|
Author
|
Topic: Close up with an Apollo lunar module (LM-9)
|
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 1771
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted April 20, 2012 07:14 AM
  
It occurs to me that most space enthusiasts have had close-up views of Apollo command modules, even if it was through a plexiglas shield as with "Columbia", but how many people outside NASA or Grumman have been able to stand a few feet from the windows and hatch of a flight-worthy lunar module?
Here are two photographs I took at Kennedy Space Center in July 1975, when LM-9 (originally intended for Apollo 15) was stored in a building in the industrial area of the space centre. These were never printed at the time because the printing lab considered them faulty (I assume because the flash reflected off the window which separated me from the LM). I saw these in print-form for the first time in 2010. On looking at them again today, I realised just how close I must have been to the front of the ascent stage (maybe 4 feet?). Apart from aerospace engineers and anyone else who visited KSC at that time, who else has been so close? The second picture suggests that the KSC people weren't looking after LM-9 very well. The landing leg struts had clearly seen better days! I was pleased to see that they had cleaned up LM-9 by the time I saw her again in the Saturn V Center in 2007 (from a greater distance).  
|
APG85
Member Posts: 141
From:
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted April 20, 2012 08:51 PM
Neat! |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 2084
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted April 21, 2012 04:55 PM
Here is a recent shot of the LM-9 at Kennedy Space Center's Apollo Saturn V Center to show her "before and after... then and now," so to speak. |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 1771
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted April 21, 2012 05:51 PM
The hatch is open! I never noticed that before. (Or has it been removed, and — if so — where is it now?) |
space1
Member Posts: 433
From: Danville, Ohio, USA
Registered: Dec 2002
|
posted April 21, 2012 06:15 PM
It drives me crazy when I see LM footpads at that weird angle, as if the LM were designed to land in a funnel. |
Tom
Member Posts: 1155
From: New York
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted April 21, 2012 06:28 PM
Speaking of the footpads, why were the bottoms covered in gold and black(?) foil? |
ilbasso
Member Posts: 1326
From: Greensboro, NC USA
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted April 21, 2012 06:42 PM
That's the way they were from Apollo 11 onward...gold and black foil, with the black half facing toward the engine.There was no foil on the footpads on the LMs for Apollo 9 and 10. There were also no plume deflectors for the RCS engines. Obviously the decision was made that better thermal and exhaust protection was needed. I don't know if the design changes were made at the same time or not. |
Rick Mulheirn
Member Posts: 2084
From: England
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted April 22, 2012 03:00 AM
The hatch is still in place. Other shots taken that day from a different angle show the hatch folded right back and just the "hinged" edge is visible. |
Headshot
New Member Posts: 8
From: Streamwood, IL USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted April 24, 2012 01:40 PM
I don't see any landing probes on any of the legs either. |
FullThrottle
Member Posts: 68
From: Seattle, WA, USA
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted April 24, 2012 01:56 PM
When I visited the Saturn V Center for the Nov. 2010 scrub of STS-133, the hatch was closed on LM-9... When I came back to Florida again, for the STS-133 launch on Feb. 24 2011, they had the hatch open! (to my surprise and excitement, so I got pictures of both displays)I'm betting 10 to 1 the reason they don't have the landing probes on the LM is because it would be too easy to grab or touch. As it is now, the LM seems "just out of your reach", just like the Saturn V (I did try my hardest to run, jump and touch the Saturn but couldn't). With the extra couple of feet hanging down on the probes you could easily stand on one of the tables underneath the LEM and grab, shake and rattle it. The LM sits right underneath the tables/chairs at the "MOON ROCK CAFE" in the Saturn V center. |
space1
Member Posts: 433
From: Danville, Ohio, USA
Registered: Dec 2002
|
posted April 24, 2012 03:56 PM
If you think about it, for all of its life before its current display location, LM-9 was earth-bound with its footpads resting on the ground. There would have been no way to display it with the probes. So much so that NASA sold the probes as surplus. They were apparently sold to Charles Bell many years ago, and from his collection to others in 2000 with the auctions of his estate.One of the lunar surface sensing probes from LM-9 is currently in my collection. I had obtained it indirectly from a buyer at the Bell estate auction. ------------------
John Fongheiser
Historic Space Systems |
Jurg Bolli
Member Posts: 458
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted April 24, 2012 06:19 PM
This probe is way cool! |
FullThrottle
Member Posts: 68
From: Seattle, WA, USA
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted April 24, 2012 06:43 PM
One of the original LM leg probes is also in the collection of Blue Origin, and is displayed in their Kent, WA headquarters building in a little mini-museum of space artifacts that the owner of Blue Origin purchased. If I remember correctly the little sign stated that it was from a J-type Apollo 15/16/17 LEM. Very cool to see extremely up close and personal, I don't remember seeing anything like it at Florida's space museums that I visited. Maybe it also came from the Charles Bell estate? I remember reading somewhere that the Apollo 11, 12, 13, and 14 probes were a different length than the Apollo 15, 16 and 17 extended mission LEM probes. Which are the longer ones, which are the shorter ones, and why? |
space1
Member Posts: 433
From: Danville, Ohio, USA
Registered: Dec 2002
|
posted April 24, 2012 07:03 PM
In the past an auction listing for a LM probe told that story about different probe lengths being used. I can't find any official documentation of that. (My spec drawing of the probe only gives one length. And when you look at the Apollo 15 Mission Report (?) in a table of changes with Apollo 15 vs. Apollo 14, among the extensively detailed items there is no mention of the probe lengths changing.) |
advertisement