Apollo 5 Scenario

[thammond]

I'm new to NASSP and I've just started with the NASSP 8 Beta addon. I decided to start with the Apollo 5 scenario.


The question I have is this scenario a fully functional scenario and is there any intended user interaction with it. Or is it fully automatic. I've run the scenario and it seems to do everything automatically up through the separation of the LEM with the 2nd stage.


But the burns decent stage and fire in the hole ascent stage do not occur automatically. So can I perform those my self?


Also I have not found much documentation on the Apollo 5 mission on my internet searches. Is there any available?

 

[indy91]

The question I have is this scenario a fully functional scenario and is there any intended user interaction with it. Or is it fully automatic. I've run the scenario and it seems to do everything automatically up through the separation of the LEM with the 2nd stage.


But the burns decent stage and fire in the hole ascent stage do not occur automatically. So can I perform those my self?

Which scenario did you use? The T-1 hour scenario under WIP Scenarios or the T-60s one under Mission Scenarios? The T-60s scenario should be set up to fly the whole mission automatically under AGC control, just like the mission was planned to be. So it mainly is a showcase of the capabilities of the software flown on that mission called Sunburst 120 and no user inputs should be required at all. The T-1h scenario basically has a "cold and dark" Lunar Module, so it needs some setting up to properly run the mission. So if you used the T-60s scenario, everything up to the first DPS burn at about T+4h GET worked fine and then it did not? Or were you expecting the burn to be earlier? Not much happens between LM/S-IVB separation and that time.

Also I have not found much documentation on the Apollo 5 mission on my internet searches. Is there any available?

There isn't anything like a flight plan, but there are still a few useful document.

The LM-1 Systems Handbook has a list for the liftoff configuration of all the switches in the LM.

And the Apollo 5 Spacecraft Operational Trajectory document has a list of all mission events starting on PDF page 22.

 

[thammond]

Thanks Indy for the reply and info.


I used the t-60 scenario under mission scenarios, I did not notice the Apollo 5 under WIP yet. I'm not sure if I was quite to the t+4 hr mark yet, I left the sim running and left my computer for a bit and when I came back the LEM was rotating on all axis (the Ascent and descent stages where still together). I then tried running it at 10x for awhile and nothing else happened, just kept spinning. So not sure what happened there. I'll try rerunning it and then give the WIP Apollo 5 scenario a shot.


Anyways what I've seen so far is amazing, so a good job to all involved.

 

[indy91]

I wouldn't bother with the WIP scenario, they should be functionally the same, the T-60s just is all configured for launch. It's not that easy to get the LGC and everything into the right state for launch.

Strange that it was just spinning. Normally it will do S-IVB/LM sep at about 54min into the mission and then after it will orientate itself in a specific attitude relative to the sun. It will stay in that attitude for about 3 hours and then the action really begins.

 

[thammond]

Is there any way to zoom in on the LM panel. I'm finding the panel text just a bit too small for me (eyes aren't what they used to be ). Does the LM have a 3d cockpit view? On the CM 3d cockpit view I can zoom in to get a better panel view using the mouse wheel.

 

[indy91]

No, unfotunately with the bitmap panels we have that is not possible. And the 3D panels are not functional. Here is a link of the bitmap in our repository where you should be able to zoom in: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/d...ples/ProjectApollo/Bitmaps/lem_main_panel.bmp

 

[thammond]

Thanks Indy,


That bitmap is very useful

---------- Post added at 01:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:09 PM ----------

There isn't anything like a flight plan, but there are still a few useful document.

The LM-1 Systems Handbook has a list for the liftoff configuration of all the switches in the LM.

And the Apollo 5 Spacecraft Operational Trajectory document has a list of all mission events starting on PDF page 22.

Those are some great documents. Since the LM-1 systems handbook is only a page revision, it is not complete. Any chance you have the Rev B version, as I would love to see some of the missing info not included in rev C?

 

[meik84]

I left the sim running and left my computer for a bit

That's something one shouldn't do on AP5. Well, not without precautions. Deactivate all energy-saving stuff before, otherwise Windows shuts down the HDD or does other dumb things after a while. That makes the sim 'jump', and when it does, it is quite possible that the RCS failure monitor of the DAP is triggered and the LGC doesn't use all jets anymore and loses attitude control. That again can result in a tumbling LM, which triggers the tumble monitor and inhibits the whole auto program sequencing.
There are ways to recover from that, but that's quite complicated and involves resetting flags and stuff.

Apart from that, I flew the mission again yesterday and came along some things:
- shouldn't the SIVB go to LVLH and heads up after insertion? Looks like it's rather going inertial...
- there's no LM riding on the SIVB (okay, most of the time before extraction is spend in the dark, but hey )
- after separation, the newly created LM points in the wrong direction ( docking hatch 90° up instead coaxial with the SIVB)
- we should not put the ascent bats on the line before LM staging. You'll need the power later...
Anyway, it would be good if we collect our knowledge about sunburst (or AP5 in general) here and make a manual from it.
Like:
- one of the EMEMs 1164 to 1167 contain the time to start of next phase (MTIMER) in seconds. Monitoring it with V11N01 proves quite helpful. Got to look up which MTIMER is active when though...

 

[indy91]

- shouldn't the SIVB go to LVLH and heads up after insertion? Looks like it's rather going inertial...

Yeah, the S-IVB did a bunch of maneuvering on Apollo 5, should implement that some time. Should be as easy as adding some parameters to the LVDC.

- there's no LM riding on the SIVB (okay, most of the time before extraction is spend in the dark, but hey )

There is definitely one for me there. Which scenario did you use, the T-60 minutes or the T-60 seconds scenario? And I did some fixes for Apollo 5 in early July, are you on the latest version?

- after separation, the newly created LM points in the wrong direction ( docking hatch 90° up instead coaxial with the SIVB)

This also doesn't happen for me. I think it used to happen in an earlier version though.

- we should not put the ascent bats on the line before LM staging. You'll need the power later...

I'll have to research this more. It doesn't look like the LM Programer is controlling the batteries, so I am not sure when the ascent batteries were brought online. But I didn't have any issues with power even late in the mission.

- one of the EMEMs 1164 to 1167 contain the time to start of next phase (MTIMER) in seconds. Monitoring it with V11N01 proves quite helpful. Got to look up which MTIMER is active when though...

That is useful to know!

 

[meik84]

Hmh. Maybe I'm really not up to speed on the updates. Will check tomorrow or so on that.

It doesn't look like the LM Programer is controlling the batteries, so I am not sure when the ascent batteries were brought online.

According to the LM-1 sys handbook p. 13-49, the LMP can indeed control the batteries. When I remember right, the mission rep states somewhere that prior to the FITH test at least one ascent bat was brought online, so they did use that...

 

[indy91]

According to the LM-1 sys handbook p. 13-49, the LMP can indeed control the batteries. When I remember right, the mission rep states somewhere that prior to the FITH test at least one ascent bat was brought online, so they did use that...

Ah, right. But I think this is only for real-time commands, so commands via uplink, and not for commands from the LGC. Different set of controlling relays in the LMP. So Sunburst had no way of commanding batteries on and off and I'm pretty sure that means during the planned mission this wouldn't have been used.

EDIT: Actually, I think it automatically should switch to ascent power at staging. Not sure that is properly implemented in our LM yet. I'll investigate.

 

[meik84]

Just flew the first hour again with fresh updates:

- there's no LM riding on the SIVB (okay, most of the time before extraction is spend in the dark, but hey )
- after separation, the newly created LM points in the wrong direction ( docking hatch 90° up instead coaxial with the SIVB)

Those two are good now. The only odd thing is that the main windows look forward and the docking window looks down when the LM is attached to the SIVB. Should be up (main) and forward (dock), but I guess that derives from the standard view of the Saturn, right?
Oh, and there are astronauts in the LM and the forward hatch is open.:uhh:

 

[meik84]

Actually, I think it automatically should switch to ascent power at staging. Not sure that is properly implemented in our LM yet. I'll investigate.

Just tried it: it doesn't.
Another thing is the missing ability of the LMP to switch to ascent water. Sunburst does issue the command (336/337), but the LMP doesn't do anything about it. Same goes for descent water shortly after liftoff.
And one thing of pure curiosity: what are you uplinking for the RCS attitude maneuvers? It goes:
- V21N1E372E0E -no idea what's that good for. Deadband should normally be set in DAPBOOLS. Rate selection?
- V25N1E1631EXXXXXEXXXXXEXXXXXE -those are the desired ICDU angles for the KALCMANU routine in octal, right?
- V25N26E20001E2067E70063E -that's setting up EXECUTIVE for the KALCMANU routine
- V30E -request EXEC. Even I get that...

 

[indy91]

Just tried it: it doesn't.

Yeah, that's what I thought. Needs some changes in the EPS. Some controlling relays for this are already there in the S&C Control Assemblies.

Another thing is the missing ability of the LMP to switch to ascent water. Sunburst does issue the command (336/337), but the LMP doesn't do anything about it. Same goes for descent water shortly after liftoff.

That should be added then. The ECS was barely functional when I first implemented the LMP, so I must have skipped some stuff.

And one thing of pure curiosity: what are you uplinking for the RCS attitude maneuvers? It goes:
- V21N1E372E0E -no idea what's that good for. Deadband should normally be set in DAPBOOLS. Rate selection?

I think setting this to zero enables the attitude maneuver. If it is nonzero then it thinks the attitude maneuver is already done. Can't really remember to be honest, but ATTCADR needs to be set to 0 for the LM to maneuver.

- V25N1E1631EXXXXXEXXXXXEXXXXXE -those are the desired ICDU angles for the KALCMANU routine in octal, right?

Yep, this is the desired attitude.

- V25N26E20001E2067E70063E -that's setting up EXECUTIVE for the KALCMANU routine
- V30E -request EXEC. Even I get that...

Correct.

 

[meik84]

Can't really remember to be honest, but ATTCADR needs to be set to 0 for the LM to maneuver.

Just tried it: no, it doesn't. Luminary's GOMANUR does look at it before it starts KALCMAN3; Sunburst doesn't even have a GOMANUR. ATTCADR maybe defined in erasable assignments, but that's it. The only thing close to it is bit 11 in flagword 2. And even that's not checked by KALCMAN3, it just resets the flag when it's done. Setting it...well, I quote the listing:

USER MUST SET SWITCH BEFORE INITIATING

. There seem to be many things Sunburst doesn't have, especially regarding safety guards and lockouts. And user interface routines, no doubt.

 

[Miriam]

Just flew the mission again: those RCS test are a little...hurried IMHO. We should allow the poor LGC more time to maneuver (20 s or so) to the uplinked attitude before we fire the +X thrusters. I know, the docs say when to start maneuvering and when to fire the thrusters to the second. But those tests were commanded from the ground and I'm quite sure that GUIDO would've looked at the ICDU angles and waited with the translation command until the LM was at least close to the required attitude.

 

[indy91]

Yeah I am sure the last part of the mission (if it would have been flown as planned) would have been quite flexible, just testing whatever they could while they still had a good spacecraft and not following a strict flight plan. I'll look at increasing the time between those uplinks.