Lunar Landing DIY

EliNaut

New member
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Boston area
Greetings Orbinauts!
Today i'll be talking about making lunar landings with only using the standard MFDs!

Lets get right to it....

I am a big NASSP fan. So, after getting frustrated watching my LM richochet off the Moon's surface when trying to use autopilots like Land MFD, Base Land, or Lola, I did some mental simulation about what exactly needs to go on to make a smooth decent and touchdown. I'll start out by describing the process in steps, with of course, using NASSP(6.4.3)

Starting out:
A prefferable orbit around the moon should be around 80-100km, and for the most part circular. Power up the LM's RCS and decent stage and undock from the CM.

First burn:
You may have noticed, if you tried to go retrograde or prograde, it is 90 degrees off due to the fact the LM's forward axis is from the cockpit facing out, not up and down on the LM.

But also remember that the NML settings are 90 degrees off from prograde, so we can use those attitudes to offset the rotation so the engines are facing the right way. If you do not understand a word of what I just said, than heres what i'm trying to say:
NML+ is retrograde, instead of the RETRO button.
HOWEVER this does not mean NML- is Prograde. See for yourself.
And note that this is only for the Eagle LM supplied with NASSP.
So, once in true retrograde, gently increase the thrust to about 0.5, so we can accurately set the Pe. Its best to do this on the dark side of the moon(Pink floyd! :D), so we can land on the day side. Keep burning until your Pe is around 8km. You could try a lower Pe for different results, but i havnt tried lower than 8km yet. Kill the engines and drift on to your Pe.

Making the second burn + Landing

When you're close to your Pe, hit NML+ again and turn it off once the LM stops manuvering. Heres where some technique gets involved. Have the Surface MFD open and ready!

Throttle up to 100%!

The idea here is to decrease our linear speed while managing vertical speed.

On the Surface MFD, keep tabs on the vertical speed.

When above 3km, a good vertical speed will be around 30-40m/s

To manage verticle speed, use 4 or 5 on the number pad to adjust your angle.

Continue burning until your velocity on your HUD is equal to your verticle speed (suggesting your only moving on the z-axis, up and down)

As your altitude gets lower, decrease your verticle speed to whatever satisfys you, but in any case should be around 10-20m/s when you hit 3km.

The tricky part occurs once your linear speed is near zero.

You'll need to cut thrust on your engines when your all stopped and quickly rotate so your level with the ground now.

Thrust rating should be kept at a low, while you keep your verticle speed under control.

As you approach 1000-500m, verticle speed should be at the most 10-5m/s

When 50m gets called out, lower your veticle speed to 1 or less m/s for a soft touchdown!

Congradulations if you made it!
Any questions, you know where to put them.
I'll do my best to clear anything up that you didnt understand.
Also I might put up a diagram.. I'll see what I can do.

Happy orbiting..
~EliNaut
 
Last edited:

HiPotOk1978

ReFuel L.L.C CEO
Addon Developer
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
373
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tucson
People always say your the bomb when you can do it manually, but choose to do it with autopilots for more precision... the autopilots will almost always be more accurate than any human pilot as long as everything goes well, but as soon as a problem exists, autopilot will kill ya.... use DGIV to take off from KCS to ISS, but around 60k, turn off one of your main engines to simulate a failure, see what the auto pilot does... or disable auto pilot to abort launch and try to land back at KCS with a single main engine, less than 50% thrust used in takeoff
 

ryan

That guy
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
1,605
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Location
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Pete Conrad landed partially manually on Apollo 12, the only thing i believe that was automated was the stabilization at ignition, throttle up, throttle down and P64 pitch over.
 

HiPotOk1978

ReFuel L.L.C CEO
Addon Developer
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
373
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Tucson
Buzz Aldrin had to do his landing manually because the computer wanted to fly him into rocks... I think it was Apollo 11 that did that...
 

ryan

That guy
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
1,605
Reaction score
4
Points
0
Location
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Neil Armstrong did that not Buzz Aldrin yes he had to go manual becuase the AGC was leading them into a bolder feild

Also i forgot to add, Apollo 12 had to land near Surveryor III to proove they could land presicley, Apollo 11 landed miles away from they were supposed to.
 

tblaxland

O-F Administrator
Administrator
Addon Developer
Webmaster
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
7,320
Reaction score
25
Points
113
Location
Sydney, Australia
Pete Conrad landed partially manually on Apollo 12, the only thing i believe that was automated was the stabilization at ignition, throttle up, throttle down and P64 pitch over.
I just reread the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. Conrad landed in P66 mode - the same as all other Apollo lunar landings. This mode still provided autopilots for nulling horizontal velocity and controlling descent rate.
 

EliNaut

New member
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Boston area
I just reread the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. Conrad landed in P66 mode - the same as all other Apollo lunar landings. This mode still provided autopilots for nulling horizontal velocity and controlling descent rate.

Right, which is what i'm doing primarily.
I'm just using NASSP as a spacecraft example, and posted how i did it, possibly for anyone who was or wanted to make an effective autopilot, or things like that.
(What I'd like to see in a new lunar landing autopilot is LAT/LONG target entry.
I've been meaning to try out Suborb MFD, as it sounds like it provides something along those lines.)

Of course, its alot easier in some cases when you have main engines and hover engines, that way you can keep a constant attitude and null velocity and verticle speed in the most influential vectors.


-----Posted Added-----


People always say your the bomb when you can do it manually, but choose to do it with autopilots for more precision...


Oh of course, I just did it manually for lack of an autopilot.
Theres currently a listed decent program in the "Flying a Saturn V" manual but it didnt come with any documentation other than its indentification in the AGC, P63, which I belive Tschachism confirmed in one of my other posts that it wasnt funtional in 6.4.3 and that its funny the AGC is even responding.
 

Belisarius

Obsessed with reality. Why?
Addon Developer
Joined
Apr 3, 2008
Messages
979
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Barcelona, Spain
Analysis of PDI-landing from AMSO

I have a document which analyses the profile of the LM from the AMSO auto-pilot as made by Lazy D.
I used it to study the autopilot approach so I could later perform a manual landing. It fits the instructions above pretty well.
 

Attachments

  • Lunar Landing Profile - AMSO.doc
    62.5 KB · Views: 13

C3PO

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
2,605
Reaction score
17
Points
53
Yes but the pourpose for this document is so people can learn to do it manually without an autopilot.

ReentryMFD isn't an auto-anything.:lol:
It's just an instrument that tells you the required tangential acceleration required to come to a halt at the target base, and it shows you the actual acceleration.
It also shows you if you're aiming left or right.

But it's all hands-on piloting. That's why I love it!:wub:
 

EliNaut

New member
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Boston area
But it's all hands-on piloting. That's why I love it!:wub:

Neat, sounds good.


-----Posted Added-----


I have a document which analyses the profile of the LM from the AMSO auto-pilot as made by Lazy D.
I used it to study the autopilot approach so I could later perform a manual landing. It fits the instructions above pretty well.

Wowee, I was close? :speakcool:

Yeh, I've never tried AMSo, when I have the time I might check it out.
:cheers:
 
Top