A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Apollo 13 LM upper stage.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 27th 11, 05:54 AM posted to sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,516
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM re entry

was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?

obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good

I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?
  #2  
Old February 27th 11, 10:33 PM posted to sci.space.history
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,516
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

On Feb 26, 11:54*pm, " wrote:
on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM * re entry

was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?

obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good

I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


bump.

I would assume the LMs upper stage was fully fueled when it burned up
at time of re entry? since the upper stage was still attached to the
descent part.

  #3  
Old February 27th 11, 11:36 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

On Feb 26, 8:54*pm, " wrote:
on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM * re entry

was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?

obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good

I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


Perhaps they needed to further destroy evidence of their not having
actually walked on our physically dark and naked moon, that which
offered at least as much radiation dosage as the worse (22.8 rads/hr)
of those Van Allen belt badlands, which they had to encounter at least
twice.

Of course, even if they had to spend a total of one hour within the
Van Allen hot-seat going to/from our moon is still very survivable.
Oddly, none of all that Kodak film ever recorded a single gamma or X-
ray hit for each and every mission. (is that beginners dumb luck, or
what?)

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #4  
Old February 28th 11, 07:13 PM posted to sci.space.history
ATControlr[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

On Feb 27, 5:36*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Feb 26, 8:54*pm, " wrote:

on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM * re entry


was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?


obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good


I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..


that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


Perhaps they needed to further destroy evidence of their not having
actually walked on our physically dark and naked moon, that which
offered at least as much radiation dosage as the worse (22.8 rads/hr)
of those Van Allen belt badlands, which they had to encounter at least
twice.

Of course, even if they had to spend a total of one hour within the
Van Allen hot-seat going to/from our moon is still very survivable.
Oddly, none of all that Kodak film ever recorded a single gamma or X-
ray hit for each and every mission. (is that beginners dumb luck, or
what?)

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”


You're an idiot.
  #5  
Old February 28th 11, 08:37 PM posted to sci.space.history
The Mighty TB[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:54 pm, wrote:
on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM re entry

was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?

obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good

I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


bump.

I would assume the LMs upper stage was fully fueled when it burned up
at time of re entry? since the upper stage was still attached to the
descent part.


The Lunar Module Ascent Stage was left attached to the Descent Stage when it was undocked from the Command Module. There was no need whatsoever to go through the trouble of seperating the two stages of the LM either before or after undocking from the CM - at that point of the mission in the last couple hours before re-entry, they were operating under a very tight schedule with no time to spare. If I recall, the LM was jettisoned just over an hour before re-entry in Earth's atmosphere of the CM.

Also, understand that during the flight after the explosion, it really wasn't a feasible option to seperate the Descent Stage to use the Acsent Stage engine if say, they needed to make another burn and didn't have enough fuel left in the Descent Stage. The Ascent Stage engine was a single use/burn design, with no throttle option - basically like a solid rocket motor. That engine was basically designed to be as simple and failure-proof as possible to insure the least liklihood of trouble getting the LM off the Moon and back to the CSM. Also, dropping the Descent Stage would further limit batteries and other consumables to just what the Ascent Stage had to offer to get the 3 astronauts back to Earth.

Lastly, there was no possible way to return a LM to Earth. It had no heat shield, and would (and did) burn up upon re-entry, just like Apollo 9's LM (an Earth orbit mission) did. You couldn't even get it in a Shuttle cargo bay (if it had somehow been left in Earth Orbit 'til the late 80's when a Shuttle would be available).

T.B.
  #6  
Old February 28th 11, 08:38 PM posted to sci.space.history
The Mighty TB[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

Brad Guth wrote:

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


Perhaps they needed to further destroy evidence of their not having
actually walked on our physically dark and naked moon, that which
offered at least as much radiation dosage as the worse (22.8 rads/hr)
of those Van Allen belt badlands, which they had to encounter at least
twice.

Of course, even if they had to spend a total of one hour within the
Van Allen hot-seat going to/from our moon is still very survivable.
Oddly, none of all that Kodak film ever recorded a single gamma or X-
ray hit for each and every mission. (is that beginners dumb luck, or
what?)

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”



Increase the meds, buddy. Your current dosage ain't cutting it.

T.B.
  #7  
Old February 28th 11, 09:47 PM posted to sci.space.history
Ken S. Tucker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 740
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

On Feb 26, 8:54 pm, " wrote:
on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM re entry

was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?

obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good

I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


Duh...Who would you get to drive it?
It was challenging enough to have the LM thrust the CSM load,
something it was never designed for, or spec'd for, but Grumman
put enough balls into the upper-LM stage to do it! Think about the
different 'structural' load with that unit pushing the CSM.
IOW's 'the warranty expired'.
Lot's of fast genious in that misssion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~Ken
  #8  
Old March 1st 11, 12:17 AM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

On Feb 26, 8:54*pm, " wrote:
on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM * re entry

was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?

obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good

I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


Notice how these typical damage-control jokers still have so much to
fear, and to hide.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
  #9  
Old March 1st 11, 04:51 AM posted to sci.space.history
Jorge R. Frank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,089
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

On 02/28/2011 01:37 PM, The Mighty TB wrote:
wrote:

On Feb 26, 11:54 pm, wrote:
on the way back to earth the LM was detached left to burn up..... just
before CM re entry

was there enough fuel in the upper stage to send the LMs upper stage
into heliospheric orbt?

obviiously this wasnt a good idea, the goal was to save the astronauts
lives. more workload wouldnt be good

I watched a show on apollo 13 today and jim lovell said they would of
prefered to save the LM but it was impossible..

that got me wondering maybe it was possible but just not worth the
effort?


bump.

I would assume the LMs upper stage was fully fueled when it burned up
at time of re entry? since the upper stage was still attached to the
descent part.


The Lunar Module Ascent Stage was left attached to the Descent Stage
when it was undocked from the Command Module. There was no need
whatsoever to go through the trouble of seperating the two stages of the
LM either before or after undocking from the CM - at that point of the
mission in the last couple hours before re-entry, they were operating
under a very tight schedule with no time to spare. If I recall, the LM
was jettisoned just over an hour before re-entry in Earth's atmosphere
of the CM.

Also, understand that during the flight after the explosion, it really
wasn't a feasible option to seperate the Descent Stage to use the Acsent
Stage engine if say, they needed to make another burn and didn't have
enough fuel left in the Descent Stage. The Ascent Stage engine was a
single use/burn design, with no throttle option - basically like a solid
rocket motor. That engine was basically designed to be as simple and
failure-proof as possible to insure the least liklihood of trouble
getting the LM off the Moon and back to the CSM.


Most of what you wrote was accurate but this part was not. The LM ascent
stage was good for multiple starts. On Apollo 14-17 it was used for the
TPI burn after powered ascent, and on previous flights was planned to be
used for large rendezvous burns in the event of an abort from powered
descent.
  #10  
Old March 1st 11, 12:31 PM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Apollo 13 LM upper stage.

On 2/28/2011 12:47 PM, Ken S. Tucker wrote:
It was challenging enough to have the LM thrust the CSM load,
something it was never designed for, or spec'd for, but Grumman
put enough balls into the upper-LM stage to do it!


It also had to sustain heavy loads on the docking collar then the CSM
braked itself and the LM into lunar orbit.

Pat



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The X-33 as the upper stage of a two-stage-to-orbit system. Robert Clark Policy 4 September 12th 09 03:51 AM
Technically could the LM upper stage engines [email protected] History 7 July 29th 09 02:21 AM
The ESC-A upper stage is readied for launch Jacques van Oene News 0 February 1st 05 07:07 PM
CEV combined with upper stage? Pete Lynn Policy 5 September 21st 04 11:55 PM
Upper stage engines Grrrbau Technology 4 November 30th 03 11:56 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.