22 Jan
2018
22 Jan
'18
8:35 a.m.
From: Paul Koning
I[t] just dawned on me that the subject is Apollo the
company bought by
HP, not Apollo the spacecraft. Oh well...
Actually, that stuff has all been saved, and run under simulators; there's
a very comprehensive site here:
http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/index.html
which will keep anyone entertained for hours.
(I have this bit set that at one point there was a 'project history' page,
but I don't see it, looking quickly now.)
Noel
23 Jan
23 Jan
6:30 a.m.
On Jan 22, 2018, at 10:35 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Not all, not by a long shot. Not even half.
The Apollo spacecraft had 4 computers aboard. One was in the Command Module, two were in
the Lunar Module, and one was in the Saturn. Of those, we only have software for the CM
and LM computers. The Saturn software, which is what actually flew from Earth to the moon,
was lost. So you can claim we have ?75%? at best, but that?s still not even close to true.
There was a large complex of computers on the ground that calculated maneuvers and
generated uplink data needed for the operation of the CM and LM computers, as well as the
computers for the controllers, and none of that software survived. A lot of effort has
gone into filling in those missing pieces, and it?s by no means complete.
From: Paul Koning
I[t] just dawned on me that the subject is Apollo
the company bought by
HP, not Apollo the spacecraft. Oh well...
Actually, that stuff has all been saved, and run under simulators 
7:14 a.m.
On 1/23/2018 6:30 AM, Daniel Seagraves via cctalk wrote:
The Saturn software, which is what actually flew from
Earth to the moon,
The navigation and guidance was in the CM and LM processors.? The
Saturn
IBM firmware is lost, but was under command of the LM and CM computers,
and is running on simulators, as well as on some hardware replicas.
Spare AGCs were used with F8 aircraft for later uses beyond the lunar
program.
After I reread the thread, I think they were talking about saving the
Apollo computer software, not the spacecraft.
AGC software here, FWIW.
https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/
I would be interested in what it takes to configure mame to run the
other Apollo software, which Al mentioned.
thanks
jim
7:24 a.m.
On Jan 23, 2018, at 9:14 AM, jim stephens via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 1/23/2018 6:30 AM, Daniel Seagraves via cctalk wrote:
Absolutely wrong. The only time the CM computer flew the Saturn was in an abort scenario
where the Saturn digital computer failed, and it happened via a data path from the FDAI
needles to the Saturn?s analog control computer. At all other points prior to S4 staging
the CM was strictly along for the ride. After S4 staging the CM and LM were on their own,
but that was after the translunar burn.
The Saturn software, which is what actually flew
from Earth to the moon,
The navigation and guidance was in the CM and LM
processors. The Saturn IBM firmware is lost, but was under command of the LM and CM
computers, and is running on simulators, as well as on some hardware replicas. After I reread the thread, I think they were talking
about saving the Apollo computer software, not the spacecraft.
They were.
AGC software here, FWIW.
https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/
I know. I am one of the NASSP maintainers. We took the yaAGC core and built a spacecraft
around it so we could actually use it instead of just running it to look at the pretty
flashing numbers in the idle loop. The project has been in work for more than 10 years
now. Right now we have the most complete Apollo simulation ever built, exceeding the
capabilities of even the NASA training simulators. See
http://nassp.sourceforge.net/wiki/Main_Page
<http://nassp.sourceforge.net/wiki/Main_Page>
7:33 a.m.
On 1/23/2018 7:24 AM, Daniel Seagraves via cctalk wrote:
As pointed out, the function of the Saturn
computers was to do the lunar
injection.? The main guidance problem of the mission was the coast and
the landing, which were done by the CM and LM.
They did what the ground uploaded to them for guidance, as full
independent guidance was decided to be too intensive and unnecessary to
have in the onboard computers.? The real work was done in the back rooms
@ Mission control, with certain features implemented on the systems
onboard the rocket.
You couldn't carry out a mission w/o the ground supporting either system
with computations to the onboard systems.? You didn't punch in the
address of the moon on any system onboard the rocket, you got
pre-computed parameters from ground? computations that the flight
computers carried out.
The AGC systems could vary that more than the Saturn stack could, as you
point out the capability was added at astronaut insistence to control
the Saturn part of the rocket, but was never used.
I'm not getting your "absolutely wrong" part.
On Jan 23, 2018, at 9:14 AM, jim stephens via
cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 1/23/2018 6:30 AM, Daniel Seagraves via cctalk wrote:
Absolutely wrong. The only time the CM computer flew the Saturn was in an abort scenario
where the Saturn digital computer failed, and it happened via a data path from the FDAI
needles to the Saturn?s analog control computer. At all other points prior to S4 staging
the CM was strictly along for the ride. After S4 staging the CM and LM were on their own,
but that was after the translunar burn. The Saturn software, which is what actually flew
from Earth to the moon,
The navigation and guidance was in the CM and LM
processors. The Saturn IBM firmware is lost, but was under command of the LM and CM
computers, and is running on simulators, as well as on some hardware replicas. After I reread
the thread, I think they were talking about saving the Apollo computer software, not the
spacecraft.
They were.
AGC software here, FWIW.
https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/
I know. I am one of the NASSP maintainers. We took
the yaAGC core and built a spacecraft around it so we could actually use it instead of
just running it to look at the pretty flashing numbers in the idle loop. The project has
been in work for more than 10 years now. Right now we have the most complete Apollo
simulation ever built, exceeding the capabilities of even the NASA training simulators.
See http://nassp.sourceforge.net/wiki/Main_Page
<http://nassp.sourceforge.net/wiki/Main_Page>
7:44 a.m.
On Jan 23, 2018, at 9:33 AM, jim stephens via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
The real work was done in the back rooms @ Mission
control, with certain features implemented on the systems onboard the rocket.
You couldn't carry out a mission w/o the ground supporting either system with
computations to the onboard systems. You didn't punch in the address of the moon on
any system onboard the rocket, you got pre-computed parameters from ground computations
that the flight computers carried out.
That?s exactly what I was trying to point out. What we have is a relatively small piece of
the entire puzzle. People seem to think that just because a few versions of CM and LM
software exist all is saved and done, but it?s really only the user interface to a much
larger stack. You can't just fire up the AGC and push the ?land on the moon? button.
You can run it by itself and look at the idle loop or display the clock but getting it to
actually DO anything close to its original tasks requires input from a lot of missing
pieces. We aren?t trying to just run it in a box, that?s been done. We?re making it FLY.
I'm not getting your "absolutely wrong"
part.
He said "The Saturn IBM firmware is lost, but was under command of the LM and CM
computers?. This is absolutely wrong. It was the other way around.
11 a.m.
Bill,
I have an Apollo here with an 8" drive and I'm hunting for an 8" Domain
media set so I can reinstall the OS.
If you get them to me I can image them and send images to Al.
- Ian
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 7:44 AM, Daniel Seagraves via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
--
Ian Finder
(206) 395-MIPS
ian.finder at gmail.com
On Jan 23, 2018, at 9:33 AM, jim stephens via
cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
The real work was done in the back rooms @
Mission control, with certain
features implemented on the systems onboard the
rocket.
You couldn't carry out a mission w/o the ground supporting either system
with
computations to the onboard systems. You didn't punch in the address
of the moon on any system onboard the rocket, you got pre-computed
parameters from ground computations that the flight computers carried out.
That?s exactly what I was trying to point out. What we have is a
relatively small piece of the entire puzzle. People seem to think that just
because a few versions of CM and LM software exist all is saved and done,
but it?s really only the user interface to a much larger stack. You can't
just fire up the AGC and push the ?land on the moon? button. You can run it
by itself and look at the idle loop or display the clock but getting it to
actually DO anything close to its original tasks requires input from a lot
of missing pieces. We aren?t trying to just run it in a box, that?s been
done. We?re making it FLY.
I'm not getting your "absolutely
wrong" part.
He said "The Saturn IBM firmware is lost, but was under command of the LM
and CM computers?. This is absolutely wrong. It was the other way around.
2525
days inactive
2526
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
dseagrav＠lunar-tokyo.net -
ian.finder＠gmail.com -
jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu -
jwsmail＠jwsss.com