posted 08-03-2016 10:13 PM               

There was, however, one requirement before I was officially given the title of "suit subject". I had to attend a class called "Physiological Aerospace Training Outline" (cover below) that included the topics in Figure 2 below.

posted 08-04-2016 11:12 PM               

I was most impressed with Charlie's inspirational last sentence quote from Descartes:

There is nothing so far removed from us that we cannot reach it, or so hidden that we cannot discover it.

posted 08-06-2016 01:13 PM               

quote:

---

Thank you very much for sharing your history and knowledge with us![/B]

---

If it was not for interested cS members like yourself, I would have ended my posts long ago!

posted 08-06-2016 03:28 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by LM-12:
Which MOCR console in Houston monitored the EMU during the moonwalks, and who was on that console for the Apollo 11 EVA?

---

Console #15 was responsible for monitoring the EMU. Console 15 was called the Telemetry, Electrical, EVA Mobility Unit (TELMU) monitor.

I do not know who was monitoring the console for Apollo 11.

I do know that there were system specialists in rooms adjoining the MOCR called Staff Support Rooms (SSR) that contained consoles manned by systems specialists who assisted specific MOCR positions.

From the real-time data available on their consoles, SSR personnel performed data analyses, analyzed long-term performance trends, compared these trends with base-line data, and relayed this information with recommendations to their respective MOCR leader, in this case the TELMU monitor.

I do not know the name(s) of the individuals at the EMU data support monitors. I will venture a guess that Astronaut Ken Mattingly, the NASA EMU expert, might have been at one of the SSR consoles.

posted 08-08-2016 12:06 AM               

The many times I was looking outside from the inside of the Pressure Helmet Assembly (PHA) through the LEVA Protective Visor and Sun Visor I was nothing less than euphoric.

I recall the time I was going through a suited procedure with my LEVA in place and the Sun Visor Down. There was a full length mirror propped up against a table. I snuck a peek and when I saw the "gold" reflection of my LEVA Sun Visor, I felt "inspirational chills" that many of us have experienced. I will never forget that moment.

For those of you that are not entirely familiar with the LEVA and its sub-components,I've put together the below graphic.

Following is a detailed description of the LEVA components shown below.

The PROTECTIVE VISOR is an ultraviolet stabilized polycarbonate shield which affords impact, micrometeoroid, and ultraviolet ray protection. It can be positioned anywhere between the full-Up and full-Down positions and requires a force of 2 to 4 pounds for movement. The protective visor can be lowered independently of the sun visor, but cannot be raised independently with the sun visor in the Down position.

The inner surface of the polysulfone SUN VISOR has a gold coating which provides protection against light and reduces heat gain within the helmet. The visor can be positioned anywhere between the full-Up and full-Down positions by exerting a force of 2 to 4 pounds on the pull tabs. The sun visor cannot be independently lowered unless the protective visor is in the Down position, but it can be raised or lowered independently when the center eyeshade is in the full-Up position and the protective visor is in the Down position.

The eyeshade assemblies are constructed of fiberglass and are coated with white epoxy paint on the outer surfaces. The inner surfaces are coated with black epoxy paint.

The SIDE EYESHADES can be lowered independently of the sun visor and each other to prevent light penetration of the side viewing areas, thereby reducing low-angle solar glare.

The CENTER EYSHADE is attached to the LEVA shell assembly over the shell thermal cover and can be lowered independently of the side eyeshade assemblies. The center eyeshade assembly cannot be independently lowered unless the protective visor and the sun visor are in the down positions.

When sufficiently lowered, the VIEWPORT DOOR may be positioned as required to reduce solar glare.

posted 08-08-2016 12:22 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Daniel on the Moon:
To my knowledge, there were no contingency EVA transfer plans other than for a "soft dock."

---

Here is the procedure for the EVT (undocked, unstable) 2-OPS scenario:

1. CSM maneuver to LM
   
2. CDR egress feet first, move to EVA handrail clear of hatch; LMP tend lifeline
   
3. LMP egress, move up EVA handrail
   
4. CDR and LMP push away from LM at same time (give signal, pull in, push off)
   
5. CSM maneuver apex to CDR and LMP
   
6. CDR and LMP use handholds to move to side hatch
   
7. CDR ingress CSM, head first, face to MDC, and move to LEB; retrieve CO2 hoses and comm umbilical
   
8. CMP connect C comm umbilical to CDR
   
9. CDR configure audio panel as desired; secure position in LEB and tend lifeline for LMP; LMP ingress CSM feet first, face down, and assume position for closing side hatch

posted 08-08-2016 09:46 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by LM-12:
Which MOCR console in Houston monitored the EMU during the moonwalks, and who was on that console for the Apollo 11 EVA?

---

They occupied the redundant Booster consoles down on the front row.

posted 08-10-2016 02:44 AM               

During previous crew training runs inside the building, the astronauts complained about the excessively long length of the air supply hoses (see below photos) that connected to the suits through a PLSS mockup shell.

On numerous occasions, the astronauts got themselves tangled in the hoses.

As a joke, we (the suit techs and I) told Young and Duke that we solved the "long hose problem" and we were ready to demonstrate the solution!.

At that point, I had my camera ready and suit tech Troy Stewart proceeded to wrap Duke's air supply hose around him (Photo 3). At the same time, another suit tech wrapped Young's hose around him (Photo 2) as we planned.

As expected, we heard "concerned" voices through the portable communications radio, i.e. "What the hell is going on here", "What are you doing with my hose Troy", and some other comments with expletives I would rather not repeat!

When we told the crew we were shortening their hoses as they suggested, we all laughed or perhaps only Charlie laughed and John kind of smiled!

I was able to get the great photos below. Because I was using my "cheap" camera the photo resolution does not compare to the quality of official NASA photos.

posted 08-13-2016 11:24 PM               

After Apollo, I accepted a position as Systems Engineer with Martin Marietta in Orlando working on the Sprint anti-ballistic System that would have been used to intercept in-coming Soviet missiles.

posted 08-18-2016 12:29 PM               

I said to my wife, "How lucky am I to get the two greatest birthday gifts ever. The first is being blessed with the greatest wife imaginable in this world. The second, being blessed with the sight of a full moon on my birthday."

posted 08-22-2016 11:35 PM               

The photo below shows Apollo 13 Astronaut Fred Haises flight PLSS and OPS prepared for a pre-flight inspection test procedure.

The "Test Preparation Sheet" (TPS) was written to authorize the testing including the removal of the hardware from bonded storage and transfer to the test area (in this case the crew training building).

The "Test and Checkout Procedure" (TCP) was written to include the specific procedures to conduct the test.

Other paperwork includes:

• "Interim Discrepancy Reports" (IDR).
  If, during the execution of testing, there was an un-diagnosed issue, an "Interim Discrepancy Report" (IDR) was written and logged in a "Test And Inspection Record" without stopping the test. Following the completion of the test, the IDR would be further investigated and dispositioned as either resolved or up-graded to a "Discrepancy Report" (DR).

• "Discrepancy Reports" (DR).
  A DR was written by the contractor QC inspector for any out of specification test result. DRs remained open until they were dis-positioned and signed by the test engineer and a NASA contractor engineer liaison that was permanently assigned to the contractor.

• "Material Review Board" results if a DR is unresolved.

• "Hardware Functional Test Reports" and other misc. paperwork.

posted 08-31-2016 06:04 PM               

Based on my assumption, I plan on posting my experiences (as PLSS/OPS EVA Crew Training Mission Manager) pertaining to the equipment used, the problems associated with the equipment used and the changes made to solve problems so that we never missed a planned crew training exercise as a result of equipment and associated problems.

My story will be relevant for historians that look back and want to know how Apollo mission EVA Training was accomplished as there is very little documented information since I was totally responsible for the PLSS/OPS training hardware used.

For those of you who assumed that training PLSS/OPSs were functionally equivalent to flight hardware and therefore could be used for earth training, the flight PLSS ventilation cooling and LCG water cooling capability was based on the process of sublimation (a solid [ice] converted directly to a gas without passing through the liquid phase) that required the vacuum of space.