|
|
Author
|
Topic: Apollo 11 Flight Plan: Relaunched (Gibson)
|
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 48710 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 07-15-2022 12:00 AM
collectSPACE RelaunchSpace reconstructs NASA flight plan for Apollo 11 moon landingMore than half a century since its pages served as humanity's first roadmap to the moon, NASA's Apollo 11 flight plan has been relaunched. More than a simple reprint, this new edition from RelaunchSpace has been reconstructed from the ground up so that it appears exactly as it did when it was prepared in 1969 by the flight planning branch of the flight crew support division at the Manned Spacecraft Center (today, the Johnson Space Center) in Houston.  |
Blackarrow Member Posts: 3481 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 07-15-2022 04:31 PM
I see from the cited article that this facsimile of the Apollo 11 Final Flight Plan incorporates the later "Revision A" amendments. That begs the question, at least in my mind, as to whether collectors prefer the "Final Flight Plan" as published, complete with staple(s), or the Final Flight Plan with all subsequent amendments added in.For instance, I have an Apollo 13 Final Flight Plan (dated March 16th, 1970) which was owned by a contractor working in the support room at Mission Control. The staples have been (carefully) removed to allow the pages of the "Revision A" document to be inserted. The later "Revision B" is also included, consisting of both extra pages for replacement/insertion and "pen and ink changes to be made on indicated pages." There are indeed a number of handwritten amendments. All of the pages (original, Revision A and Revision B) were originally held in a 5-ring binder, as can be seen from slight "stretch marks" to the ring-holes. I realize this sounds like a sales-pitch, but the Flight Plan is not for sale. I'm just curious about whether a fully amended and updated Flight Plan is more desirable to collectors. N.B. I note that even this updated and amended Flight Plan still refers (at Section 1, Page 1-1) to the CMP as "Mattingly" although all subsequent crew references simply say CDR, CMP or LMP. |
kyra Member Posts: 589 From: Louisville CO US Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 07-16-2022 11:31 AM
While I have not been a collector of anything for over a decade due to circumstances beyond my control, I do know quite a bit about Flight Data File documentation.These documents were living documents in that they were under constant revision. Ideally any reissued collector's would reflect what the crew and flight controllers actually used complete with strike outs and new pages. And of course a Revision B will be worth more than Revision A, unless there is provenance Rev. A was owned by someone historically known (such as a FD or astronaut) or signed "Used in Training" for example. On the other hand, nobody in their right mind is going to mark up an original that has survived this long with P&I and PCN's. But if a document is going to be re-issued with hundreds of hours of work, why not make it as close to what was on the console or onboard the spacecraft? | |
Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts
Copyright 2022 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.

Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a
|
|
|
advertisement
|