![apollo guidance computer apollo guidance computer](https://hackaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/apollo-agc-thumbnail.jpg)
Is a backup system still contemplated for either APOLLO or LEM?
![apollo guidance computer apollo guidance computer](http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/apollo-guidance-computer-and-key-input.jpg)
In regard to the previous question, is there a back-up guidance function of sufficient breadth and proven development that can allow the APOLLO/LEM mission to attain success … in the event of catastrophic failure of the MIT guidance? …ħ. Is there documented test-proven data to show that it will meet the needs of APOLLO/LEM?ģ. There has always been apprehension about the MIT guidance system achieving the required reliability to ensure a safe mission. Karth (D-Minnesota) listed a number of questions. In a letter to NASA administrator James Webb, Representative Joseph E. The arguments were complex and contentious and even reached members of the House of Representatives. In late 1962, Bellcomm recommended that IBM, not MIT, supply the computers for the Apollo Command and Lunar Modules. AT&T in turn established Bellcomm, an entity that carried out these analyses. Early in the Apollo program, NASA contracted with AT&T to provide technical and managerial assistance for select technical issues. But in the early 1960s, when this decision was made, the chip was untested, and its reliability was a large unknown. That seems obvious in retrospect, as today we enjoy the fruits of integrated circuit technology in our consumer devices. What was more, the designers of the computer, at the MIT Instrumentation Laboratory, decided to build the computer using the newly-invented integrated circuit, or silicon “chip” as we now know it. Due to size, weight, and power constraints, the Command and Lunar Modules would each carry only one computer, which had to work. One of the most interesting examples of these decisions concerned the Apollo Guidance and Navigation system, controlled by the Apollo Guidance Computer. There are numerous other examples of similar trade-offs that illustrate the need for safety against the need to venture so far away from Earth orbit, and to meet President Kennedy’s deadline of putting a man on the Moon by 1969. During Apollo 8, which carried no LM, this wasn’t a practical solution, but during the Apollo 13 mission the LM engine was used to help return the astronauts safely to Earth.
![apollo guidance computer apollo guidance computer](https://www.nutsvolts.com/uploads/wygwam/NV_0905_Driscoll_apollo_guidance_computer_Eldon_Hall.jpg)
But even in that instance a plan was worked out to use the Lunar Module’s (LM) engine as a backup. There was no practical backup if the engine failed. For example, the Service Module’s engine needed to fire while the crew was behind the Moon to place them in a trajectory that would return them to Earth. Sometimes creating a backup was not always practical.
![apollo guidance computer apollo guidance computer](https://res-1.cloudinary.com/theymadethat/image/upload/v1522255803/thing/ethmtopxpxp4ehpyuimj.jpg)
Wherever possible, they designed backup systems so that if a primary system failed the crew would still have the means to return home safely. (Mark Twain, Pudd’nhead Wilson’s Calendar (1897), Chapter 15)Īs the Apollo program took form in the early 1960s, NASA engineers always kept the safety of their astronauts at the fore in light of the enormous risks they knew were inherent in the goal of landing on the Moon and returning safely. Put all your eggs in one basket-AND WATCH THAT BASKET!