I'm AMAZED you have all this information available to you. I worked on the Apollo program in my early 20's and am probably, now, in a fast diminishing group of people still alive that did that. So much of the technical information, I would have thought would, have been long lost. Your presentation is amazing for no other reason is your ability to locate all this information, and present it as well as you do. Great Job!
@@rutexas7157 You don't understand it so it can't be true is that it? Whether you believe it or not doesn't change the fact it happened. Go back to your conspiracy kindergarden and leave people alone.
Dan Slotea lol no. NACA was using analog computers to calculate flight dynamics in the 1930s, and digital computers were doing the same by the 1950s. Orbital mechanics, ground simulators, mechanical and electrical engineering etc were are using computers in the 1960s. Sure some engineers were probably doing daily small calculations on slide rules, but the big systems were designed and tested on digital computers.
Me too, although I kinda feel sad knowing that the state of the art electronics in the LVDC were just discarded after the third stage wasn't needed anymore. But I understand that reusability wasn't a priority in the Apollo Program, the Saturn just had to get the spacecraft on a trajectory to the Moon and once it was finished it wasn't needed anymore.
Early on in the video, I said you didn't need a computer to fly a rocket ( i was thinking of a digital one) and that the V2 rocket used gyroscopes to control the graphite rudders in the exhaust during launch. Well, this rather oversimplifies things. The gyroscopes output actually went through the first all-electronic analogue computer called the "Mischgerät" which computed the signals to send to the graphite rudders. Thanks to Bernd Ulmann of analogparadigm.com for highlighting this.
It's nice to admit faults, but calling a continuous "analog-state" to "current-level" converter device "a computer" is a bit of a stretch. If you defined that as a computer, you would also have to call counterweight devices, water-clocks, mechanical measuring devices (down to something, say, with a spring that clamps in and then releases a block as a measuring device gains resistance) and so on computers as well. A stepless switch alone would be "a computer", even if there was nothing involved that would, say, adjust the range or prevent states from going under a certain level depending on the current level, etc. That's not a "computer", even if it's an extremely sophisticated sliding analog state converter. I don't know if thinking about anything that is a "black box" between one device and another as a computer is a modern phenomenon or not. But it's not a mechanical device that takes one input state, or one number, and then through a mechanical process produces a predictable output result according to the rules of that mechanical process. A converter device can of course be digital as well, and use a process that is incredibly complicated just to not get the accurate result of an analog converter device. But it doesn't make the analog converter device a "computer" any more than it makes a voltmeter a computer. Still, what's funny about this is that if we at some point in the future will end up producing solid quantum computing devices, we will in some fairly significant ways treat them as if they were analog converter-devices with probability-predictors for the result of a complicated equation, rather than a mechanical instruction set result of an approximation. I am also very weak for suggestions that insist that analogue measuring devices should naturally be involved, in, say, determining the variable bitrate of computation density - in sound-formats and compression, noise-reduction and filters, for example. So I guess people might disagree on what "a computer" should be defined at by looking forwards as well as backwards in time. But the Mischgerät was an analog conversion device, that translated positions in the gyroscope to a specific range of current. That current was then used, with some treshold(?) and filtering to determine the fin-positions(I believe that was one of the huge weaknesses of the system, that the way it was put together could make noise interfere with the ranges, along with the problem with oscillations that still would be an issue). So unless you're redefining what an "analog computer" is to being any form of conversion of input - which makes it very different to what a digital one is, then it's questionable to say that the (very advanced, and super-interesting) converter device in the v2s was a "computer".
@@kabalder So, don't call it a computer, call it a processor then, and no harm's done. In the Netherlands, an extensive analog computer was used to predict the behaviour of water along rivers and landscape: Deltar. Of course, with the advent of digital computers in the seventies and eighties, it grew obsolete. Analog computers were also used for quickly calculating artillery solutions, especially by the navy. We now may call such devices differently, but in contrast to present-day options, where digital processing power has become ubiquitous, the most striking property is being analog. It is not about the processing power as such.
Even though I'm a sucker for anything "Apollo" this episode is truly engaging. I really liked the schematic illustrations that enhanced the technical description. You're selection of topic and fluid dialog which enhances the technical understanding of the subject is growing exponentially each time. Thank you for these great video gems Paul!!
"The Saturn V was far too complicated to fly by hand." Actually, Gene Cernan stated that there was a procedure to hand fly the Saturn if they lost guidance. I believe the procedure was initiated after the lightning strike on Apollo 12. It was ready to go and operational by the time of Apollo 16, or possibly 15 (my memory is hazy on the precise flight). Cernan said in one interview that he practically dared "her" to quit on them so he could hand fly the rocket into orbit. So yes, you could use your amazing astro-piloting skills and fly the Beast, or the Lady, as Cernan also called her. Not that I'd want to!
Yea, brain is amazing and people self-confident. If we wanted to translate driving a car or playing a videogame into a system it would take a supercomputer. On the other hand It isnt always flawless and it's a bit logarithmic and slow at some point. Flying fast a fighter jet with high static instability is said to be impossible without computers. Has anyone tried it? We would spend all the time thinking about the chemistry in our liver if God wasnt an engineer :) We can waste time snd sleep in a flying rocket. How cool is that
Cernan said "if they lost GUIDANCE". Actually hand flying a Saturn V without the LVDC was indeed impossible. Watch the video again. Guidance was only one of the LVDC's several jobs. Quoting Wikipedia, "In flight the LVDC ran a major computation loop every 2 seconds for vehicle guidance, and a minor loop 25 times a second for attitude control." If the guidance routine failed, yeah an astronaut could fill in for that "every 2 seconds" guidance routine. But if the attitude-management and vibration-damping routines failed, there's no way the crew could handle the 25 adjustments per second needed to keep the rocket from tearing itself apart. Managing the huge rocket's side-to-side flexing and damping out pogo oscillations required corrections to be made far too rapidly for human reflexes.
The procedure is pretty well-documented: If the launch vehicle's inertial platform failed, the LVDC would no longer be able to provide steering commands to the rocket's flight control system. In this case the astronauts could flip a switch "Launch Vehicle Guidance - CMC" so that steering commands are now taken from the CMC (Apollo Guidance Computer), which had a simple pitch vs. time guidance scheme up until just prior to S1C staging. Afterwards the astronaut using the hand controllers could steer the rocket (astronaut's commands would be read by the AGC and sent directly to the rocket's flight control system). The astronaut would make manual corrections by referencing his trajectory chart with the current trajectory information displayed on the instrument panel.
Finally. This video explains topics I have wondered about, and answers questions I have had for many years. It is one of the most interesting Apollo videos I have ever seen, and I regard it Curious Droid's best. Which says a lot.
Oooohhhh... that's ruthless rocket humour savagery that Von Braun himself would've enjoyed and probably told similar jokes himself behind the backs of US scientists as he and his Operation Paperclip friends enjoyed even worse jokes too!
Since I'm getting so much attention. Anyone else want a video on the Apollo 1, Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11 accidents? I'd love to see these tragedies met with the razor eye and political/historical astuteness of Curious Droid.
@@bobl78 Generally speaking yes, depending on the mission (heavy payloads and payloads that have to get up high may be outside of the engine-out capability of the vehicle). The space shuttle, like Apollo-Saturn can also do an Abort To Orbit (ATO), in which the payload is delivered to a lower orbit than planned, causing the mission to become shorter.
The LVDC was unique in that most precision-guided rockets/ICBMs prior to the Saturn series usually used simple autopilots that followed pre-programmed sequences (pitch over at this rate for this long, then stop pitching, then do it again at a different rate, etc.) in the initial part of light, with precision control usually being accomplished by radio guidance and tracking from the ground. The LVDC had the computing power and guidance hardware to read its own acceleration rate and rotation in all three axes, allowing it to guide itself towards its target vector and velocity in what's called "closed-loop guidance". This refers to the feedback loop used to control itself (the blind, simple guidance method I referred to above is called "open-loop guidance". This is referred to as Iterative Guidance Mode (IGM) in the software documents.
It was a robust system. It took a lightening strike on Apollo 12 and didn't disrupt the rocket flight. It did knock-out the guidance computer in the command module. Pete Conrad laughing all the way to orbit is some of the best audio ever. One of my favorite t-shirts says: KEEP CALM AND SWITCH SCE TO AUX.
Indeed.. I was a teensy bit disappointed that CD didn't mention this detail, because had the LVDC *not* been separate from the AGC, Apollo 12 would never had gotten to orbit, let alone the moon. (And where did you get that shirt?)
I believe I got it from a website called Zazzle. They sell a lot of stuff. Off the same sight - for a friend - I purchased a residential light switch cover plate that is labeled like the Apollo Command module "SCE" is at the top and light position has "AUX" at the top and "Norm" at the bottom. He loved it.
Both the LVDC and AGC were tremendous engineering accomplishments 50 years ago, that not only got us to the moon but jump started the modern semiconductor industry. Being an old fart retired EE I am amazed at how rapidly the technology has advanced. I just stuck a 2TB 2.5" secondary drive in a laptop to act as a poor mans server along with a 260GB SSD.
Having worked on Apollo in engineering at North American Aviation in Downey Ca. I learned the i high speed computer isn’t really necessary as flight rates aren’t anywhere instantaneous(eg roll, yaw, and pitch rates are relatively slow) in addition in those days, analog computers were quite fast enough to handle airframe motions.
Show your kids this... A=1....Z=26 A-1,T-20,T-20, I-9,T-20, U-21,D-4,E-5 ATTITUDE add's up tp 100...I think attitude is 100 % everything... take care from NZ 👍🇳🇿
Simply Outstanding! You’ve accomplished the most technical and simultaneously pleasantly engaging presentations I have ever seen! Thank you Sir, very impressive!
2:10 - Depending on where you are, you can view one of these in Huntsville, AL. Actually, you can view a whole Saturn-V rocket there in the space center. I've been there about 5 times and I nerd out every single time. Definitely worth checking out!
10:31 - 32KB of RAM. It's amazing how far we've come. I can imagine though at that time, that seemed well enough. But it's definitely hard to comprehend how such little memory got the job done when we're pretty used to much more than that in current times.
Electrical engineer here, that's interesting that it was using surface mount packaging back then for the ICs, but early consumer ICs were through-hole for a long time before SMT became common.
You know what's really incredible about all this computing power we have now? The fact regular folks like us can come on here and find many many amazing and detailed videos like this.
"My dad" ..this that & the other... boast boast .. "no insights here" - Whoop-de-do for you! The rest of us mortals will nevertheless enjoy this video as is...
Mr. Shillito, I found your channel a month or so ago and just wished to say howmuch i enjoy your informative and well laid out videos. As my step-children get older I plan to use them to help kindle their love of learning and hopefully, a fascination with our universe. Thankyou again
I grew up on the west coast of Fl in a town called Crystal River. I remember my mother taking me and my little sister out to the end of our driveway (the drive was N&S, but the road was E&W) to watch the only night launch of Apollo 17. I'll never forget seeing that stream of light streaking towards the heavens :-) Then in 76 my father took us all to tour the cape, they were in the process of converting to the SS so we were allowed inside the assembly building... Awesome is the only word that accurately describes that building from the eyes of an 11 year old boy ;-) Thank you Mr C.D. !!!
VERY interesting! This makes me even more appreciative of the work done by the engineers & technicians. The challenges, problems and hurdles were enormous.
When I visited the Apollo exhibit in Florida, I noticed that the Saturn V was assembled using mostly rivets, Instead if bolts or screws. I asked about this and they said 'rivets give, screws snap"
Awesome video, as always. All of your videos have the perfect balance of including plenty of technical detail while still being easy to understand and follow along.
I always love Curious Droids videos. Fascinating subjects all. And I love most things that cover the Cold War period. Could you do a piece on Operation Chrome Dome or something similar?
Excellent video and your detailed description of the IU is the best I've seen. The one part you left out was the performance of the IU during the Apollo 12 Launch where not once, but twice, the Saturn V was struck by lightening, and the IU never blinked. It just kept doing it's job and guided the Saturn V to orbit.
So many things you have to take into consideration for all of this to work. Nobody knew it all but all knew some and it took everybody doing their job to make it work. The people who stitched the parachutes together and the lil ole ladies who pumped the resin into the honeycomb heat shield are not even thought of, but is a good example of even the simplistic of jobs that had to be done correctly to make it successful.
Congratulations on an excellent presentation of a subject that most people don't know about, but should have an appreciation of. I can still remember when network TV used to do programs to this level of detail (but not any more!). Thanks greatly.
And 2 Mhz clock speed with a whopping 16K RAM WOW WEEE! That's 1/16th the size of my first build in 94 out of PC Magazine But I'm blown away by what these guys did back then on the very dawn of technology
Excellent video Paul. The robustness of the LVDC architecture was dramatically demonstrated during the launch of Apollo 12. The vehicle was struck by lightning which reset the AGC and tripped out numerous systems in the spacecraft, neatly causing the flight to be aborted. But the LVDC continued operating normally and flew the vehicle through the problem, while the crew reset the spacecraft systems. If the Saturn-V had been controlled by the same technology as the AGC, the mission would have been lost.
Great video. I remember core memory back in the '70s and using assembly language in those days. It's amazing anything could be accomplished since you're essentially programming on the molecular level of the process.
A lot of the videos I've seen on this subject are either really shallow on the science or they dive in too deep that it all goes over my head. You have the perfect middle ground and an easy to understand delivery.
Fantastic video. That ‘zero and reasonableness’ test is brilliant. Processing power has increased by orders of magnitude and software replaces a lot of hardware but we still rely upon sensors. When a sensor fails no amount of processing power or sophisticated software is going to correct for it and so it is better to identify its failure and ignore its input.
I live in Endicott, NY birth place of IBM, I've heard so meny stories about IBM & NASA programs. Thank you so much for this video, the LVDC has been the unsung hero of the Apollo story.
All that innovation and hard work just film a video on a soundstage... lol. I actually met a person the other day who said the Moon landings were a hoax, and followed it up with "Look it up on the Internet!" .. It stopped me in my tracks and I was literally speechless. [Edit, just to be clear, I had *heard* about "Moon Landing Deniers", but had never actually seen/met one IRL... it's so ridiculous that I just assumed it was some kind of running gag/Internet Troll, so when a grown, otherwise-rational *adult* sincerely insists that "we never landed on the moon, it was all a hoax", *it is so beyond the realm of comprehension for me, I simply can't believe it.* ... see what I did there? ...Good. Alrighty then. ;) ]
@@badlaamaurukehu there is no difference between believing in Apollo "lunar" landings and a flat earth, both require little to no critiquing. Carry on, life is so simple.
Absolutley fascinating! I love hearing about the "inner tech" from the Apollo and other missions from that time period. The complexity and the inginuity to deal with it has always impressed me......sometimes I wonder if that ingenuity still exists today...Excellent video Paul! Thank you.
Another fascinating glimpse at a bit of the collective genius of the Apollo program. As a musical instrument maker familiar with vibrations, this was particularly interesting to me. Thanks, nicely done. Cheers from cloudy Vienna, Scott
maxsmodels Thanks for mentioning. Specifically, it’s at the US Space and Rocket Center museum right along side the Saturn V. AND there are engineers on hand who actually worked on the LVDC, or as they call it “The brains of the Saturn V”. They are fascinating to talk with. Full of great stories. The LVDC and entire instrument (IU) were actually built in Huntsville by IBM, about a mile from the Rocket Center museum in one of the city’s research parks. The building’s still there on Sparkman Drive just north of I-565, though it’s no longer an IBM operation. I remember being stuck in traffic near there in 1969 (or late ‘68) as police cars with lights flashing, and officers directing frustrated drivers, wondering what the heck was going on. Shortly, (or longly) a huge flatbed vehicle made its way out of Sparkman Drive and slowly turned onto the highway. It was the large IU (instrument unit) for the Saturn V moon rocket. Destination: Cape Canaveral, Florida. Without it, no Saturn V launch, no man on the moon.
Even though I followed our space program from the beginning. The "IU" was a surprise. I figured there had to be more electronics aboard, but back in the day there was a lot that wasn't made publicly available with the cold war, and such. Also no internet. World was very different back than. Corded rotary phone, radio and tv's with 4 or 5 station if you were lucky. That was it. Thanks for updating . Really enjoy your videos.
The MCAS system worked exactly as it was designed to do. The problem is that they didn't have that redundancy check to throw out garbage data from broken sensors. And the actuator was given too much control authority.
@@theman5887 1. The MCAS worked perfectly according to the design, there were no errors in programming it. The issue was the design made by American Boeing engineers. 2. The MCAS was programmed by American Boeing engineers. It's deplorable to use the death of hundreds of humans as a misguided opportunity for "learning a lesson on hiring Indian programmers".
Not sure if it really worked better, the 99.6% per 6h was a good number back then, but by today's standards it is very bad. Assuming 6h of flying time every day, this would mean one system failure per 250 planes per day. Back then it was a great architecture and they got the most out of the available technology. Exactly what I miss about the 737.
@@danielrose1392 The 737 MAX befaves just like a 757/767 at low speeds and high thrust levels. The purpose of MCAS was to make the plane behave like a 737 Classic/NG so that retraining could be kept to a minimum as Boeing's airline customers wanted. There is nothing inherently unsafe about the 737 MAX's flying qualities.
Great video. Apollo is amazing in 2 ways to me: 1) How little computer power was available compared to today's spacecraft and 2) How fantastic and ahead of their time the computers of Apollo were. Thank you for this.
Brilliantly researched, presented, and narrated. It is good and extremely useful that the absolute brilliance and colossal technological and scientific achievements of the manned space program are remembered, shown and explained. Too many people forget that every single day we still benefit from the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs.
@@benbaselet2026 Täällä on sen verran vihamielinen yleisö millekään aidolle keskustelulle, joten vastaan nyt siksi suomeksi vain sinulle, jos tämä pysyisi sivistyneenä. Seuraan tätä kanavaa siksi, että kiinnostuin koko aiheesta törmättyäni hyviin todisteisiin siitä, miksi kuussa ei ole käyty. Ihminen ei Apollo-lentoja lukuun ottamatta ole käynyt yli 600km etäisyydellä maasta, eikä samaa LEO-kiertorataa ylemmäs ole lähetetty yhtään Apollo-lentojen suuruista luotainta vuoden 1972 jälkeen. Kun tutustuu tarkemmin NASAn nykyiseen kuuohjelmaan, niin heillä on kestänyt nyt 14 vuotta eikä siinä ajassa ole saatu lähetettyä edes tyhjää kuumodulia kuun ympäri. Ohjelma on jäissä mm. siksi ettei NASA omien sanojensa mukaan tiedä miten suojata astronautteja Van Allenin vyöhykkeen säteilyltä. Kuuohjelma ei edes yritä käyttää Apollo-lentojen teknologiaa hyväkseen, lukuunottamatta luotaimen ilmakehään palaamiseen tarkoitetun lämpösuojauksen materiaalia, ja sitäkin eri tavoin kuin vuosina '69-'72. Uskoin itse kuulentoihin 40 vuotta, kunnes aloin tutkimaan asiaa. todisteet ovat täynnä jälkiä väärennöksistä, ja teknologiaa ei ole vieläkään olemassa. Tulokset avaruuslennoissa ovat nyt 1000x huonompia, vaikka kuulentoihin tarvittavat teknologiat tietotekniikasta materiaaleihin, softaan, kokemukseen avarauuslentämisestä jne. ovat kehittyneet 1000-1000000 kertaa paremmiksi. Joka tapauksessa tuntuu että tästä aiheesta on vaikea löytää asiallista keskustelua, jos joku on kiinnostunut näistä, niin kyseessä on usein trolli joka pystyy vain haukkumaan vastapuolta idiootiksi.
good timing for this video. Everyone interested in the LVDC should check out the recent SmarterEveryDay video on it. They actually show the physical computer in detail and they visit a museum with the entire instrument ring on display and talk to a guide who worked on it. They go into some incredible details over the 2 videos, it was amazing to see and hear about. I *highly* suggest it.
In the 1960's I was among a group of Boeing test engineers who wrote and evaluated test procedures for some of the interfaces between the Saturn V's Instrument Unit (IU) and various mobile launcher consoles. This work was done in a NASA high-bay facility at the Marshall Space Flight Center on Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama. In that facility was a "breadboard" containing facsimiles of the mobile launcher consoles and an actual IU, in which were mounted the Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), its DAD converter (LVDA), the ST-124 Inertial Platform, accelerometers, etc. The various mobile launcher facsimile consoles were connected to the IU equipment by many electrical cables that ran underneath a false floor. Whenever an LVDC software update was required, a crane was used to remove the LVDC from the IU, and the LVDC was taken to the IBM facility in Research Park for the update, then returned and re-mounted in the IU.
Smarter every day just put out a video on this exact thing talking with one of the guys who worked on the saturn v computers. Two of my favorite channels put out pretty much the same video on the same day and I love it
LVDC, the mission saver of Apollo 12 -lightning strikes during flight? , not only did it keep working but maintained keeping the Saturn straight and true like it never happened, what a test for this amazing creation to have successfully passed -seeing one of these up close would be as amazing as seeing anything Apollo related
I suspect that the zero and reasonableness test allowed the LVDC to basically ignore the scrambled signals from the various systems during the actual lightning strike, and once the electrical noise from the strikes went away it started getting “reasonable” readings again.
What an interesting video, thank you! So strange, the feeling of nostalgia combined with the knowledge that this was breakthrough technology at the time... makes me respect the effort of landing on the Moon even more.
Your description of the process of how the flight control computers resembles the way every modern digital flight control system found in fighters like the F-16. The impact of technologies developed for the moon program can't be overstated.
Great find on the bit of film of the launch abort test showing the boosters falling away from the truncated rocket - 11:18 - and then the escape tower engines go full flame the whole thing with a 1/4 turn and the capsule completely engulfed in rocket exhaust And the capsule separating from the tower rocket with its drogue already deployed - 11:23 Though thankfully they never had to use it but man what a ride that would be
Boeing MCAS designers could have learned from the zero state concept to overcome faulty sensor input. Amazingly advanced for its time. I was a young lad at the time of Apollo and remember this all with excitement. I feel the same way about SpaceX today
Good video for starters. "Smarter Every Day" goes even more in depth with their "The Computer that Controlled the Saturn V" video. It is interesting to see those boards/modules, understand what they were doing and have other explanations by the guy who worked on the project. I wonder how much more advanced technology we have now but don't know about it, if PCs aren't that much better than in 60's. Guess it is used by a chosen few and military.
I'm AMAZED you have all this information available to you. I worked on the Apollo program in my early 20's and am probably, now, in a fast diminishing group of people still alive that did that. So much of the technical information, I would have thought would, have been long lost. Your presentation is amazing for no other reason is your ability to locate all this information, and present it as well as you do. Great Job!
This dude has the most mind blowing videos. And his delivery is fantastic
It's the Shirts....As soon as you put one on you get a British accent and your IQ goes up by 20 points
Don't you mean, mind numbing, brain searing hogwash? This guy is a lieing douche bag.
@@MudderFukker-m6g i had pj's that had that print as a kid ;-)
@@rutexas7157
Go back your chan you npc troll with yur incel pals
@@rutexas7157 You don't understand it so it can't be true is that it? Whether you believe it or not doesn't change the fact it happened. Go back to your conspiracy kindergarden and leave people alone.
The whole Apollo program still impresses me to this day
All on sliding rules too
Dan Slotea lol no. NACA was using analog computers to calculate flight dynamics in the 1930s, and digital computers were doing the same by the 1950s. Orbital mechanics, ground simulators, mechanical and electrical engineering etc were are using computers in the 1960s. Sure some engineers were probably doing daily small calculations on slide rules, but the big systems were designed and tested on digital computers.
Insignificant when compared to the power of the Force.
Me too, although I kinda feel sad knowing that the state of the art electronics in the LVDC were just discarded after the third stage wasn't needed anymore. But I understand that reusability wasn't a priority in the Apollo Program, the Saturn just had to get the spacecraft on a trajectory to the Moon and once it was finished it wasn't needed anymore.
Yes ,me as well, VERY understated event till this day in my opinion..(So impressive ,many do not believe it ever happened. lol)
Early on in the video, I said you didn't need a computer to fly a rocket ( i was thinking of a digital one) and that the V2 rocket used gyroscopes to control the graphite rudders in the exhaust during launch. Well, this rather oversimplifies things. The gyroscopes output actually went through the first all-electronic analogue computer called the "Mischgerät" which computed the signals to send to the graphite rudders. Thanks to Bernd Ulmann of analogparadigm.com for highlighting this.
Bernd, the VAX man :)
It's nice to admit faults, but calling a continuous "analog-state" to "current-level" converter device "a computer" is a bit of a stretch. If you defined that as a computer, you would also have to call counterweight devices, water-clocks, mechanical measuring devices (down to something, say, with a spring that clamps in and then releases a block as a measuring device gains resistance) and so on computers as well. A stepless switch alone would be "a computer", even if there was nothing involved that would, say, adjust the range or prevent states from going under a certain level depending on the current level, etc. That's not a "computer", even if it's an extremely sophisticated sliding analog state converter.
I don't know if thinking about anything that is a "black box" between one device and another as a computer is a modern phenomenon or not. But it's not a mechanical device that takes one input state, or one number, and then through a mechanical process produces a predictable output result according to the rules of that mechanical process. A converter device can of course be digital as well, and use a process that is incredibly complicated just to not get the accurate result of an analog converter device. But it doesn't make the analog converter device a "computer" any more than it makes a voltmeter a computer.
Still, what's funny about this is that if we at some point in the future will end up producing solid quantum computing devices, we will in some fairly significant ways treat them as if they were analog converter-devices with probability-predictors for the result of a complicated equation, rather than a mechanical instruction set result of an approximation. I am also very weak for suggestions that insist that analogue measuring devices should naturally be involved, in, say, determining the variable bitrate of computation density - in sound-formats and compression, noise-reduction and filters, for example. So I guess people might disagree on what "a computer" should be defined at by looking forwards as well as backwards in time.
But the Mischgerät was an analog conversion device, that translated positions in the gyroscope to a specific range of current. That current was then used, with some treshold(?) and filtering to determine the fin-positions(I believe that was one of the huge weaknesses of the system, that the way it was put together could make noise interfere with the ranges, along with the problem with oscillations that still would be an issue). So unless you're redefining what an "analog computer" is to being any form of conversion of input - which makes it very different to what a digital one is, then it's questionable to say that the (very advanced, and super-interesting) converter device in the v2s was a "computer".
@@kabalder So, don't call it a computer, call it a processor then, and no harm's done.
In the Netherlands, an extensive analog computer was used to predict the behaviour of water along rivers and landscape: Deltar. Of course, with the advent of digital computers in the seventies and eighties, it grew obsolete.
Analog computers were also used for quickly calculating artillery solutions, especially by the navy.
We now may call such devices differently, but in contrast to present-day options, where digital processing power has become ubiquitous, the most striking property is being analog. It is not about the processing power as such.
@@Guido_XL The TH-cam channel Veratasium talks about these analog computers in a very interesting video.
Even though I'm a sucker for anything "Apollo" this episode is truly engaging. I really liked the schematic illustrations that enhanced the technical description. You're selection of topic and fluid dialog which enhances the technical understanding of the subject is growing exponentially each time. Thank you for these great video gems Paul!!
"The Saturn V was far too complicated to fly by hand."
Actually, Gene Cernan stated that there was a procedure to hand fly the Saturn if they lost guidance. I believe the procedure was initiated after the lightning strike on Apollo 12. It was ready to go and operational by the time of Apollo 16, or possibly 15 (my memory is hazy on the precise flight). Cernan said in one interview that he practically dared "her" to quit on them so he could hand fly the rocket into orbit.
So yes, you could use your amazing astro-piloting skills and fly the Beast, or the Lady, as Cernan also called her. Not that I'd want to!
Yea, brain is amazing and people self-confident. If we wanted to translate driving a car or playing a videogame into a system it would take a supercomputer. On the other hand It isnt always flawless and it's a bit logarithmic and slow at some point. Flying fast a fighter jet with high static instability is said to be impossible without computers. Has anyone tried it? We would spend all the time thinking about the chemistry in our liver if God wasnt an engineer :)
We can waste time snd sleep in a flying rocket. How cool is that
Cernan said "if they lost GUIDANCE". Actually hand flying a Saturn V without the LVDC was indeed impossible. Watch the video again. Guidance was only one of the LVDC's several jobs.
Quoting Wikipedia, "In flight the LVDC ran a major computation loop every 2 seconds for vehicle guidance, and a minor loop 25 times a second for attitude control." If the guidance routine failed, yeah an astronaut could fill in for that "every 2 seconds" guidance routine. But if the attitude-management and vibration-damping routines failed, there's no way the crew could handle the 25 adjustments per second needed to keep the rocket from tearing itself apart. Managing the huge rocket's side-to-side flexing and damping out pogo oscillations required corrections to be made far too rapidly for human reflexes.
👏GENE 👏KERMAN😤
The procedure is pretty well-documented: If the launch vehicle's inertial platform failed, the LVDC would no longer be able to provide steering commands to the rocket's flight control system. In this case the astronauts could flip a switch "Launch Vehicle Guidance - CMC" so that steering commands are now taken from the CMC (Apollo Guidance Computer), which had a simple pitch vs. time guidance scheme up until just prior to S1C staging. Afterwards the astronaut using the hand controllers could steer the rocket (astronaut's commands would be read by the AGC and sent directly to the rocket's flight control system). The astronaut would make manual corrections by referencing his trajectory chart with the current trajectory information displayed on the instrument panel.
Akshually...
Finally. This video explains topics I have wondered about, and answers questions I have had for many years. It is one of the most interesting Apollo videos I have ever seen, and I regard it Curious Droid's best. Which says a lot.
last time I was this early, von Braun was still aiming for London
LOL, you are a old fart then :)
Oof. Lol
steve1978ger
Ohhh ok I see what you did there
Last time I was this early, I had premature premonition.
Oooohhhh... that's ruthless rocket humour savagery that Von Braun himself would've enjoyed and probably told similar jokes himself behind the backs of US scientists as he and his Operation Paperclip friends enjoyed even worse jokes too!
I had been hoping for something like this since your video on the Apollo Guidance Computer. Thank you so much for delivering this great video.
Yes, I wanted to complete the circle so to speak as the two worked together but were very different systems and mind sets behind them.
Since I'm getting so much attention. Anyone else want a video on the Apollo 1, Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11 accidents? I'd love to see these tragedies met with the razor eye and political/historical astuteness of Curious Droid.
The LVDC could also do things like correct the burn for an engine failing (with would change the length and attitude of the burn)
that´s cool... can modern rockets do that, too ?
@@bobl78 Generally speaking yes, depending on the mission (heavy payloads and payloads that have to get up high may be outside of the engine-out capability of the vehicle). The space shuttle, like Apollo-Saturn can also do an Abort To Orbit (ATO), in which the payload is delivered to a lower orbit than planned, causing the mission to become shorter.
The ATO-capability was only used once by the shuttle, Challengers (STA/OV-099) 8th mission (STS-51F)
Sure...like guide the rocket to fall in the ocean to FAKE ALL NASA HIJINKS TO STEAL TAXPAYER HEALTH PROGRAMS.
The LVDC was unique in that most precision-guided rockets/ICBMs prior to the Saturn series usually used simple autopilots that followed pre-programmed sequences (pitch over at this rate for this long, then stop pitching, then do it again at a different rate, etc.) in the initial part of light, with precision control usually being accomplished by radio guidance and tracking from the ground. The LVDC had the computing power and guidance hardware to read its own acceleration rate and rotation in all three axes, allowing it to guide itself towards its target vector and velocity in what's called "closed-loop guidance". This refers to the feedback loop used to control itself (the blind, simple guidance method I referred to above is called "open-loop guidance". This is referred to as Iterative Guidance Mode (IGM) in the software documents.
It was a robust system. It took a lightening strike on Apollo 12 and didn't disrupt the rocket flight. It did knock-out the guidance computer in the command module. Pete Conrad laughing all the way to orbit is some of the best audio ever. One of my favorite t-shirts says: KEEP CALM AND SWITCH SCE TO AUX.
Indeed.. I was a teensy bit disappointed that CD didn't mention this detail, because had the LVDC *not* been separate from the AGC, Apollo 12 would never had gotten to orbit, let alone the moon. (And where did you get that shirt?)
JAFO , Yes, if you find out please post it here. Otherwise, I’ll have to get a couple made on etsy.
I believe I got it from a website called Zazzle. They sell a lot of stuff. Off the same sight - for a friend - I purchased a residential light switch cover plate that is labeled like the Apollo Command module "SCE" is at the top and light position has "AUX" at the top and "Norm" at the bottom. He loved it.
Redbubble also have a few different variations of this shirt.
Both the LVDC and AGC were tremendous engineering accomplishments 50 years ago, that not only got us to the moon but jump started the modern semiconductor industry. Being an old fart retired EE I am amazed at how rapidly the technology has advanced. I just stuck a 2TB 2.5" secondary drive in a laptop to act as a poor mans server along with a 260GB SSD.
*_They went to the moon practically using steampunk technology. Absolutely mind blowing._*
Hard to believe my 1992 oldsmobile has more computing power than the Awsome saturn V.
Simply amazing
Having worked on Apollo in engineering at North American Aviation in Downey Ca. I learned the i high speed computer isn’t really necessary as flight rates aren’t anywhere instantaneous(eg roll, yaw, and pitch rates are relatively slow) in addition in those days, analog computers were quite fast enough to handle airframe motions.
5:03 I wish my kids would control their attitude 25 times a second
Show your kids this... A=1....Z=26
A-1,T-20,T-20, I-9,T-20, U-21,D-4,E-5
ATTITUDE add's up tp 100...I think attitude is 100 % everything... take care from NZ 👍🇳🇿
Ask NASA if you can borrow their computer for a few years. 😁
@@allgood6760
You got the whole squad laughing
You really appreciate the innovative genius of the engineers that designed these systems.
Simply Outstanding!
You’ve accomplished the most technical and simultaneously pleasantly engaging presentations I have ever seen!
Thank you Sir, very impressive!
2:10 - Depending on where you are, you can view one of these in Huntsville, AL. Actually, you can view a whole Saturn-V rocket there in the space center. I've been there about 5 times and I nerd out every single time. Definitely worth checking out!
10:31 - 32KB of RAM. It's amazing how far we've come. I can imagine though at that time, that seemed well enough. But it's definitely hard to comprehend how such little memory got the job done when we're pretty used to much more than that in current times.
"bending oscillations"
You're talking about the Kraken.
Krakens:Always entertaining never fun.
SPAGHETTI!!!!
I wonder how NASA managed to deal with the ridiculous wheel bounce physics for the rover. Must've been some custom mods.
@@phodon129 probably KJR
Only, in this case, the code minimized the oscillations, instead of generating it. ;-)
Electrical engineer here, that's interesting that it was using surface mount packaging back then for the ICs, but early consumer ICs were through-hole for a long time before SMT became common.
Brilliant video!, very well researched.
Great video.
Wtf why is no one liking your comment🤣 your the real one right?
Thanks. As always, perfect editing and great presentation.
You know what's really incredible about all this computing power we have now? The fact regular folks like us can come on here and find many many amazing and detailed videos like this.
My dad worked on that problem. And on the Redstone. But I was still eating dirt then. So ... no insights here.
"no insights here"
Still cool to know. Thanks for telling us.
@MichaelKingsfordGray because this guy is the real deal holyifield
"My dad" ..this that & the other... boast boast .. "no insights here" - Whoop-de-do for you! The rest of us mortals will nevertheless enjoy this video as is...
your never talked with him about the Apollo Programm ? The challenges, solutions and how far ahead it was compared to the rest of the world ?
In spite of that. Had your dad not fired his rocket, then you wouldn't be.
Mr. Shillito,
I found your channel a month or so ago and just wished to say howmuch i enjoy your informative and well laid out videos. As my step-children get older I plan to use them to help kindle their love of learning and hopefully, a fascination with our universe.
Thankyou again
Love your Apollo videos
Just one more of those fantastic videos with Internet's best narrator ever. Thank you again.
Everyday Astronaut and Curious Droid posting within 10 minutes of each other. Its a good day.
Can we get some ObsidianAnt up in hurr?
This video + Smart everyday + Linus all 3 videos about LVDC Made my week. LVDC was awesome
Hah! Amazing! ❤️
I grew up on the west coast of Fl in a town called Crystal River. I remember my mother taking me and my little sister out to the end of our driveway (the drive was N&S, but the road was E&W) to watch the only night launch of Apollo 17. I'll never forget seeing that stream of light streaking towards the heavens :-) Then in 76 my father took us all to tour the cape, they were in the process of converting to the SS so we were allowed inside the assembly building... Awesome is the only word that accurately describes that building from the eyes of an 11 year old boy ;-) Thank you Mr C.D. !!!
The hardware part of the LVDC computer that controlled Apollo rocket ascent was a PID controller. Control theory teaches about PID.
Smarter Everyday did a great video on this, and I'm glad you did one, too!
Well, I’m now a huge fan of LVDC, Thanks!
16 KB of RAM made my day! )))
Many modern microcontrollers have 16 KB of RAM
Absolutely astonishing how complex the Saturn V was. The engineers were geniuses. Thanks for this video, the detail and delivery were fantastic!
For more information: Smarter Every Day and Linus Tech Tips have videos with actual hardware and an interview with one of the engineers.
Linus showed the engineer, then we never heard a word from him.
Smarter Every Day finally dropped it about a week ago and there's an extended interview on his secondary channel. :)
VERY interesting! This makes me even more appreciative of the work done by the engineers & technicians. The challenges, problems and hurdles were enormous.
Ooh that was really good. Learned lots of things I didn't know before about Apollo (and I've watched lots). Fine work Curious Droid.
When I visited the Apollo exhibit in Florida, I noticed that the Saturn V was assembled using mostly rivets, Instead if bolts or screws. I asked about this and they said 'rivets give, screws snap"
This was fascinating. I love this channel.
Awesome video, as always. All of your videos have the perfect balance of including plenty of technical detail while still being easy to understand and follow along.
I always love Curious Droids videos. Fascinating subjects all. And I love most things that cover the Cold War period. Could you do a piece on Operation Chrome Dome or something similar?
Excellent video and your detailed description of the IU is the best I've seen. The one part you left out was the performance of the IU during the Apollo 12 Launch where not once, but twice, the Saturn V was struck by lightening, and the IU never blinked. It just kept doing it's job and guided the Saturn V to orbit.
So many things you have to take into consideration for all of this to work. Nobody knew it all but all knew some and it took everybody doing their job to make it work. The people who stitched the parachutes together and the lil ole ladies who pumped the resin into the honeycomb heat shield are not even thought of, but is a good example of even the simplistic of jobs that had to be done correctly to make it successful.
Congratulations on an excellent presentation of a subject that most people don't know about, but should have an appreciation of. I can still remember when network TV used to do programs to this level of detail (but not any more!). Thanks greatly.
138 Watts LVDC using circuit boards with a liquid cooled magnesium frame- Amazing Ingenuity at IBM - Waaay ahead of their time!
And 2 Mhz clock speed with a whopping 16K RAM
WOW WEEE!
That's 1/16th the size of my first build in 94 out of PC Magazine
But I'm blown away by what these guys did back then on the very dawn of technology
If they did it then then it was not way ahaed at all.
Too bad the company has now been reduced to shit.
The liquid cooled magnesium frame doesn’t sound especially challenging or revolutionary.
Excellent video Paul. The robustness of the LVDC architecture was dramatically demonstrated during the launch of Apollo 12. The vehicle was struck by lightning which reset the AGC and tripped out numerous systems in the spacecraft, neatly causing the flight to be aborted. But the LVDC continued operating normally and flew the vehicle through the problem, while the crew reset the spacecraft systems. If the Saturn-V had been controlled by the same technology as the AGC, the mission would have been lost.
Absolutely fascinating information video and information, many thanks Paul and cheers from Australia,
Great video. I remember core memory back in the '70s and using assembly language in those days. It's amazing anything could be accomplished since you're essentially programming on the molecular level of the process.
Great video. Greater shirt :)
... but a giant shirt for fankind!
A lot of the videos I've seen on this subject are either really shallow on the science or they dive in too deep that it all goes over my head. You have the perfect middle ground and an easy to understand delivery.
Top notch, as usual 👍
Nice to see the difference between the IBM and MIT systems.
Fantastic video. That ‘zero and reasonableness’ test is brilliant. Processing power has increased by orders of magnitude and software replaces a lot of hardware but we still rely upon sensors. When a sensor fails no amount of processing power or sophisticated software is going to correct for it and so it is better to identify its failure and ignore its input.
Insightful as always, so satisfying seeing my Patreon $ doing good ^-^b
These snippets are very informative, taking the lid off the little known things from that great time in history when man really did reach for the sky.
Curious Droid : uploads
me : *happiness noises*
Does it sound like a dial up modem?
@@natedunn51 maybe sounds like a dot matrix printer?
Amazing insight. And from 08:04 the power of computing redundancy was understood back then and implemented so perfectly.
Its 2am in East Africa Time.... Up already watching this
I live in Endicott, NY birth place of IBM, I've heard so meny stories about IBM & NASA programs.
Thank you so much for this video, the LVDC has been the unsung hero of the Apollo story.
All that innovation and hard work just film a video on a soundstage... lol.
I actually met a person the other day who said the Moon landings were a hoax, and followed it up with "Look it up on the Internet!" ..
It stopped me in my tracks and I was literally speechless.
[Edit, just to be clear, I had *heard* about "Moon Landing Deniers", but had never actually seen/met one IRL... it's so ridiculous that I just assumed it was some kind of running gag/Internet Troll, so when a grown, otherwise-rational *adult* sincerely insists that "we never landed on the moon, it was all a hoax", *it is so beyond the realm of comprehension for me, I simply can't believe it.*
... see what I did there? ...Good. Alrighty then. ;) ]
Land lubbers have always thought the earth was flat hence their environmental ignorance and lack of imagination and perspective.
@@badlaamaurukehu there is no difference between believing in Apollo "lunar" landings and a flat earth, both require little to no critiquing. Carry on, life is so simple.
You could always tell him, "But they ARE real. Look them up on the internet." People always look for what they want to believe in the first place.
No one cares lol, your life is a utter failure and no one wants to hear your opinion. Let the grown ups talk, shhhhhhh.
@@johnbeckman492 Only morons assume that their talking to themselves on the internet.
Absolutley fascinating! I love hearing about the "inner tech" from the Apollo and other missions from that time period. The complexity and the inginuity to deal with it has always impressed me......sometimes I wonder if that ingenuity still exists today...Excellent video Paul! Thank you.
Love it already thank you!
Another fascinating glimpse at a bit of the collective genius of the Apollo program. As a musical instrument maker familiar with vibrations, this was particularly interesting to me.
Thanks, nicely done. Cheers from cloudy Vienna, Scott
"What was flying the rocket?"
A tiny alien pilot of course!
The CIA is everywhere!
Great video. My uncle worked on that system for Appollo and went on to other projects afterward, many of which as still classified today.
This lecture / video was out of my league. Not CD's fault...I'm just a frustrated engineer who had trouble with elementary mathmatics!
A new CD video… just what I really needed this evening. Thank you!
What is the state of development of ion drives?
Ion thrusters have existed for years if you're not aware of that. They use them for satellites to be able to move in and out of orbits.
Also, the 'Dawn' mission to Vesta and Ceres, used ion-engines.
There is an LVDC on display in Huntsville, in fact they use it as an archway in to one of the exhibits.
maxsmodels Thanks for mentioning. Specifically, it’s at the US Space and Rocket Center museum right along side the Saturn V. AND there are engineers on hand who actually worked on the LVDC, or as they call it “The brains of the Saturn V”. They are fascinating to talk with. Full of great stories.
The LVDC and entire instrument (IU) were actually built in Huntsville by IBM, about a mile from the Rocket Center museum in one of the city’s research parks. The building’s still there on Sparkman Drive just north of I-565, though it’s no longer an IBM operation. I remember being stuck in traffic near there in 1969 (or late ‘68) as police cars with lights flashing, and officers directing frustrated drivers, wondering what the heck was going on. Shortly, (or longly) a huge flatbed vehicle made its way out of Sparkman Drive and slowly turned onto the highway. It was the large IU (instrument unit) for the Saturn V moon rocket. Destination: Cape Canaveral, Florida. Without it, no Saturn V launch, no man on the moon.
Brilliant as always
Even though I followed our space program from the beginning. The "IU" was a surprise. I figured there had to be more electronics aboard, but back in the day there was a lot that wasn't made publicly available with the cold war, and such. Also no internet. World was very different back than. Corded rotary phone, radio and tv's with 4 or 5 station if you were lucky. That was it. Thanks for updating . Really enjoy your videos.
these simple analog/digital computers still worked better than the Boeing 737 Max's :(
The computers were amsolutely great. The code was the issue.
I hope Boeing learned their lesson from hiring $9/hour Indian "programmers"
The MCAS system worked exactly as it was designed to do. The problem is that they didn't have that redundancy check to throw out garbage data from broken sensors. And the actuator was given too much control authority.
@@theman5887 1. The MCAS worked perfectly according to the design, there were no errors in programming it. The issue was the design made by American Boeing engineers.
2. The MCAS was programmed by American Boeing engineers.
It's deplorable to use the death of hundreds of humans as a misguided opportunity for "learning a lesson on hiring Indian programmers".
Not sure if it really worked better, the 99.6% per 6h was a good number back then, but by today's standards it is very bad. Assuming 6h of flying time every day, this would mean one system failure per 250 planes per day.
Back then it was a great architecture and they got the most out of the available technology. Exactly what I miss about the 737.
@@danielrose1392 The 737 MAX befaves just like a 757/767 at low speeds and high thrust levels. The purpose of MCAS was to make the plane behave like a 737 Classic/NG so that retraining could be kept to a minimum as Boeing's airline customers wanted.
There is nothing inherently unsafe about the 737 MAX's flying qualities.
Great video. Apollo is amazing in 2 ways to me: 1) How little computer power was available compared to today's spacecraft and 2) How fantastic and ahead of their time the computers of Apollo were. Thank you for this.
8:04 Shame Boeing seems to have thrown out the logical reasoning seen here in the design of the systems in the 737 Max.
Felix B Lol, no, your thought process is amazingly stupid.
muh diversity Another armchair aeronautical engineer. No, go back to you chips and tv, way over your head.
@@DoctorShocktor Is that the best you've got? insulting people on the internet like a boss? You sound like you have blood on your hands.
Brilliantly researched, presented, and narrated. It is good and extremely useful that the absolute brilliance and colossal technological and scientific achievements of the manned space program are remembered, shown and explained. Too many people forget that every single day we still benefit from the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs.
POLL: How many still believe man walked on the moon on Apollo missions? Thumbs up=yes, Thumbs down=no
You use the word "still" like there would be any evidence against the well-known facts we have all known about for 50 years...
You’re a dunce = thumbs up. You’re a moron = thumbs down. Probably just a fuckwit trying to ruin a comments section = both thumbs up
@@benbaselet2026 Täällä on sen verran vihamielinen yleisö millekään aidolle keskustelulle, joten vastaan nyt siksi suomeksi vain sinulle, jos tämä pysyisi sivistyneenä. Seuraan tätä kanavaa siksi, että kiinnostuin koko aiheesta törmättyäni hyviin todisteisiin siitä, miksi kuussa ei ole käyty. Ihminen ei Apollo-lentoja lukuun ottamatta ole käynyt yli 600km etäisyydellä maasta, eikä samaa LEO-kiertorataa ylemmäs ole lähetetty yhtään Apollo-lentojen suuruista luotainta vuoden 1972 jälkeen. Kun tutustuu tarkemmin NASAn nykyiseen kuuohjelmaan, niin heillä on kestänyt nyt 14 vuotta eikä siinä ajassa ole saatu lähetettyä edes tyhjää kuumodulia kuun ympäri. Ohjelma on jäissä mm. siksi ettei NASA omien sanojensa mukaan tiedä miten suojata astronautteja Van Allenin vyöhykkeen säteilyltä. Kuuohjelma ei edes yritä käyttää Apollo-lentojen teknologiaa hyväkseen, lukuunottamatta luotaimen ilmakehään palaamiseen tarkoitetun lämpösuojauksen materiaalia, ja sitäkin eri tavoin kuin vuosina '69-'72. Uskoin itse kuulentoihin 40 vuotta, kunnes aloin tutkimaan asiaa. todisteet ovat täynnä jälkiä väärennöksistä, ja teknologiaa ei ole vieläkään olemassa. Tulokset avaruuslennoissa ovat nyt 1000x huonompia, vaikka kuulentoihin tarvittavat teknologiat tietotekniikasta materiaaleihin, softaan, kokemukseen avarauuslentämisestä jne. ovat kehittyneet 1000-1000000 kertaa paremmiksi. Joka tapauksessa tuntuu että tästä aiheesta on vaikea löytää asiallista keskustelua, jos joku on kiinnostunut näistä, niin kyseessä on usein trolli joka pystyy vain haukkumaan vastapuolta idiootiksi.
Engagement bait
good timing for this video. Everyone interested in the LVDC should check out the recent SmarterEveryDay video on it. They actually show the physical computer in detail and they visit a museum with the entire instrument ring on display and talk to a guide who worked on it. They go into some incredible details over the 2 videos, it was amazing to see and hear about. I *highly* suggest it.
0 views 😐
In the 1960's I was among a group of Boeing test engineers who wrote and evaluated test procedures for some of the interfaces between the Saturn V's Instrument Unit (IU) and various mobile launcher consoles. This work was done in a NASA high-bay facility at the Marshall Space Flight Center on Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville, Alabama. In that facility was a "breadboard" containing facsimiles of the mobile launcher consoles and an actual IU, in which were mounted the Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), its DAD converter (LVDA), the ST-124 Inertial Platform, accelerometers, etc. The various mobile launcher facsimile consoles were connected to the IU equipment by many electrical cables that ran underneath a false floor. Whenever an LVDC software update was required, a crane was used to remove the LVDC from the IU, and the LVDC was taken to the IBM facility in Research Park for the update, then returned and re-mounted in the IU.
i love how you don't underestimate your viewers.
This channel is a wonderful way to spend my free time no doubt... Thank you for your uploads.
Such a great window into an oft overlooked key component of the Apollo missions. Thank you!
Smarter every day just put out a video on this exact thing talking with one of the guys who worked on the saturn v computers. Two of my favorite channels put out pretty much the same video on the same day and I love it
God, that shot beginning at 3:38 and running til 4:23 is just such a beautiful shot. What a machine! My favorite thing of all the things.
Fantastic videos. Makes what could be complicated and dry material easy to understand and interesting.
LVDC, the mission saver of Apollo 12 -lightning strikes during flight? , not only did it keep working but maintained keeping the Saturn straight and true like it never happened, what a test for this amazing creation to have successfully passed -seeing one of these up close would be as amazing as seeing anything Apollo related
Indeed... and IIRC, Apollo 12 had the "roundest" pre-TLI Earth orbit of any of the moon-bound Apollo missions.
I suspect that the zero and reasonableness test allowed the LVDC to basically ignore the scrambled signals from the various systems during the actual lightning strike, and once the electrical noise from the strikes went away it started getting “reasonable” readings again.
Fantastic presentation as usual, thanks Paul. So now the AGC and LVDC have been covered, this just leaves the AGS crying out for an explanation video.
Note to self.... make AGS video
What an interesting video, thank you! So strange, the feeling of nostalgia combined with the knowledge that this was breakthrough technology at the time... makes me respect the effort of landing on the Moon even more.
Thanks for your work on this channel. I always learn something. I knew about the LVDC, but didn't understand how big the job was for the computer.
How could anyone dislike this video? It’s excellent.
Brilliant, detailed work Curious Droid! I just soak up these videos!
Always a pleasure and informative, not to mention heavily researched and a top notch presentation. Thanks as usual, keep em coming.
Your description of the process of how the flight control computers resembles the way every modern digital flight control system found in fighters like the F-16. The impact of technologies developed for the moon program can't be overstated.
Great find on the bit of film of the launch abort test showing the boosters falling away from the truncated rocket - 11:18 - and then the escape tower engines go full flame the whole thing with a 1/4 turn and the capsule completely engulfed in rocket exhaust
And the capsule separating from the tower rocket with its drogue already deployed - 11:23
Though thankfully they never had to use it but man what a ride that would be
Your knowledge never ceases to amaze me. Looking forward to your next video. Keep up the great content!
Brilliant! I'll take any excuse to geek out on computer history, but this little chapter is wonderfully important.
Boeing MCAS designers could have learned from the zero state concept to overcome faulty sensor input. Amazingly advanced for its time. I was a young lad at the time of Apollo and remember this all with excitement. I feel the same way about SpaceX today
Good video for starters. "Smarter Every Day" goes even more in depth with their "The Computer that Controlled the Saturn V" video. It is interesting to see those boards/modules, understand what they were doing and have other explanations by the guy who worked on the project.
I wonder how much more advanced technology we have now but don't know about it, if PCs aren't that much better than in 60's. Guess it is used by a chosen few and military.
You sir, are the living god of Education. Brilliant show! Thank you for all you do!
Great content delivered in an excellent production, thank you for taking the time to produce such great work
Marvelous. What incredible ingenuity.