MSC-07631 23. Flight data file

Cernan

The Flight Data File was in tune with the flight; it was complete; it was followed; and it was in excellent shape.

Evans

It was in outstanding shape. There was absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Cernan

We had minimal updates to the crew cue cards and minimal updates to the Flight Plan. Flight planning did a super job getting it all together. There's nothing we can add to it. The Lunar Surface Checklist was the one that had most real-time updates and that was simply based on mileages and bearings because the LM position was slightly east of where we had set up the Lunar Surface Checklist. The Checklist was changed in real time because of the time allotted at each station. That's to be expected as the checklist is only a guideline anyway.

[edit] 23.1 CSM

Schmitt

Generally, I have nothing but praise for the Flight Data File, both vehicles. One comment on the Flight Plan Supplement. We had split pages for medical and food logging. That was probably a mistake. We tended to only use the book as a whole and it was a good place to keep them. If you had wanted the pages split they were too thin to maintain. Furthermore, they tended to fall out of the book, I recommend not splitting the pages or having heavier paper if you want them split. I had an extra cue card built for panel 229. I think it was an excellent card that summarized the circuit breaker functions both on 229 and on panel 8. It was not used because we had no systems anomalies of any significance that would relate to that card. But I would strongly recommend its availability if only for training. It's a good quick review of what you lose or retain for those two panels.

In the Flight Plan, I added some pen and ink cues along the margins for certain observational targets that I particularly wanted to look at. These are independent of any designated experiment and I entered them as a function of time. That seemed to work very well for me. I think it is the easiest way to go, since it shouldn't concern any large number of people. Gordy Fullerton fixed up the circular orbital cue card for me with similar designation of craters as a function of time. I did not use that. Not because it wasn't a good idea but because of familiarity with the Moon, which came very quickly after a couple of orbits. You could recognize your position on the Moon fairly easily as a function of each rev, either timing the rev, approximate time since sunset, or just because you could look out the window and could tell where you were.

[edit] 23.2 LM

Schmitt

The same comments apply. I think all the Flight Data File items were excellent. We logged most of our specific items such as alignment data and comparable kinds of things in the checklist and at the point where they were collected rather than in the Data Book.

Cuff checklist - We talked about that in the surface items. I thought the cuff checklist was excellent.

We had the right kind of photo maps and they were useful for reference when we were around a given station. I don't think we used them as much as I had anticipated.

Navigation was no problem as the points that we had selected previously were excellent points for investigation. There was no need to try to decide on an alternative point to try to study in the vicinity of a given station. The list of items to be accomplished at each station were mindjoggers to read at each station. They were not used as much as I thought they would be initially. That was mainly because we had become so familiar with the items that each station was in itself easy to recall as a result of having created the checklist. So, the checklist was turned out to be more of a learning item rather than a reference item for use on the surface. I wouldn't have done it any differently.

I particularly want to compliment Chuck Lewis on the Timeline Book. The book was very very well done and we had no problems with it at all. That of course applies to every checklist we had. There were no procedural errors in any of the books. Fortunately, we did not have to use the Malfunction Book. Only once did I pull out the Systems Data Book to check on a systems problem and I can't remember what that was now.

[edit] 23.3 Charts and Maps

Evans

I never did use the sun compass. I didn't have time to get it squared away or to figure out where it was and follow it around. I never used it as much as I thought I was going to prior to the flight. After you've been up there for a while you could look out the window and tell essentially where you were, so you really didn't need it. You kind of guess pretty much on the settings for the cameras and hopefully there wasn't any problems in that respect. We used the orbit monitor charts. They are not as good as they could be but were useful in finding out where you were and looking up a few of the craters. I did not use the contingency chart at all.

Cernan

Let me comment about the LM landing site monitor chart and ascent monitor chart. The only time we used these charts was in observing the landing site from the command module on a day prior to landing. Because of the operation of the PGNCS and the ascent guidance systems we did not have to use the ascent monitor chart at all.

Lunar surface maps - We used in the cockpit after the EVAs but only pointedly toward trying to relocate our traverse and make sure we were aware of the craters we saw and where we had been. They were sort of a resume-type post-EVA rather than pre-EVA planning guide. Let Jack comment on the EVA traverse maps. I think we used them far less than Jack planned. I used my cuff checklist for all my navigation and for my traverse even though I was told that it would be relatively useless. My cuff checklist was a very vital part of my lunar surface navigation.

Ward

What did you use to make the fender with?

Cernan

In that respect, they were very useful.

Schmitt

I thought I would use the orbit monitor charts in the CM, so I had an extra one put on so it wouldn't interfere with the planned activities of the CMP. I did not use that very much. I eventually did some sketching on it post-TEI. I think I labelled about five specific points as areas A, B, C, D, maybe E, and these are referenced in my crew notebook for a specific observation.

One item - that chart should have been identical to the CMP's chart. There were a few pen and ink changes left off such as exposure settings for certain photo targets that caused some confusion. The CSM lunar landmark maps that the LMP had added in the rear of that book, again, were not used. As I was observing a specific point or area such as Gagarin I would not take the time out to sketch on the photo. I tended to look at the first opportunity and to take notes in the notebook rather than trying to sketch on the photograph.

I think having selected them and studied them preflight made it worth having them around. The necessity for flying them was probably less than the necessity for having reviewed them and studied them. I still would want to have that kind of data available in the spacecraft. I think the CMP used his visual target maps considerably. I did on a couple of occasions. For the most part, that was post-TEI and I made some notes and sketches on some of those maps. I think that function was because there was a lot of Lime to look at the Moon, make a sketch, and then look back and fix it up post-TEI. In orbit, the time just did not exist. As Dick Gordon said a couple years ago, "Once you start flying, the clock is relentless."

[edit] 23.4 General Flight Planning

Evans

Outstanding.

Cernan

This may be an appropriate place to content on how we handled the lunar orbit phase with three men in the spacecraft. After the first 2 hours in the spacecraft, we figured out the most expeditious and efficient way of handling it and it worked that way throughout the rest of the flight. The CDR got in the left seat, where he belongs anyway and took the Flight Plan. Windows 5, 4, and 3 point towards the lunar surface so I let the orbital geologist and the surface geologist look out the windows and make all their finds. I kept them honest on SIM bay, made all the attitude changes that were required, and kept them up to date on all SIM bay switch changes. I ran the spacecraft, they did the orbital geology, and I kept them honest. I kept out of their way. I stayed on my side of the spacecraft, kept the systems and the world honest and they cut loose. That's the way I'd recommend doing it all the time. You didn't bump into each other. Occasionally I would sneak a peek and say they were right or wrong and let it go at that.

Evans

Level of details provided in onboard documentation/recommendation changes - Solo phase - I have no recommended changes. It was in outstanding shape. We had gone through it before and checked it out in the simulator.

Cernan

I want to comment under miscellaneous. I think the Flight Plan carried just enough detail to tell you what was going on and what was going to happen. If you were not familiar with the details of the operation of that particular system or what you were going to do in terms of going into PTC or any other phase in the mission it would refer you to the Systems Book or G&C Dictionary. You did not have to repeat them in the Flight Plan. I like this way of doing things. We generally had the Flight Plan plus two other documents out. One was a Systems Book and the other was probably a G&C Dictionary.

Evans

We kept the G&C dictionary out. In the solo phase, I had the Experiments Checklist out, too.

Schmitt

The Flight Plan was excellent. We had no problems with it at all that I'm aware of. Tommy Holloway and his people are to be complimented. The number of different requirements and experiments and general operational items that were required to be integrated was very very high. It was done in an extremely competent and usable way. I can't think of anything that I would change in the way that the Flight Plan was written.

[edit] 23.5 Preflight Support

Evans

Good.

Cernan

Updated properly. This is both LM and CSM.

Evans

The CSM had no problem. We would give the information to the people at the Cape and they would make the changes in the CSM and quarters copies. We had them in a timely manner. Coordination was good between the Cape: and Houston. Change propulsion system - There were very few changes in the checklists themselves once you came out with the primary book. There were few changes after that.

Real time procedures changes - They were quite nominal and from the CM standpoint easily taken care of.

Cernan

As far as I'm concerned, the LM preflight support on the Flight Data File was excellent. If there's anyplace that I'd make a comment on it was the fact that somehow the latest changes we thought were in a system somehow never got in until the morning of the sim. They were always there for the sim.

Real-time procedural changes in the LM - There were really none except for the EVA. In the command module, they were so minimal that it was no problem updating the Flight Plan as we went along. I might add that the clock sync was so smooth that you wouldn't even believe it. It went "zap," we updated our clocks, and we were on our way. That put us right on the Flight Plan and that's probably one of the smoothest ideas anyone ever had.

Schmitt

Excellent in the Flight Data File area. One specific item that I had was two or three briefing sessions on portions of the lunar orbit during which I was in the CSM spacecraft. We went over in detail the attitudes, maneuvers, and the window availabilities so that I was able to plan in a very short amount of time with minimum effort my part for my own personal observations of the lunar surface. I appreciated that extra above and beyond the call of duty on the part of the flight planners. I appreciated their taking time out to do that for me.

I think it was useful to have the sessions where the flight controllers, the crew, and the flight planners met and went over those portions of the Flight Plan which were not normally simulated. I was a little bit disappointed in that some of the people who would be eventually intimately involved in the mission were not at the Flight Plan review.

---

Edits and errors by Eric Hartwell are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 license. The original NASA material is copyright-free.