Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!b.gp.cs.cmu.edu!ralf
From: ralf@b.gp.cs.cmu.edu (Ralf Brown)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: Apollo 8, 9, and 10
Message-ID: <5574@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 19 Jul 89 17:24:25 GMT
References: <377@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> <1989Jul19.005449.3163@utzoo.uucp> <17231@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 18

In article <17231@bellcore.bellcore.com> ddavey@grits.UUCP (Doug Davey) writes:
}Does anybody remember whether the ascent or descent engine was used
}during Apollo 10's return from low orbit to rendezvous with the CSM?
}Either option seems difficult.  On the one hand, I would not expect
}the descent engine to be restartable.  On the other, firing the
}ascent engine and getting the ascent stage cleanly separated from the
}descent stage would be tricky since the descent stage was deigned to
}be firmly on the lunar surface during this operation.

As I recall, one contingency plan was in fact such a separation while not
on the surface, in case they ran out of fuel trying to land.  They would
then separate immediately and use the ascent stage to abort back to the
CSM.
-- 
{backbone}!cs.cmu.edu!ralf   ARPA: RALF@CS.CMU.EDU   FIDO: Ralf Brown 1:129/46
BITnet: RALF%CS.CMU.EDU@CMUCCVMA   AT&Tnet: (412)268-3053 (school)   FAX: ask
DISCLAIMER?  Did  |"Let both sides invoke the wonders of science instead of
I claim something?| the terrors." --John F. Kennedy