posted 05-10-2015 10:46 AM               

Apollo 10 splashed down on 26 May 1969 and almost immediately Sam Phillips released the Apollo 10 Post Launch Mission Operation Report (the cover sheet was dated 26 May 1969). On Wednesday 11 June 1969 NASA announced to the public that Apollo 11 would attempt the first lunar landing.

posted 05-12-2015 06:51 AM               

Apollo directors/managers/engineers had to conduct some sort of formal review of Apollo 10's flight before Apollo 11 could be given the OK to attempt a landing. Of note, there were three launch vehicle discrepancies, 25 CSM discrepancies, 15 LM discrepancies and one mission support discrepancy that needed to be evaluated, reviewed and resolved/waived. In my opinion, two of these, the raggedy S-IVB performance during TLI and "large attitude excursions" prior to and during LM staging could have been potential show-stoppers for Apollo 11.

posted 05-12-2015 08:43 AM               

Due to the need for favorable lighting and tracking conditions, only a few days were available each month to launch for a particular landing site on the moon... NASA headquarters, in particular, was fearful that there was just too much still to do to support a July launch. The decision had to made soon, because the Saturn V had been on Pad 39A since late May and technicians were almost set to begin loading hypergolic propellants aboard the Apollo spacecraft; these were so corrosive that they could not sit in the ship's plumbing for more than a few weeks."

Unsurprisingly, the astronauts opposed the idea of postponing until August; they told Deke Slayton they would be ready and felt the additional time would make things only marginally better. After a nine-hour flight readiness review on 17 June, Sam Phillips formally announced 16 July as Apollo 11's date with destiny.

posted 05-12-2015 01:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by onesmallstep:
From 'Foothold in the Heavens: The Seventies'

---

posted 05-17-2015 01:16 PM               

If there was still an internal debate of whether it should be pushed back to August or not that seems to indicate that there were some remaining discrepancies, even after the June 11 "go" announcement, but that they were not significant.

posted 05-17-2015 01:32 PM               

As its name suggests, a Flight Readiness Review, or FRR, gives teams responsible for various elements of a NASA flight mission an opportunity to ensure technical questions raised at earlier reviews have been adequately dealt with and to raise concerns about anything else that might affect mission success.

...the reviews gather team members in one meeting room, where they report on their areas of responsibility and, at the end of the session, express their judgment in a "go" or "no-go" flight decision. Most often, technical issues that could affect the flight are studied and resolved by engineers before the meeting; their work is reviewed and discussed and the session usually ends in a unanimous "go" decision.

posted 06-09-2015 08:52 PM               

Until 1969, NASA chose roman numerals to designate successful flight missions, although there were notable exceptions.

In the Mercury program, the choice of the number "7" by the original seven Mercury astronauts precluded the use of roman numerals for the [x] spacecraft. Project Gemini was the only manned program to use roman numerals, and even its early unmanned flights were named by the Mercury system (Gemini-Titan 1, Gemini-Titan 2).

posted 06-10-2015 12:58 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jonnyed:
For example, Apollo 11 as Apollo XI. Why?

---

posted 06-10-2015 01:22 AM               

I also penciled APOLLO around the top of my circular design and ELEVEN around the bottom. Neil didn't like the ELEVEN because it wouldn't be understandable to foreigners, so after trying XI and 11, we settled on the latter and put APOLLO 11 around the top.

posted 07-03-2015 10:26 PM               

Some time went by with Aldrin pleading publicly and privately to be first. Armstrong largely kept silent on this even though he had already been made commander. Aldrin made multiple statements and references to the tradition of ship captains not being first to step off into new lands.

posted 07-03-2015 11:59 PM               

In this case, Armstrong never spoke out about being first out; that was a story instigated and invented by Paul Haney, who had recently resigned as a NASA public affairs officer. Both Aldrin and Armstrong confirmed the story was false.