Naval Aviators

On Jan 24, 7:37*pm, wrote:
Is there really anything in common with flying an airplane and an LM?
Terry
PPL ( and aspiring astronaut)

Try your luck. They got Eugene Cernan to give it a go:

http://eaglelander3d.com/

thanks sock, this looks way cool, only 17 hrs to go to finish
downloading!

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:33:39 -0800 (PST), terry wrote:

If the commanders flew the LMs why was the second guy always called
the LM pilot?

The Shuttle carries the same system...person in the left seat is the Commander,
the one in the right seat is the Pilot.

Is there really anything in common with flying an airplane and an LM?

Next to nothing, I think, but pilots must develop good hand-eye coordination,
quickly interpret instruments, and are accustomed to their physical attitude
changing in response to their movement of controls. Probably a good start, when
looking for an LM driver.

Ron Wanttaja

On Jan 24, 12:27*am, wrote:
Harrison Schmitt ( Apollo 17 Lunar module pilot) was a civillian but
to what extent did he help fly the LM?
Is there really anything in common with flying an airplane and an LM?
Terry
PPL ( and aspiring astronaut)

Check out the NASA footage of the practice LMs being flown.

Here's a link I found to some posts about flying the thing -- of
course it is the Internet so, maybe complete BS.

http://yarchive.net/space/apollo/lun...e_landing.html

Today, scientist look back at the moon landings and are still in shock
that no one ever died. Back then no one really realized the extent to
which they got lucky many times on the Apollo missions. During
practice with the LM teethered the pilots often would lose control. In
addition, the assent rocket on the LM only worked 6 out of 10 times.

-Robert

On Jan 25, 2:30*am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Jan 24, 12:27*am, wrote:

Harrison Schmitt ( Apollo 17 Lunar module pilot) was a civillian but
to what extent did he help fly the LM?
Is there really anything in common with flying an airplane and an LM?
Terry
PPL ( and aspiring astronaut)

Check out the NASA footage of the practice LMs being flown.

Here's a link I found to some posts about flying the thing -- of
course it is the Internet so, maybe complete BS.

http://yarchive.net/space/apollo/lun...e_landing.html

Today, scientist look back at the moon landings and are still in shock
that no one ever died. Back then no one really realized the extent to
which they got lucky many times on the Apollo missions. During
practice with the LM teethered the pilots often would lose control. In
addition, the assent rocket on the LM only worked 6 out of 10 times.

yes it was a very risky endeavour to be sure, but the LM was probably
the most reliable part of the whole system. I dont recall any tethered
flights with the LM , I dont think it had enough thrust to fly in
earths gravity. they did make some wierd contraption, which they
called the" flying bedstead" that tried to simulate the LM on earth.
Armstrong nearly killed himself in it. I dont know where you got the
6 out of 10 engine failure stat from, the LM ascent engine
reliability was something that was given a hell of a lot of attention,
NASA realizing the public relations disaster of leaving astronauts
stranded on the moon. I do not believe they would have accepted a 6
out of 10 failure rate. the engine itself was of hypergolic design,
nitrogen tetroxide and hydrazine which only had to come into contact
to ignite. The LM worked almost flawlessly on 9 out of 9 space
flights including of course Apollo 13 where it performed way above
what it was designed for.
terry

terry wrote:
out of 10 failure rate. the engine itself was of hypergolic design,
nitrogen tetroxide and hydrazine which only had to come into contact
to ignite. The LM worked almost flawlessly on 9 out of 9 space
flights including of course Apollo 13 where it performed way above
what it was designed for.
terry

They have the enigine on display at the Space Museum in Alamogordo, NM, and
I was amazed how small it is!

On Jan 25, 7:31*am, terry wrote:
snip
The LM worked almost flawlessly on 9 out of 9 space
flights including of course Apollo 13 where it performed way above
what it was designed for.

that should have been 10/10 I had forgotten Apollo 5, the unmanned LM
test in earth orbit.
terry

On Jan 25, 7:58*am, "ManhattanMan" wrote:
terry wrote:
out of 10 failure rate. the engine itself was of hypergolic design,
nitrogen tetroxide and hydrazine which only had to come into contact
to ignite. *The LM worked almost flawlessly on 9 out of 9 space
flights including of course Apollo 13 where it performed way above
what it was designed for.
terry

They have the enigine on display at the Space Museum in Alamogordo, NM, and
I was amazed how small it is!

must get to see that one day. have only been to the states once
( 1985) and 3 of my highlights were Kennedy Spacecenter, Johnson
Space Center and the Smithsonian. ( oh and of course all those nice
american people ). Big bummer was missing the space shuttle
launch... damn computer hitch delayed it.
terry

Robert M. Gary wrote:
In addition, the assent rocket on the LM only worked 6 out of 10 times.

-Robert


Maybe if they had asked nicely the other 4 times...?

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200801/1

On Jan 24, 12:31*pm, terry wrote:
On Jan 25, 2:30*am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:


yes it was a very risky endeavour to be sure, but the LM was probably
the most reliable part of the whole system. I dont recall any tethered
flights with the LM , I dont think it had enough thrust to fly in
earths gravity. * *

They had a version that was created for the purpose of training the
crew....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AH0VYi1G6jo

-Robert

the assent rocket on the LM only worked 6 out of 10 times.

-Robert

Hmm.

I think it worked 7 out of 7.