaggeration to say "before there were computer simulators for training", but what they used then wouldn't even be thought of as a "real" computer now by those who never had to learn to program on punch cards as I did. The computer I'm using to write this has over 1000 times (if not more) the computing power of the computers used to navigate the Apollo missions, and an "average" computer now can run a simulation of a lunar landing with full texture mapping without breaking a sweat! This is why I find the current state of NASA so unforgivable. I work with computer simulations every day on complex problems, and NASA should not be having the problems they seem to be having in replacing the shuttles.
Sigh...
Things weren't necessarily simpler during the heyday of Apollo, but they certainly seemed more focused.
Posted by: Jack at July 24, 2004 03:14 PMI'll give ya that, bro - I'll give ya that.
Of course, I spend my day working with a sim that isn't object-oriented code. While I'm not doing any of the coding (thank heaven) I'm continually being thwarted by the way the thing interconnects module to module - and how the documentation is so poorly/not done that tracking effects is like pulling on a noodle in a plate of cooked spaghetti - pull on this end, and it moves way the heck over there in a seemingly unrelated area!
But you are correct - they got to the damn moon and back, why can't they build a damn new shuttle.
Posted by: John of Argghhh! at July 24, 2004 04:20 PM





