Astronaut Bean and two U. S. Spacecraft on the surface of the Moon. This photograph shows how close Conrad landed the LM to its target point (AS-12-48-7135).
Astronaut Bean and two U. S. Spacecraft on the surface of the Moon.
This photograph shows how close Conrad landed the LM to its target point
(AS-12-48-7135).
PI/Engineer: R. E. Benson, JSC
Other Contacts: B. G. Cour-Palais, JSC
Apollo Flight Nos.: 12
Apollo Exp't No.:
Discipline: Materials of Construction
Weight: NA
Dimensions: NA
Manufacturer: NA
Description/Purpose:
After a 30 month exposure of Surveyor 3 on the surface, the A-12 crew
inspected the spacecraft and retrieved key parts from it for further analysis
on Earth...sort of an LDEF of the Moon. The effects of the A-12 LM blast
ejecta, micrometeroid effects on electronics (TV camera), cables, metal
structure, mirrors, etc., analysis of the sampler scoop, effect of a low
temperature oxygen plasma on the coatings, induced radioactivity, and microbe
survival in the lunar environment, were a few of the studies conducted.
It also allowed verification of the original remote analyses performed
by the alpha-backscatter instrument on Surveyor.
Unloading from the LM: NA
Transporting by foot or MET:
A "Surveyor parts bag" was attached to the CDR's PLSS by the LMP. The
cutting tool was in the bag.
Loading/unloading tools/exp'ts on LRV: NA
Site selection:
The precision landing required to land near the S3 site was required,
but once accomplished, there was no astronaut site selection. The crew
actually saw Surveyor crater during the descent. The LM landed ~163 m from
the spacecraft, just outside the radius of 150 m which was to be avoided
to minimize contamination of the Surveyor vehicle by LM exhaust and dust.
A geology traverse was part of the trip to and from the spacecraft.
Check-out of experiment:
The crew visited the spacecraft on the second EVA. Photography of specific
parts was planned, including vernier engines, klystron, foot pads, power
supplies, solar panels, and others. Also, photography of some of the same
scenes viewed by the S-III TV camera provided a comparison of trenches
and other scenes over time.
Operation of experiment:
As the CDR cut specific parts off of S-III the LMP caught the samples.
A cable sample (~10 cm) was caught in a special bag (the SESC). There were
pockets in the parts bag for each item returned. Some surfaces were wiped
and then photographed to document any dust accumulation.
Recovery/take-down of experiment: NA
Stowing experiment for return: The parts were stored in a bag for return.
Loading/unloading samples on LRV: NA
Loading of exp't/samples into the LM: Nominal.
Stowing of package once in the LM:
The storage of the Surveyor parts bag and its components in the LM
was completely satisfactory.
Sampling operations - soil, rocks:
The crew retrieved a painted tube, an unpainted tube, the TV camera,
a cable, and the scoop. Some soil that was in the scoop was returned, as
well.
Navigating/recognizing landmarks: NA
Were there any hazards in the experiment?
i.e. hazardous materials (explosive, radioactive, toxic), sharp
objects, high voltages, massive, bulky, tripping hazards, temperatures?:
Concern existed before the mission about operating on the inner slope
of the crater (Surveyor crater) where S3 had landed. A 10 meter tether
was provided in case stability was questionable.
Was lighting a problem?: No.
Were the results visible to the crew?: Some discoloration was evident to the crew.
Would you recommend any design changes?: NA
Were any special tools required?:
A cutting tool was used to remove the TV camera and tubes. A 30 foot
(9.1 m) tether was included in case the steepness of the slope made operation
difficult, but it was not needed. The crew recommended that a 100 foot
(30 m) tether would be ideal for determining whether or not a specific
crater wall with steep sides was adequate for descent to obtain samples
inside it. This was flown on A-13 and 14, but never used.
Was the orientation of the experiment (i.e. horizontal/vertical)
important? Difficult?
The spacecraft was on a 12 degree slope, but there was no feeling that
it was likely to slide downhill nor was there a problem maintaining balance.
Was the experiment successful?: Yes.
Were there related experiments on other flights?:
The thermal degradation (TDS) experiment considered
the degradation of thermal properties of coatings after exposure to the
lunar dust. The long duration exposure facility (LDEF) was placed in LEO
for 6 years to investigate the effects of the low earth orbit environment
on various materials. A "Long-Term Surface Exposure Experiment" was begun
on A-17. Selected hardware was photographically documented and left on
the moon during the mission. Samples of similar material were set aside
for long-term storage on Earth. The purpose is to allow comparison of the
materials at some future time. The long-term effect of the lunar environment
on the materials thus can be evaluated if the A-17 site is revisited. The
hardware comprised items which would be flown on A-17 anyway, such as the
LEAM experiment, the mirror surface on the LRV batteries, TV, communications
unit, thermal blankets on the ALSEP central station, etc.
Where was it stored during flight?: NA
Were there any problems photographing the experiment?:
Some shadows may have been a problem.
What pre-launch and cruise req'ts were there? power, thermal,
late access, early recovery?:
NA
What was different between training and actual EVA?:
Some shadows may have been a problem.
What problems were due to the suit rather than the experiment?: No comments by crew.
Any experiences inside the LM of interest from the experiment/operations
viewpoint?:
No comments by crew.
References:
"Analysis of Surveyor 3 Material and Photographs Returned by Apollo 12" NASA SP-284, 1972.
Apollo 12 Preliminary Science Report and Apollo 12 Mission Report
Final Apollo 12 Lunar Surface Operations Plan, JSC, October 23, 1969
Apollo Program Summary Report, section 3.2.28 Surveyor III Analysis, JCS-09423, April, 1975.