Apollo Expeditions to the Moon
CHAPTER 7.5
LONG-DISTANCE SOLUTIONS
Apollo 16 had its unique problems and one was a major one of the instantaneous
and serious variety. Just after separation of the CSM from the LM, prior to initiating
final descent for the landing, a maneuver was to be performed by the command and
service module Casper to circularize its orbit around the Moon. Preparations for the
burn went well until a check was made of the secondary yaw gimbals. These gimbals
controlled the direction of thrust in yaw plane for the service propulsion system, a
system that was essential to insuring that the astronauts could get out of lunar orbit.
The gimbals appeared normal until the motor was started and then they exhibited
rapidly diverging oscillations. The two spacecraft were asked to rendezvous; and
Jim McDivitt, the Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager, met with Bob Gilruth and
me to tell us that it appeared to him that the mission would have to be terminated.
Another meeting in an hour was scheduled to review the bidding. By the time we had
the second meeting, the Operations Team, through extensive testing and simulations,
determined that the oscillations would have damped and the secondary servo system
was safe to use. John Young and Charlie Duke proceeded with the landing, as I reflected
on the phenomenal capabilities of a group of young engineers who had
solved a problem of a spacecraft 240,000 miles away from Earth.
Apollo 17, the final mission to the Moon, clearly demonstrated the maturity of
the Operations Team. For the first time, a manned launch was made at night. A landing
was made in the valley of Taurus-Littrow, the most difficult of any of the Apollo
landing sites. The spacecraft performed in an outstanding fashion, and there were
no major problems. Minor ones that did occur were handled without difficulty.
The problems encountered were all overcome due to the careful premission
preparation, rigorous testing, planning, training, and hours and hours spent simulating
critical phases of the mission with the flight crew. These simulations prepared the
controllers and the crew to respond to both normal and abnormal situations. Their
record speaks for itself on the adequacy of the training. This was not brought together
overnight, and in 1962 we were a long way from Taurus-Littrow.
The basic flight-control concepts used for Apollo were developed by a small
group of people on the Mercury Operations Team. In 1958, under the leadership of
Robert R. Gilruth, the Space Task Group had been given the fantastic responsibility
of placing a man in orbit around the Earth. Those few young men who assumed this
task did not have any previous experience on which to rely. It had never been done
before. What they did have was the willingness to tackle any job, and a technical
capability that they had attained through an apprenticeship in what I consider to
have been the Nation's finest technical organization, the National Advisory Committee
for Aeronautics. Other members of the Mercury Operations Team had experience
with aircraft development and flight testing with the Air Force and Navy or with
major aircraft companies, both within this country and in particular with AVRO of
Canada. That country's cancellation of the CF-105 with its attendant effect on the
AVRO program proved to be a blessing to the United States space program. Many
fine engineers came to work as members of the Space Task Group at Langley. Jim
Chamberlin, John Hodges, Tecwyn Roberts, Dennis Fielder, and Rod Rose, to name
a few. The operational concepts that were developed by this cadre on Mercury were
improved as experience was gained on each flight. As the Operations Team assumed
the responsibility for flying Gemini, the concepts were further developed, expanded,
and improved. There were many essential steps that had to be taken to get to the
Moon. For the Operations Team, Gemini was one.
Only a small group of people were involved in Mercury operations. When the
team was given the responsibility for flying Gemini, and with the Mercury flights
continuing, the organization had to be expanded. A conscious effort was made to
bring young people into the organization. With an abundance of recent college graduates,
the team took on a young character. The additions brought with them the
aggressiveness, initiative, and ingenuity that one finds in the young engineer. They
did not all come from major colleges; there were graduates of Southwestern State
College in Oklahoma, Willamette University in Oregon, San Diego State College,
Texas Wesleyan College, and Northeastern University in Boston, to name a few. A
large contingent of officers was also made available by the U.S. Air Force and this
group provided excellent support. I came to rely on these young people and I can
honestly say they never let me down.
