See list belowApril 3, 196969-PA-T-53APA/Chief, Apollo Data Priority CoordinationSome G Mission Techniques action items
This memo is just a list of action items assigned to MPAD and/or MIT which I remember coming from our recent G descent/descent abort meetings. In addition to reminding those responsible for them, they serve as some sort of indication of what's going on in this business which you might find interesting.
1. Orbital Mission Analysis Branch
a. Establish a preferred rendezvous maneuver sequence to guard against lunar impact in the event of late descent aborts on the AGS. This includes a recommendation on ΔV trimming at insertion, too.
b. Determine if an unacceptable abort situation would exist if PDI were delayed one rev in real time.
2. Math Physics Branch
a. Determine how the flight controllers should decide when to apply the altitude bias update to the Lear Processor Display of H vs. H. Is there some way to take into account the known lunar surface slope? Specifically; find out from the mapping people what the exact slope is for the landing sites.
b. Determine the effect of non-synchronization cf the data sources when updating the Lear altitude from PGNCS.
3. Landing Analysis Branch
a. Establish a technique for testing and determining accepta- bility of the LGC LM state vector pre-PDI. Also, recommend the action – that is, under what conditions they should abort, update the state vector, advise crew of large ΔH, or what?
b. There is a PDI attitude burn check made at TIG – 2 minutes, referenced to the horizon. Determine how accurately a pre-flight value may be established and thus if it is necessary to update this test in real time. Also, ascertain if the sun will interfere with this test.
c. Is there some way to monitor the PGNCS to determine failure of the P63/P64 program change to occur when it should have by using the V, H, H DSKY displays? I would like to avoid having to call up TGO. Also, establish what course of action the crew should take if they fail to get the program change.
4. Guidance and Performance Branch
Establish strip chart limit lines defining AGS performance in terms of acceptable, marginal, and failed. Similar limits are also required for the telemetry comparison display.
5. Landing Analysis Branch and Math Physics Branch
Determine if and how the descent targeting must be updated in the event PDI is delayed one rev in real time after DOI.
6. Guidance and Performance Branch and MIT
Establish abort limits for the strip charts beyond which impend- ing failure of the PGNCS should be considered imminent.
7. Landing Analysis Branch, G&CD, and MIT
a. Establish attitude error and attitude rate limit to be used by the crew during descent and recommended action if violented.
b. Establish what constitutes adequate landing radar data. Speci- fically, what should be used as a measure of this:
(1) The amount obtained and when it was obtained.
(2) ΔH from the strip chart at the time of landing radar loss.