Recent content by Thespacer

Thanks Indy. I skimmed some of the real life numbers passed to the various crews, and as you probably know they range between +800 and +4200 feet. Apollo 15 had a negative value of 2800 feet. Apollo 16 appears to have been “closest,” pre N69, with a value of just +800. While I probably won’t...

Out of interest, I understand from Apollo 12 onwards, MCC-H read up a Noun 69 correction shortly after PDI was initiated, to update the down/up range component of the AGC’s targeted landing site. While I’m sure the AGC software supports it, is such an update able to be simulated from the MCC...

I just checked one of my recent post-TEI scenarios, and my SPS fuel, after the burn, was 11.7%, so seems exactly the same as yours. I also had a small MCC5 burn, but it was RCS only and 2.7fps DV.

Which release version are you using? Asking in light of the changes Indy has made to MCC targeting, which appears to be incompatible with pre-existing save states. The MCC5 Dv seems high.

You probably have noticed that each time you perform a P52, small torquing angles are generated. While generally imperceptible, you may notice, when you hit “torque” in the P52 procedure, your FDAI #1 gimbal angles adjust ever so slightly. That is the visible effect of the IMU realigning itself...

Thanks for running that down, Indy, very interesting. I haven’t tried Apollo 7 yet, but I guess I should, in order to get a better understanding of V83, particularly since I had assumed it would not return viable information without a valid SV of the other vehicle.

Well done, anyway, it’s a great feeling. Plus, this thread should hopefully now serve as a point of reference for others going through lunar rendezvous for the first (or second) time. As I mentioned in a separate thread, consider now having another go but this time also doing the CSM “mirror”...

Indy, while kinda on topic, I wonder if you have any thoughts on the apparent quirk of PGNS vs AGS with respect to ORDEAL, in light of the following note from the Apollo 11 debrief: The main reason I bring this up is that I think I too saw this when activating the LM recently, namely the LM...

I’m interested in simulating entry using the revised (actual) landing coordinates, in light of the weather issues at the original planned coordinates. Any ideas how to do this, using (for example) RTCC MFD? If I’m not mistaken, no DV or other burns were conducted after the decision to move the...

Not really. You start P35 after the TPI burn and you’ll notice R2 of F 16 45 counts up (from TPI tig). Follow Checklist MFD with one important note: do not hit the final compute PRO until Tig+12mins; if you do it early or late, the Tig for MCC1 will not be exactly 15mins after TPI Tig, as it is...

When you say “tweak the pitch,” you’re referring to translating along the pitch ( y ) axis? If so, then technically yes, that is what you should be doing to null that residual velocity (according to your R2 numbers there). Whether you actually need to do that is a different matter, sometimes the...

Should be the CDH time

That’s exactly correct. Sometimes you will also see, in some checklists (mostly in the LM), a note saying “update DET.” This happens most frequently in rendezvous when the initially-calculated Tig shifts slightly, so all you will be doing is resetting the DET to accommodate the new Tig. I also...

In short, set the DET to a value which, when counting up, will mean that it hits 00:00 exactly at the time of ignition (Tig). The last item of P30 is the flashing Verb 16 Noun 45 (F 16 45). Register two displays the time until Tig, counting down (assuming you have started P30 within an hour of...

According to this handy document (https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap10fj/pdf/19750065857_mission-f+g-lunar-orbit-vol1-techniques-19690507.pdf) at para 4.11, page 4-26 (read ”y” as “ydot”, cut n paste didn’t carry the “dot” across): “After CSI, rendezvous navigation is performed in both spacecraft...