Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Apollo Lunar Module Operations Handbook (56k no!)

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    261

    Apollo Lunar Module Operations Handbook (56k no!)

    http://www.btinternet.com/~ursine/LMhandbook.pdf (Warning: 37 megabyte PDF file)
    Starting today at 0800 hours, all hoax believers will be evacuated to temporary internment camps for re-eductation duties. You will be required to study this entire document and hand in your comprehensive point-by-point refutation by Thursday, September 21st.
    Seriously, though. I'd really love to read a woo-woo "de-bunking" of this training manual.
    Edit: Somebody please tell the guy who scanned this that it's really difficult to read improperly cropped block diagrams. :roll:

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,257
    Thanks for the link. Yet another item to place on my reading list...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    11,489
    And if anyone knows the whereabouts -- digital or print -- of the other parts to this documents, please let us know.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,257
    What parts are missing?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    11,489
    According to Rick Sternbach, the 804-page document is merely one part of volume 1. Volume 1 itself runs to several thousand pages, and there is no sign of volume 2.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,242
    They really didn't need to fly to the Moon. They could have just have stacked up that one document alone and climbed there.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    522
    Quote Originally Posted by JayUtah
    According to Rick Sternbach, the 804-page document is merely one part of volume 1. Volume 1 itself runs to several thousand pages, and there is no sign of volume 2.
    The landing was obviously a fake, since in the 60's NASA did not have the word processing technology that would be necessary to produce such a document. Kinko's would not be invented until 1970, after Apollo 11! AHA!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by lyford
    Quote Originally Posted by JayUtah
    According to Rick Sternbach, the 804-page document is merely one part of volume 1. Volume 1 itself runs to several thousand pages, and there is no sign of volume 2.
    The landing was obviously a fake, since in the 60's NASA did not have the word processing technology that would be necessary to produce such a document. Kinko's would not be invented until 1970, after Apollo 11! AHA!
    Brilliant! =D>

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    11,489
    If you've never worked on a project whose operations handbook won't fit into the trunk of your car, you've let the best in life pass you by.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    522
    Quote Originally Posted by JayUtah
    If you've never worked on a project whose operations handbook won't fit into the trunk of your car, you've let the best in life pass you by.
    Let's see - are you talking about a 1960's trunk? Ee gads man!

    That's a lot of operations handbook!
    "Thank you for purchasing your new ThingaMaBob. Please read this manual fully before using to ensure years of enjoyment."

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,322
    Quote Originally Posted by johnwitts
    They really didn't need to fly to the Moon. They could have just have stacked up that one document alone and climbed there.
    It's a rule in the space field that you're not ready to fly until the mass of your paperwork exceeds the mass of your spacecraft.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,070
    Quote Originally Posted by sts60
    Quote Originally Posted by johnwitts
    They really didn't need to fly to the Moon. They could have just have stacked up that one document alone and climbed there.
    It's a rule in the space field that you're not ready to fly until the mass of your paperwork exceeds the mass of your spacecraft.
    IIRC, that's a phrase coined by Wernher von Braun.

    Harald

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    11,489
    That's been a common phrase in engineering for a very long time.

    Part of the engineering dilemma these days is that we're creating systems so complex that not only do the instructions not fit into your car, they won't fit into your brain either. "Operator error" in many cases means that the system exhibited behavior that the operator couldn't fully comprehend. Systems are getting too complex to be fully grasped by even a highly-trained and astute human mind.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,242
    We've got a couple of microwave ovens at school. One is fancy and expensive, and one isn't. They both have the same power output, so both cook the food as fast.

    The expensive one has a clock, and a touch pad and LED display. When you plug it in, you have to set the clock. Otherwise it doesn't work. This task isn't at all intuitive. It's one of those where you have to press and hold some unrelated button for 5 seconds, then punch in the time. We have to set this every time we want to use it as, being a school, we turn the power off when we've finished to stop the kids microwaving CDs or each other. Then you set the power. Another 3 button presses. Then the time. Beep beep beep beep. Then START. But what if you want to increase the time? Or lower the power? While it's going? Forget it. Press cancel and start again.

    The cheaper one? Two knobs. One for power, one for time. The Power and the Time are painted round the knobs and there's a little arrow on each. Put food in, close door, turn knob and we're off. Oops, power is set to defrost and we want high. No problem, turn it up as it's going. Not plugged in? Plug it in and it starts up with the settings on the dial.

    Guess which one we use?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,798
    A bit of a tangent, but it's interesting you should say that....an article appeared in the SMH just this morning, describing the findings of the psychology experiments at Stanford & Columbia Unis. It makes findings about a human preference for more choice, but an inability to cope with it!


    (edited to remove a url that led to a registration screen - sorry! ops: )

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,643

    Re: Apollo Lunar Module Operations Handbook (56k no!)

    Quote Originally Posted by sts60
    Quote Originally Posted by johnwitts
    They really didn't need to fly to the Moon. They could have just have stacked up that one document alone and climbed there.
    It's a rule in the space field that you're not ready to fly until the mass of your paperwork exceeds the mass of your spacecraft.
    That was a big file; it took five minutes to download!

    Those folks in the space field have always had it easy! Back in my Naval Nuclear days, when we finished a power unit, three rail cars were necessary to deliver it to the shipyard: one flatbed for the power unit in the shipping container, and two full-sized boxcars for the certification paperwork. 8-[

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,643

    Re: Apollo Lunar Module Operations Handbook (56k no!)

    I've always been suspicious of manuals and other documents that list the first of April as their publication or revision dates. If the organization is big enough, you know there's got to be at least one clown in there somewhere. And, based on the technical writers I've known, they would be among the usual suspects. For example, consider Bill Kaysing.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    439
    Kewl, I've just found my new wallpaper! No, not for Windows... for my house \/

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,257
    Quote Originally Posted by JayUtah
    According to Rick Sternbach, the 804-page document is merely one part of volume 1. Volume 1 itself runs to several thousand pages, and there is no sign of volume 2.
    A quick Copernic search brings up a few citations to LM790-3-LM, such as page 7 of NASA's REPORT OF APOLLO 13 REVIEW BOARD.

    The NASA Center for Aerospace Information has the following listing for LMA790-1, Lunar excursion module familiarization manual:

    Quote Originally Posted by CASI
    TITLE: Lunar excursion module familiarization manual
    Document ID: 19730060786 N (73N70028) File Series: NASA Technical Reports
    Report Number: NASA-CR-129890 LMA790-1 LMA790-01001C
    Sales Agency & Price: CASI Hardcopy A07 CASI Microfiche A02
    Authors: (Author(s) Not Available)
    Published: Oct 15, 1965
    Corporate Source: Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. (Bethpage, NY, United States)
    Pages: 140
    Contract Number: NAS9-1100
    This is obviously not what you're looking for but I posted it FWIW.

    I'm guessing you have done a pretty thorough search (by the tone of the post quoted above), but I'll do a little checking on my own - not that I'm pretending to be an authority though I have a some (nightmarish) experience running down some fairly obscure technical references.

    Has anyone contactd the NASA History Office or maybe Northrop Grumman Media Relations. Those are the ideas that come off the top of my head, anyway.

  20. #20
    "When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the aircraft, the mission can depart the station." -- oft-repeated and anecdotally quite accurate statement from yr obdt svt's USAF career 30+ years ago...which means a lot of trees gave their lives to get them BUFFs off the ground...

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    219

    HB

    The next time some HBer says "why doesn't the LM {fill in blank here}..." We should have this document online and simply ask them to read it.

    Dwight

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,212
    This reminds me of a bug report I got last year. I wrote the printing code for a realtime programming tool; one of our customers submitted an issue report complaining that printing took way too long. I'd tested the print code for speed, and was getting 1-5 pages per second, which I considered excellent. So, I was rather confused and called the customer. It turns out that the customer was printing a 14,000 page control program, taking over an hour.

    I'd worry about the trees that died to produce that document, except that we also sell paper mill controls. 8)

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,322
    Found an older version at work:

    Apollo Operations Handbook
    Lunar Module
    LM 3

    Volume I

    LMA790-3-LM 3
    1 January 1968

    836 pages

    A quick comparison shows a few differences such as Section 2.10 in this version being "Miscellaneous", whereas in the later (1971) PDF it's "Lighting". Also, it looks like the PDF scan did not include the index at the end. It's not obvious why this one is 836 pages compared to the 804 pages of the PDF. Also, there's no mention in the table of contents for sections 4 (Normal/Backup Procedures) and 5 (Contingency Procedures), which are in the sought-after Apollo Operations Handbook, Volume II, Operational Procedures.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2010-May-05, 11:00 PM
  2. The Lunar Module Too Flimsy?
    By HypothesisTesting in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 283
    Last Post: 2009-Apr-28, 07:49 PM
  3. Lunar Module Question
    By SSJPabs in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 2005-Mar-21, 01:59 PM
  4. Lunar module insulation
    By Jairo in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 2004-Dec-01, 06:36 PM
  5. Many new Apollo PDF documents (Block I operations handbook!)
    By Daryl71 in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2004-Sep-30, 03:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •