diff --git "a/logs/app.log" "b/logs/app.log" --- "a/logs/app.log" +++ "b/logs/app.log" @@ -1,12583 +1,3 @@ -2025-04-09 at 02:13:12 | INFO | config:update_log_path:171 - Additional logs will be stored in: /workspace/DeepSearch/trainer_output_meta-llama_Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct_gpu0_20250409_021311/logs -2025-04-09 at 02:13:12 | INFO | __main__::40 - Training output directory: /workspace/DeepSearch/trainer_output_meta-llama_Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct_gpu0_20250409_021311 -2025-04-09 at 02:13:12 | INFO | __main__::41 - Logs are being saved to both ./logs and /workspace/DeepSearch/trainer_output_meta-llama_Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct_gpu0_20250409_021311/logs -2025-04-09 at 02:13:12 | INFO | __main__::44 - Initializing model meta-llama/Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct -2025-04-09 at 02:14:02 | INFO | __main__::55 - Setting up LoRA adapter -2025-04-09 at 02:14:09 | INFO | __main__::66 - Loading datasets -2025-04-09 at 02:14:09 | INFO | __main__::68 - Loaded 286 training examples and 32 test examples -2025-04-09 at 02:14:09 | INFO | __main__::71 - Setting up training arguments -2025-04-09 at 02:14:09 | INFO | __main__::108 - Setting up verifier -2025-04-09 at 02:14:09 | INFO | __main__::120 - Initializing trainer -2025-04-09 at 02:14:09 | INFO | __main__::141 - Starting training -2025-04-09 at 02:14:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: secure fastener for electronic devices in aerospace -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: secure knobs for knobs timers in aircraft -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -Certain components are wired into the spacecraft wiring harness by inserting crimped, pinned ends of the wiring into terminal boards of the spacecraft harness. In many cases, this wiring is part of closeout installations and circuit verification can only be accomplished through functional checks of the component. This anomaly has pointed out the fact that circuits verified in this manner must be analyzed to determine if functional checks provide an adequate verification. All circuits have been analyzed with the result that the service module and command module reaction control system propellant isolation valves are the only components which require additional testing. Resistance checks will be performed on all future spacecraft to prove that the isolation valves are properly wired. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.l.8 Potable Water Quantity Fluctuations ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: timer knob security system aircraft -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -The extensive testing and analyses and the consistency with which the postflight test data repeated preflight acceptance test results indicate the problem was most likely caused either by the Command Module Pilot responding_too quickly to the $0.05\tt{e}$ light not coming on or by an intermittent hardware failure that cleared itself during entry. - -Based on these findings, a change is not warranted to existing procedures or hardware on future flights. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.6 Gas Leak in Apex Cover Jettison System ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: -querying "Choices for securing knobs sliders or levers on timers" - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -Inspection also revealed that both the cabin and suit loop pressure transducers contained various contaminants identified as solder flux, glass beads (0.o4 mm diameter), and fibers from the wipers used in the transducer manufacturer's clean room; all of which could potentially affect the transducer operation. - -To assure that one of the pressure transducers is operative, the Apollo 14 cabin pressure transducer will be disassembled, the plating will be inspected and the instrument will be cleaned, reassembled and installed. - -For Apollo 15 and subsequent, the suit and cabin pressure transducers will be disassembled and cleaned. The plating will be inspected for cracking or flaking and the units will be reassembled. The suit pressure transducers will be reassembled without soldering. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.l.l0 Gas Leak in Electrical Circuit Interrupter ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: aerospace valve lock-wire harness -2025-04-09 at 02:14:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- -Result 2: -a. With the handle extended only l/4 inch or less from the valve locked position, both plungers remained locked. b. With the handle extended from 5/16 to 3/8 inch from the valve locked position, the exhaust valve opened but the inlet valve remained closed.' This condition duplicates that of the position of the handle and the operation of the valve found on the Apollo l3 spacecraft after flight. c. When the handle was extended from 3/8 inch to full travel from the valve-locked position, both the inlet and and exhaust valves opened. - -Testing verified that application of power to the valves while the locking pins are being released will prevent the pin from being pulled to the unlock position because the drive shaft torque binds the lock pin. - -NASA-S-70-5841 - - - -Figure l4-l.- Post-landing vent valve lock. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: replacement for special gripping compound securing timers -2025-04-09 at 02:14:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: roll pin securing future flight timers -2025-04-09 at 02:14:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -The structure in the forward end of the docking tunnel was reinforced to accommodate the expected higher parachute loads due to the increased weight of the command module. In the sequential system the timing signal which disables the roll engines during service module separation was changed from a 5.5- to a 2-second interval, and a cutoff time of 25 seconds was incorporated for the translation engines instead of allowing them to fire until the propellant was depleted. These timing changes were instituted to minimize the effects of fuel slosh and to improve service-module separation characteristics. The stripline units in the high-gain antenna were changed to an improved design. A detachable filter was provided for installing over the cabin heat exchanger exhaust to assist in collection of free lumar dust after crew transfer from the lunar module. An extra urine filter, in addition to the primary and backup units, was stowed and could be used to reduce the possibility of a clogged ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: secure knob mating surface reinforcement -2025-04-09 at 02:14:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The worse-case tolerance buildup is when the fork contacts the attenuator block and the piston O-ring is 0.075 inch from entering the chamfer in the breech assembly. The O-ring enters this chamfer when the block has been crushed about 94 percent, at which point an O-ring displacement and accompanying gas escape could be expected. The factors which affect the degree of attenuator crushing are generally uncontrollable within narrow limits and include: - -a. Sliding friction of the many electrical contact pins, the several camming and fork-to-plate surfaces, and the piston b. Forces exerted by the springs, which hold the lift and base plates together in the assembled position C. Propellant gas pressure and the simultaneous increase of pres sure in the two breeches and the plenum d. Simultaneous occurrence of the electrical firing signals to the two cartridges e. Physical properties of the attenuator block. ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:24 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:14:24 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 6/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [100, 325, 34, 345, 275, 391, 421, 357] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 281.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 10.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 28.10 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- -Result 2: -a. With the handle extended only l/4 inch or less from the valve locked position, both plungers remained locked. b. With the handle extended from 5/16 to 3/8 inch from the valve locked position, the exhaust valve opened but the inlet valve remained closed.' This condition duplicates that of the position of the handle and the operation of the valve found on the Apollo l3 spacecraft after flight. c. When the handle was extended from 3/8 inch to full travel from the valve-locked position, both the inlet and and exhaust valves opened. - -Testing verified that application of power to the valves while the locking pins are being released will prevent the pin from being pulled to the unlock position because the drive shaft torque binds the lock pin. - -NASA-S-70-5841 - - - -Figure l4-l.- Post-landing vent valve lock. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nsheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area ...', 'Result 1:\nThe valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifica...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -Certain components are wired into the spacecraft wiring harness by inserting crimped, pinned ends of the wiring into terminal boards of the spacecraft harness. In many cases, this wiring is part of closeout installations and circuit verification can only be accomplished through functional checks of the component. This anomaly has pointed out the fact that circuits verified in this manner must be analyzed to determine if functional checks provide an adequate verification. All circuits have been analyzed with the result that the service module and command module reaction control system propellant isolation valves are the only components which require additional testing. Resistance checks will be performed on all future spacecraft to prove that the isolation valves are properly wired. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.l.8 Potable Water Quantity Fluctuations ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -The extensive testing and analyses and the consistency with which the postflight test data repeated preflight acceptance test results indicate the problem was most likely caused either by the Command Module Pilot responding_too quickly to the $0.05\tt{e}$ light not coming on or by an intermittent hardware failure that cleared itself during entry. - -Based on these findings, a change is not warranted to existing procedures or hardware on future flights. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.6 Gas Leak in Apex Cover Jettison System ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -The structure in the forward end of the docking tunnel was reinforced to accommodate the expected higher parachute loads due to the increased weight of the command module. In the sequential system the timing signal which disables the roll engines during service module separation was changed from a 5.5- to a 2-second interval, and a cutoff time of 25 seconds was incorporated for the translation engines instead of allowing them to fire until the propellant was depleted. These timing changes were instituted to minimize the effects of fuel slosh and to improve service-module separation characteristics. The stripline units in the high-gain antenna were changed to an improved design. A detachable filter was provided for installing over the cabin heat exchanger exhaust to assist in collection of free lumar dust after crew transfer from the lunar module. An extra urine filter, in addition to the primary and backup units, was stowed and could be used to reduce the possibility of a clogged ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The worse-case tolerance buildup is when the fork contacts the attenuator block and the piston O-ring is 0.075 inch from entering the chamfer in the breech assembly. The O-ring enters this chamfer when the block has been crushed about 94 percent, at which point an O-ring displacement and accompanying gas escape could be expected. The factors which affect the degree of attenuator crushing are generally uncontrollable within narrow limits and include: - -a. Sliding friction of the many electrical contact pins, the several camming and fork-to-plate surfaces, and the piston b. Forces exerted by the springs, which hold the lift and base plates together in the assembled position C. Propellant gas pressure and the simultaneous increase of pres sure in the two breeches and the plenum d. Simultaneous occurrence of the electrical firing signals to the two cartridges e. Physical properties of the attenuator block. ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. ------- -Result 2: -Inspection also revealed that both the cabin and suit loop pressure transducers contained various contaminants identified as solder flux, glass beads (0.o4 mm diameter), and fibers from the wipers used in the transducer manufacturer's clean room; all of which could potentially affect the transducer operation. - -To assure that one of the pressure transducers is operative, the Apollo 14 cabin pressure transducer will be disassembled, the plating will be inspected and the instrument will be cleaned, reassembled and installed. - -For Apollo 15 and subsequent, the suit and cabin pressure transducers will be disassembled and cleaned. The plating will be inspected for cracking or flaking and the units will be reassembled. The suit pressure transducers will be reassembled without soldering. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.l.l0 Gas Leak in Electrical Circuit Interrupter ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: To prevent recurrence of the problem, the mating surface of the bumper will be swaged for future missions so as to provide an interference fit with the internal surface threads of the l0-mm lens assembly. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.3.2 Failure of the Interval Timer Set Knob - -The onboard interval timer, which has two timing ranges (o to 6 and 0 to 60 minutes), is stowed in the command module for crew use in timing such routine functions as fuel cell purges, cryogenic system fan cycles, and so forth. A tone advises the crew when the set time period has elapsed. Prior to 55 hours, the time-period set knob came off in a crewman's hand because of a loosened set screw. The set screw had been secured with a special gripping compound. Postflight examination of other flight timers indicated that this compound apparently does not provide a strong enough retention force for this application. Therefore, the knobs on timers for future flights will be secured to the shaft with a roll pin. -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 3.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.375 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.000, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:25 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.330, Max reward: 0.982 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What type of insulation used in S-1I stage -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -Temperature changes were noted in bays 3 and 4 of the service module in response to a high heat pulse or high pressure surge. Fuel cell 2 was turned off about 2 hours later because of the loss of pressure from cryogenic oxygen tank l. - -The cryogenic oxygen tank design will be changed to eliminate the mechanisms which could initiate burning within the tank and ultimately lead to a structural failure of the tank or its components. All electrical wires will be stainless-steel sheathed and the quantity probe will be made from stainless steel instead of aluminum. The fill-line plumbing internal to the tank will be improved, and a means of warning the crew of an inadvertent closure of either the fuel cell hydrogen or oxygen valves will be provided. A third cryogenic oxygen tank will be added to the service module for subsequent Apollo missions. The fuel cell oxygen ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: insulator materials used s-1li spacecraft -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "S-1 Saturn rocket insulation" -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What type of insulation was used in the Saturn V S-1 stage? -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -If the Saturn V vehicle is charged to a potential of several million volts, corona discharges will be produced which, in turn, generate radio noise. The onset of these discharges should occur very soon after liftoff and reach a maximum when the launch vehicle is still close to the ground. Radio noise records strongly support this conclusion. The sudden onset of the noise probably corresponds closely to lift-off. It is interesting that, at about 15 seconds after lift-off, the noise became enhanced at the lower rather than the higher frequencies. This phenomenon implies that larger discharges occur at these times. The most intense discharges would be expected to occur soon after the launch vehicle and its exhaust plume clear the launch tower. - -1l.l.3 Measurement of Pelluric Current ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: S-Il stage insulation -2025-04-09 at 02:14:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -Structural loads experienced during S-IC boost were well below design values, with maximum lateral loads approximately 25 percent of the design value. As a result of high amplitude longitudinal oscillations during S-Il boost, the center engine experienced a l32-second premature cutoff. At 330.6 seconds, the S-II crossbeam oscillaticns reached a peak amplitude of +33.7g: Corresponding center-engine chamber pressure oscillations of ยฑ225 psi initiated engine cutoff through the "thrust OK" switches. These responses were the highest measured amplitude for any S-Il flight. Except for the unexpected high amplitude, oscillations in this range are an inherent characteristic of the present S-II structure/propulsion configuration and have been experienced on previous flights. Acceleration levels experienced at various vehicle stations during the period of peak oscillations indicate that the vehicle did not transmit the large magnitude oscillations to the spacecraft. Installation of an ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What type of electrical insulation was used in the cnromatic fuel tank of the S-1 stage of the Saturn V launch vehicle? -2025-04-09 at 02:14:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -Field meter records indicate the Apollo l3 vehicle carried aloft a net positive charge and that the trailing exhaust gases were negatively charged (fig. ll.l-4). Initial analysis indicates the total charge $\mathsf Q$ carried by the vehicle was about 0.o4 coulomb. If the capacitance of the launch vehicle is about l00 picofarads, the vehicle is then at a potential of 4 million volts. A stored charge of $0.04$ coulomb at a potential of 4 million volts provides an electrostatic potential energy of 160 0o0 joules. Although this energy is much less than that dissipated in a natural lightning discharge, the level is still considerable and could significantly increase the potential hazard in an otherwise marginal weather situation. These numbers are consistent with the electrostatic discharge analysis performed on the Apollo l2 lightning incident. Engines in jet aircraft have been observed to produce similar charging effects . - - - -Figure ll.l-4.- Electrical charge characteristics. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What is the composition of the S-1 stage's structural insulation used in the Apollo Saturn V launch vehicle? -2025-04-09 at 02:14:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 6/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, False, True, False, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [81, 558, 105, 112, 219, 173, 160, 130] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 192.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 10.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 19.23 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -Temperature changes were noted in bays 3 and 4 of the service module in response to a high heat pulse or high pressure surge. Fuel cell 2 was turned off about 2 hours later because of the loss of pressure from cryogenic oxygen tank l. - -The cryogenic oxygen tank design will be changed to eliminate the mechanisms which could initiate burning within the tank and ultimately lead to a structural failure of the tank or its components. All electrical wires will be stainless-steel sheathed and the quantity probe will be made from stainless steel instead of aluminum. The fill-line plumbing internal to the tank will be improved, and a means of warning the crew of an inadvertent closure of either the fuel cell hydrogen or oxygen valves will be provided. A third cryogenic oxygen tank will be added to the service module for subsequent Apollo missions. The fuel cell oxygen ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -Structural loads experienced during S-IC boost were well below design values, with maximum lateral loads approximately 25 percent of the design value. As a result of high amplitude longitudinal oscillations during S-Il boost, the center engine experienced a l32-second premature cutoff. At 330.6 seconds, the S-II crossbeam oscillaticns reached a peak amplitude of +33.7g: Corresponding center-engine chamber pressure oscillations of ยฑ225 psi initiated engine cutoff through the "thrust OK" switches. These responses were the highest measured amplitude for any S-Il flight. Except for the unexpected high amplitude, oscillations in this range are an inherent characteristic of the present S-II structure/propulsion configuration and have been experienced on previous flights. Acceleration levels experienced at various vehicle stations during the period of peak oscillations indicate that the vehicle did not transmit the large magnitude oscillations to the spacecraft. Installation of an ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -If the Saturn V vehicle is charged to a potential of several million volts, corona discharges will be produced which, in turn, generate radio noise. The onset of these discharges should occur very soon after liftoff and reach a maximum when the launch vehicle is still close to the ground. Radio noise records strongly support this conclusion. The sudden onset of the noise probably corresponds closely to lift-off. It is interesting that, at about 15 seconds after lift-off, the noise became enhanced at the lower rather than the higher frequencies. This phenomenon implies that larger discharges occur at these times. The most intense discharges would be expected to occur soon after the launch vehicle and its exhaust plume clear the launch tower. - -1l.l.3 Measurement of Pelluric Current ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -Field meter records indicate the Apollo l3 vehicle carried aloft a net positive charge and that the trailing exhaust gases were negatively charged (fig. ll.l-4). Initial analysis indicates the total charge $\mathsf Q$ carried by the vehicle was about 0.o4 coulomb. If the capacitance of the launch vehicle is about l00 picofarads, the vehicle is then at a potential of 4 million volts. A stored charge of $0.04$ coulomb at a potential of 4 million volts provides an electrostatic potential energy of 160 0o0 joules. Although this energy is much less than that dissipated in a natural lightning discharge, the level is still considerable and could significantly increase the potential hazard in an otherwise marginal weather situation. These numbers are consistent with the electrostatic discharge analysis performed on the Apollo l2 lightning incident. Engines in jet aircraft have been observed to produce similar charging effects . - - - -Figure ll.l-4.- Electrical charge characteristics. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 4.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.500 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.500 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.100, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:14:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.239, Max reward: 0.841 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Heart rate measurement techniques for spacewalks -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module pilot heart rate Apollo -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 lunar module pilot heart rate comparison -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Alan Shepard heart rate physiology -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Basal rate vs Pilot heart rate data for spacewalk -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: indicating lunar module pilot heart rate vs basal rate Apollo -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 lunar module pilot heart rate lapse and basal rate -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Lunar Module Pilot heart rate comparison Shepherd Resume -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 lunar module pilot heart rate baseline -2025-04-09 at 02:14:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Lunar Module Pilot inflight heart rate comparison -2025-04-09 at 02:14:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Lunar Module Pilot heart rate Apollo 11 -2025-04-09 at 02:14:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Commander's heart rate comparison Lunar Module Pilot -2025-04-09 at 02:14:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Lunar module pilotapollo 11 stress -2025-04-09 at 02:14:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The Commander and the Command Module Pilot both reported a feeling of fullness in the head lasting for several hours on the first day of the mission. The Lumar Module Pilot reported a similar feeling and also that he felt like he was "hanging upside dowm." The Commander reported that all crewmen had red eyes the first day of the mission. - -Upon awakening on the Second day of the mission, the Lunar Module Pilot complained of a severe headache. He took two aspirin, ate breakfast, and became immediately engaged in unrestrained physical activity. He then became nauseated, vomited once, and lay down for several hours. He then experienced no further nausea. The Lunar Module Pilot continued to take two aspirin every 6 hours to prevent recurrence of the headache. After the inflight incident, he took aspirin on only one occasion. - -9.2.2 Cabin Environment ------- -Result 2: -Postflight physical examinations were conducted immediately after recovery. These physical examinations were normal, although all crewmen were extremely fatigued and the Lunar Module Pilot had a urinary tract infection. While standing during portions of his postflight physical examination, the Lunar Module Pilot had several episodes of dizziness, which were attributed to fatigue, the effects of weightlessness, and the urinary tract infection. The Commander, Command Module Pilot, and Lunar Module Pilot exhibited weight losses of 14, ll, and 6.5 pounds , respectively. In the final 4 or 5 hours of the flight, the Lunar Module Pilot drank considerably more water than did the other crewmen and possibly replenished his earlier body fluid losses. - -The Command Module Pilot had a slight irritation at the site of the superior sensor on the upper chest, but the Cormander and Lunar Module Pilot had no irritation at any sensor sites. - -10.0 MISSION SUPPORT PERFORMANCE - -10.1 FLIGHT CONTROL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:14:58 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Physical effects Apollo 11 second day -2025-04-09 at 02:14:58 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At approximately 56 hours, the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 began to rise at an abnormally high rate and, within about lo0 seconds, the tank abruptly lost pressure. The pressure in tank l also dropped but at a rate sufficient to maintain fuel cell 2 in operation for approximately 2 more hours. The loss of oxygen and primary power in the service module required an immediate abort of the mission. The crew powered up the lunar module, and the first maneuver following the incident was made with the descent propulsion system to place the spacecraft once again on a free-return trajectory. A second maneuver performed with the descent engine 2 hours after passing pericynthion reduced the transearth transit time and moved the earth landing point from the Indian Ocean to the South Pacific. Two small transearth midcourse corrections were required prior toentry. ------- -Result 2: -Attempt to impact the expended S-IVB stage on the lunar surface within 350 km of the targeted impact point of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude under nominal flight control conditions to excite the Apollo l2 seismometer. - -b. Postflight determination of the actual time and location of S-IVF impact to within. l second. - -Both objectives were accomplished, and the results are documented in reference 2. The impact was successfully detected by the seismometer and is reported in greater detail in section ll.3. - -Seven scientific experiments, in addition to those contained in the lunar surface experiment package, were also assigned as follows: - -a. Lunar field geology (S-059) b. Pilot describing function (T-029) c. Solar wind composition (S-080) d. S-band transponder exercise (S-164) e. Downlink bistatic radar observations of the moon (S-170) f. Gegenschein observation from lunar orbit (S-178) gใ€‚ Lunar surface closeup photography (S-184) ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:14:58 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Post Apollo 12 moon landing -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, False, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.33 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [437, 68, 770, 269, 261, 269, 183, 1957] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [36, 36, 36, 36, 36, 36, 36, 36] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 526.75 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 36.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 14.63 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -At 55:54:54, a telemetry dropout was observed. Immediately after the incident, crew heart rates ranged from $\mathtt{105}$ to 136 beats /min. These heart rates are well within normal limits and are indicative of stress and an increased workload. - -During the entry phase, biomedical data on the Command Module Pilot and Lunar Module Pilot were available. The Command Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 60 to 70 beats/min. The Lunar Module Pilot's heart rate ranged from 100 to l25 beats/min, which in contrast to his basal rate was an indication of an inflight illness detected after flight. The Commander had removed his bioharness shortly after the emergency incident; hence, no biomedical data were available from him during the entry. - -9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY - -9.2.l Adaptation to Weightlessness ------- -Result 2: -The biomedical data were excellent in quality during the period from launch to the occurrence of the inflight incident. Physiological data for the remainder of the mission were very scant. The command module was completely powered down, and this eliminated simultaneous biomedical monitoring capability. In the lunar module, only one electrocardiogram signal for one crewman at a time can be monitored. However, even these.medical data were sacrificed to improve air-to-ground communications. - -Prior to the abort condition, physiological parameters were well within expected ranges. Just prior to the incident, heart and respiratory rates of the crewmen were as follows. - -Crewman Heart rate, beats/min Respiratory rate, breaths/min Commander 68 18 Command Module Pilot 65 15 Lumar Module Pilot 72 12 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The Commander and the Command Module Pilot both reported a feeling of fullness in the head lasting for several hours on the first day of the mission. The Lumar Module Pilot reported a similar feeling and also that he felt like he was "hanging upside dowm." The Commander reported that all crewmen had red eyes the first day of the mission. - -Upon awakening on the Second day of the mission, the Lunar Module Pilot complained of a severe headache. He took two aspirin, ate breakfast, and became immediately engaged in unrestrained physical activity. He then became nauseated, vomited once, and lay down for several hours. He then experienced no further nausea. The Lunar Module Pilot continued to take two aspirin every 6 hours to prevent recurrence of the headache. After the inflight incident, he took aspirin on only one occasion. - -9.2.2 Cabin Environment ------- -Result 2: -Postflight physical examinations were conducted immediately after recovery. These physical examinations were normal, although all crewmen were extremely fatigued and the Lunar Module Pilot had a urinary tract infection. While standing during portions of his postflight physical examination, the Lunar Module Pilot had several episodes of dizziness, which were attributed to fatigue, the effects of weightlessness, and the urinary tract infection. The Commander, Command Module Pilot, and Lunar Module Pilot exhibited weight losses of 14, ll, and 6.5 pounds , respectively. In the final 4 or 5 hours of the flight, the Lunar Module Pilot drank considerably more water than did the other crewmen and possibly replenished his earlier body fluid losses. - -The Command Module Pilot had a slight irritation at the site of the superior sensor on the upper chest, but the Cormander and Lunar Module Pilot had no irritation at any sensor sites. - -10.0 MISSION SUPPORT PERFORMANCE - -10.1 FLIGHT CONTROL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -At approximately 56 hours, the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 began to rise at an abnormally high rate and, within about lo0 seconds, the tank abruptly lost pressure. The pressure in tank l also dropped but at a rate sufficient to maintain fuel cell 2 in operation for approximately 2 more hours. The loss of oxygen and primary power in the service module required an immediate abort of the mission. The crew powered up the lunar module, and the first maneuver following the incident was made with the descent propulsion system to place the spacecraft once again on a free-return trajectory. A second maneuver performed with the descent engine 2 hours after passing pericynthion reduced the transearth transit time and moved the earth landing point from the Indian Ocean to the South Pacific. Two small transearth midcourse corrections were required prior toentry. ------- -Result 2: -Attempt to impact the expended S-IVB stage on the lunar surface within 350 km of the targeted impact point of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude under nominal flight control conditions to excite the Apollo l2 seismometer. - -b. Postflight determination of the actual time and location of S-IVF impact to within. l second. - -Both objectives were accomplished, and the results are documented in reference 2. The impact was successfully detected by the seismometer and is reported in greater detail in section ll.3. - -Seven scientific experiments, in addition to those contained in the lunar surface experiment package, were also assigned as follows: - -a. Lunar field geology (S-059) b. Pilot describing function (T-029) c. Solar wind composition (S-080) d. S-band transponder exercise (S-164) e. Downlink bistatic radar observations of the moon (S-170) f. Gegenschein observation from lunar orbit (S-178) gใ€‚ Lunar surface closeup photography (S-184) ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 4.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.500 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.500 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.225, Perfect scores: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.88 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:00 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.179, Max reward: 0.533 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "trans-Earth injection maneuver duration -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "transearth injection maneuver" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection duration -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection duration Cassini-Huygens mission -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection maneuver duration -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection maneuver duration -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what was the duration of a transearth injection maneuver -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 7 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection time -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "transearth injection duration" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection maneuver duration -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection Cassini-Huygens mission duration -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: (no specific time found in the search results), because "transearth injection maneuver" is not a clear search query. -Let me try a more specific search. -duration of S-IVB 17 SLS Transearth injection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of transearth injection maneuver Apollo spacecraft -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection time and duration apollo 11 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 7 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection time definition -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "transearth injection duration" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection duration with primary guidance system -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of S-IVB Transearth injection, Earth 1976 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- -Result 2: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection and transearth transit Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection time and duration apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 6 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection duration guidance system throttling 40 percent 40 percent to full throttle -2025-04-09 at 02:15:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of translunar injection S-IVB -2025-04-09 at 02:15:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- -Result 2: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 12 transearth injection time -2025-04-09 at 02:15:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection maneuver 12.6% to 40% 21 seconds -2025-04-09 at 02:15:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection.duration 5 seconds 12.6 percent 21 seconds -2025-04-09 at 02:15:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth mission 143 hours minus 5 hours -2025-04-09 at 02:15:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew reported sleeping well the first 2 days of the mission. They all slept about 5-l/2 hours during the first sleep period. During the second period, the Commander, Command Module Pilot, and Lunar Module Pilot slept 5, 6, and 9 hours, respectively. The third sleep period was scheduled for 6l hours, but the oxygen tank incident at 56 hours precluded sleep by any of the crew until approximately 8o hours. ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection time 80 hours after mission start -2025-04-09 at 02:15:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection time mentioned in two different timeframes -2025-04-09 at 02:15:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection time 141 hours after mission start -2025-04-09 at 02:15:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 6/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, False, False, False, False, True, True, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [254, 430, 779, 1568, 230, 223, 528, 46] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 507.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 11.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 46.11 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.375, Valid formats: 3.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 7/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -The crew reported sleeping well the first 2 days of the mission. They all slept about 5-l/2 hours during the first sleep period. During the second period, the Commander, Command Module Pilot, and Lunar Module Pilot slept 5, 6, and 9 hours, respectively. The third sleep period was scheduled for 6l hours, but the oxygen tank incident at 56 hours precluded sleep by any of the crew until approximately 8o hours. ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 10: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth c...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nThe crew reported sleeping well the first 2 days of the mission. They all sle...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- -Result 2: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- -Result 2: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nNominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are s...', 'Result 1:\nNominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are s...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth c...', 'Result 1:\nThe first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth c...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...', 'Result 1:\nThe first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 0.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.275, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 5/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 1.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:24 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.396, Max reward: 0.648 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Franklin D. Roosevelt presidential inauguration April 18, 1936" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What notable event occurred on April 18, 1936? -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: artificial turf completion April 18 1936 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -according to ground instructions. ------- -Result 2: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What notable event completed on April 18, 1936 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "event completed on April 18, 1936" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Completed air cargo service across the Atlantic Ocean via aerial refueling -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -started to sight the service module in the docking window. The lightened spacecraft combination was easily maneuvered using attitude control in both the manual minimum-impulse and automatic attitude-hold modes. ------- -Result 2: -The structure in the forward end of the docking tunnel was reinforced to accommodate the expected higher parachute loads due to the increased weight of the command module. In the sequential system the timing signal which disables the roll engines during service module separation was changed from a 5.5- to a 2-second interval, and a cutoff time of 25 seconds was incorporated for the translation engines instead of allowing them to fire until the propellant was depleted. These timing changes were instituted to minimize the effects of fuel slosh and to improve service-module separation characteristics. The stripline units in the high-gain antenna were changed to an improved design. A detachable filter was provided for installing over the cabin heat exchanger exhaust to assist in collection of free lumar dust after crew transfer from the lunar module. An extra urine filter, in addition to the primary and backup units, was stowed and could be used to reduce the possibility of a clogged ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 6 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 recovery mission -2025-04-09 at 02:15:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed -2025-04-09 at 02:15:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The performance of the command and service module systems is discussed in this section. The sequential, pyrotechnic, service propulsion, thermal protection, earth landing, and emergency detection systems and all displays, controls, and crew provisions operated essentially as intended and are not discussed. The pyrotechnic system, which performed all desired functions, did exhibit two minor anomalies, which are discussed only in sections 14.l.6 and 14.l.l0 of the Anomaly Summary, and two discrepancies in the operation of crew equipment were noted, these being discussed in sections 14.3.l and 14.3.2 of the Anomaly Summary. Except for these four cases, all other anomalies are generally mentioned in this Section but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary. - -5.1 SITRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ------- -Result 2: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 11 mission failed mission Earth re-entry" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY - -The Apollo l3 mission, planned as a lunar landing in the Fra Mauro area, was aborted because of an abrupt loss of service module cryogenic oxygen associated with a fire in one of the two tanks at approximately 56 hours. The lunar module provided the necessary support to sustain a minimum operational. condition for a safe return to earth. A circumlunar profile was executed as the most efficient means of earth return, with the lunar module providing power and life support until transfer to the command module just prior to entry. Although the mission was unsuccessful as planned, a lunar flyby and several scientific experiments were completed. ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 mission details -2025-04-09 at 02:15:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Safing of command module pyrotechnics April 18 1936 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The performance of the command and service module systems is discussed in this section. The sequential, pyrotechnic, service propulsion, thermal protection, earth landing, and emergency detection systems and all displays, controls, and crew provisions operated essentially as intended and are not discussed. The pyrotechnic system, which performed all desired functions, did exhibit two minor anomalies, which are discussed only in sections 14.l.6 and 14.l.l0 of the Anomaly Summary, and two discrepancies in the operation of crew equipment were noted, these being discussed in sections 14.3.l and 14.3.2 of the Anomaly Summary. Except for these four cases, all other anomalies are generally mentioned in this Section but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary. - -5.1 SITRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "event completed April 18 1936" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo mission history -2025-04-09 at 02:15:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Navy Apollo-Samoa March 1936 news" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: moon landing failed missions -2025-04-09 at 02:15:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY - -The Apollo l3 mission, planned as a lunar landing in the Fra Mauro area, was aborted because of an abrupt loss of service module cryogenic oxygen associated with a fire in one of the two tanks at approximately 56 hours. The lunar module provided the necessary support to sustain a minimum operational. condition for a safe return to earth. A circumlunar profile was executed as the most efficient means of earth return, with the lunar module providing power and life support until transfer to the command module just prior to entry. Although the mission was unsuccessful as planned, a lunar flyby and several scientific experiments were completed. ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "event completed April 18, 1936" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: april 18 1936 events -2025-04-09 at 02:15:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "New Zealand visit 1936 April" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -The flight crew remained aboard the Iwo Jima overnight and were flown to Pago Pago, Samoa, the following morning. A C-l4l aircraft then took the crew to Hawaii, and following a ceremony and an overnight stay, they were returned to Houston. - -Upon arrival of the Iwo Jima in Hawaii, the command module was offloaded and taken to Hickam Air Force Base for deactivation. Two and one half days later, the command module was flown to the manufacturer's plant at Downey, California aboard a C-l33 aircraft. - -The following is a chronological listing of events during the recovery operations. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:42 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what was completed on April 18 1936 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:42 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service module was separated $\scriptstyle4-3/4$ hours before entry , affording the crew an opportunity to observe and photograph the damaged bay 4 area. The command moduie was separated from the service module by using the lunar module reaction control system. The lunar module was retained for as long as possible to provide maximum electrical power in the command module for entry . ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:42 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: completed installations Houston April 18 1936 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: nasa history april 18 1936 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- -Result 2: -The space vehicle, with a crew of James A. Lovell, Commander; Fred W. Haise, Jr., Lunar Module Pilot; and John L. Swigert, Jr., Command Module Pilot; was launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida, at 2:13:00 p.m. e.s.t. (i9:13:00 G.m.t.) April ll, 1970. Two days before launch, the Command Module Pilot, as a member of the Apollo l3 backup crew, was substituted for his prime crew counterpart, who was exposed and found susceptible to rubella (German measles). Prior to launch, a network of meters was installed in the vicinity of the launch site to measure electrical phenomena associated with Saturn V ascent in support of findings from the Apollo l2 lightning investigation; satisfactory data were obtained. During S-II stage boost, an automatic shutdown of the center engine occurred because of a divergent dynamic structural condition associated with that engine. Soon after the spacecraft was ejected, the S-IvB was maneuvered so as to impact on the lunar surface and provide seismological ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 3/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [212, 200, 504, 1246, 288, 549, 315, 376] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [29, 29, 29, 29, 29, 29, 29, 29] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 461.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 29.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 15.91 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -according to ground instructions. ------- -Result 2: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY - -The Apollo l3 mission, planned as a lunar landing in the Fra Mauro area, was aborted because of an abrupt loss of service module cryogenic oxygen associated with a fire in one of the two tanks at approximately 56 hours. The lunar module provided the necessary support to sustain a minimum operational. condition for a safe return to earth. A circumlunar profile was executed as the most efficient means of earth return, with the lunar module providing power and life support until transfer to the command module just prior to entry. Although the mission was unsuccessful as planned, a lunar flyby and several scientific experiments were completed. ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -The service module was separated $\scriptstyle4-3/4$ hours before entry , affording the crew an opportunity to observe and photograph the damaged bay 4 area. The command moduie was separated from the service module by using the lunar module reaction control system. The lunar module was retained for as long as possible to provide maximum electrical power in the command module for entry . ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- -Result 2: -The space vehicle, with a crew of James A. Lovell, Commander; Fred W. Haise, Jr., Lunar Module Pilot; and John L. Swigert, Jr., Command Module Pilot; was launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida, at 2:13:00 p.m. e.s.t. (i9:13:00 G.m.t.) April ll, 1970. Two days before launch, the Command Module Pilot, as a member of the Apollo l3 backup crew, was substituted for his prime crew counterpart, who was exposed and found susceptible to rubella (German measles). Prior to launch, a network of meters was installed in the vicinity of the launch site to measure electrical phenomena associated with Saturn V ascent in support of findings from the Apollo l2 lightning investigation; satisfactory data were obtained. During S-II stage boost, an automatic shutdown of the center engine occurred because of a divergent dynamic structural condition associated with that engine. Soon after the spacecraft was ejected, the S-IvB was maneuvered so as to impact on the lunar surface and provide seismological ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The performance of the command and service module systems is discussed in this section. The sequential, pyrotechnic, service propulsion, thermal protection, earth landing, and emergency detection systems and all displays, controls, and crew provisions operated essentially as intended and are not discussed. The pyrotechnic system, which performed all desired functions, did exhibit two minor anomalies, which are discussed only in sections 14.l.6 and 14.l.l0 of the Anomaly Summary, and two discrepancies in the operation of crew equipment were noted, these being discussed in sections 14.3.l and 14.3.2 of the Anomaly Summary. Except for these four cases, all other anomalies are generally mentioned in this Section but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary. - -5.1 SITRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ------- -Result 2: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The performance of the command and service module systems is discussed in this section. The sequential, pyrotechnic, service propulsion, thermal protection, earth landing, and emergency detection systems and all displays, controls, and crew provisions operated essentially as intended and are not discussed. The pyrotechnic system, which performed all desired functions, did exhibit two minor anomalies, which are discussed only in sections 14.l.6 and 14.l.l0 of the Anomaly Summary, and two discrepancies in the operation of crew equipment were noted, these being discussed in sections 14.3.l and 14.3.2 of the Anomaly Summary. Except for these four cases, all other anomalies are generally mentioned in this Section but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary. - -5.1 SITRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ------- -Result 2: -injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY - -The Apollo l3 mission, planned as a lunar landing in the Fra Mauro area, was aborted because of an abrupt loss of service module cryogenic oxygen associated with a fire in one of the two tanks at approximately 56 hours. The lunar module provided the necessary support to sustain a minimum operational. condition for a safe return to earth. A circumlunar profile was executed as the most efficient means of earth return, with the lunar module providing power and life support until transfer to the command module just prior to entry. Although the mission was unsuccessful as planned, a lunar flyby and several scientific experiments were completed. ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Event Weight, 1b Center of gravity, in. Moment or inertia, slug-ft2 Product of inertia, slug-ft2 X Z IxY Lift-off 110 252.4 847.4 2.4 3.7 67646 1 175 539 1 178 016 2906 8047 3711 Earth orbit insertion 101 261.2 807.4 2.6 4.1 66770 718 686 721 213 5157 11945 3688 Command&servicemodules Lwnar module 63 720.3 33499.1 934.5 1237.0 4.0 -0.1 6.5 0.0 33995 22457 76486 24654 79123 25255 ~1746 -126 95 3221 235 Totaldocked 97 219.4 1038.7 2.6 4.3 56 736 534890 538009 -8142 -9376 3585 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 97 081.5 96 851.1 1038.9 1039.0 2.6 2.6 4.2 4.2 56 629 56 508 534493 534 139 537 635 537 380 -8192 -8189 -9305 -9282 3620 3587 Cryotenic oxygen tank incitent Before 96 646.9 1039.2 2.6 4.2 56 321 533499 536 766 -8239 -9244 3636 After Second midcourse correction 96 038.7 1040.7 3.0 3.9 57248 533 927 537 251 -8269 669- -3709 Ignition Cutoff 95 959.9 95 647.1 378.8 379.4 4.9 5.0 0.7 0.7 57205 57006 516443 513919 521 180 518700 11617 11553 2659 2651 3286 3285 Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -The flight crew remained aboard the Iwo Jima overnight and were flown to Pago Pago, Samoa, the following morning. A C-l4l aircraft then took the crew to Hawaii, and following a ceremony and an overnight stay, they were returned to Houston. - -Upon arrival of the Iwo Jima in Hawaii, the command module was offloaded and taken to Hickam Air Force Base for deactivation. Two and one half days later, the command module was flown to the manufacturer's plant at Downey, California aboard a C-l33 aircraft. - -The following is a chronological listing of events during the recovery operations. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -started to sight the service module in the docking window. The lightened spacecraft combination was easily maneuvered using attitude control in both the manual minimum-impulse and automatic attitude-hold modes. ------- -Result 2: -The structure in the forward end of the docking tunnel was reinforced to accommodate the expected higher parachute loads due to the increased weight of the command module. In the sequential system the timing signal which disables the roll engines during service module separation was changed from a 5.5- to a 2-second interval, and a cutoff time of 25 seconds was incorporated for the translation engines instead of allowing them to fire until the propellant was depleted. These timing changes were instituted to minimize the effects of fuel slosh and to improve service-module separation characteristics. The stripline units in the high-gain antenna were changed to an improved design. A detachable filter was provided for installing over the cabin heat exchanger exhaust to assist in collection of free lumar dust after crew transfer from the lunar module. An extra urine filter, in addition to the primary and backup units, was stowed and could be used to reduce the possibility of a clogged ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nstarted to sight the service module in the docking window. The lightened spac...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 5.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.625 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.075, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:15:44 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.227, Max reward: 0.641 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:47 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what was deleted from Apollo 13 lunar module compared to Apollo 12 lunar module -2025-04-09 at 02:15:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 mission instrumentation list Apollo 12" -2025-04-09 at 02:15:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 package instrumentation vs apollo 12 package instrumentation -2025-04-09 at 02:15:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 lunar module vs Apollo 12 lunar module instrumentation -2025-04-09 at 02:15:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 12 mission instrumentation Apollo 13 mission -2025-04-09 at 02:15:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what instruments were removed from moon mission to affect Apollo 13 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 command and service module instrumentation comparison to Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 12 training experiences differences with mission requirements -2025-04-09 at 02:15:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: separate transearth injection navigation and mission focus from Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:15:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:15:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 12 command and service module vs Apollo 13 inspection and modification reports -2025-04-09 at 02:15:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 12 vs Apollo 13 lunar surface equipment -2025-04-09 at 02:15:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 transearth injection course corrections and power conservation -2025-04-09 at 02:15:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:15:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module instrument modifications Apollo 12 vs Apollo 13 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 12 vs Apollo 13 spacecraft configuration -2025-04-09 at 02:16:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 free-return maneuver details -2025-04-09 at 02:16:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 lunar module subsystem components comparison to Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 h2 and humidity issues lunar module and cometary module -2025-04-09 at 02:16:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 lunar surface experiments modifications -2025-04-09 at 02:16:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -The thickness of the outer-skin shielding for the forward hatch was increased from 0.004 to 0.010 inch to improve the resistance to the tearing that was noted on Apollo l2. The D-ring handle on the modularized equipment storage assembly was changed to a looped cable to simplify the deployment operation. The thermal insulation for the landing gear was modified to reduce the total insulation weight by 27.2 pounds. Both a color and a black-and-white television camera were included for increased reliability of television coverage on .the lunar surface. The primary guidance programs were modified to permit reentry into the automatic and attitude hold modes of operation after manual control was exercised; this change was incorporated to provide improved final descent capability in the event of obscuration from lunar dust. The event timer was modified so that after it counted down to zero, it would count up automatically and thus reduce crew workload during critical events. The descent ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 spacecraft modifications -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, True, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [658, 713, 885, 604, 151, 1182, 1701, 277] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 771.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 68.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 11.34 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstr...', 'Result 1:\nd. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction wi...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', "Result 1:\nThe command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' Californi...", 'Result 1:\nd. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction wi...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstr...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstr...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstr...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstr...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -The thickness of the outer-skin shielding for the forward hatch was increased from 0.004 to 0.010 inch to improve the resistance to the tearing that was noted on Apollo l2. The D-ring handle on the modularized equipment storage assembly was changed to a looped cable to simplify the deployment operation. The thermal insulation for the landing gear was modified to reduce the total insulation weight by 27.2 pounds. Both a color and a black-and-white television camera were included for increased reliability of television coverage on .the lunar surface. The primary guidance programs were modified to permit reentry into the automatic and attitude hold modes of operation after manual control was exercised; this change was incorporated to provide improved final descent capability in the event of obscuration from lunar dust. The event timer was modified so that after it counted down to zero, it would count up automatically and thus reduce crew workload during critical events. The descent ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The Apollo lunar surface experiment package stowed for Apollo l3 was similar to that for Apollo l2. However, the solar wind spectrometer, magnetometer, and suprathermal ion detector, included on Apollo l2, were deleted from Apollo 13. A heat flow experiment and a charged particle environment detector were added for Apollo l3. The cold-cathode ion gage experiment deployed during Apollo l2 was significantly modified for Apo1lo13. - -The Apollo lunar surface experiments package consisted of two subpackages as shown in figures A-l and A-2. These were stowed in the lunar module scientific equipment bay. - -NASA-S-70-5864 - - - -Figure A-l.- Experiment subpackage number l. - -A.3.1 Heat Flow Experiment - -The heat flow experiment was designed to measure the thermal gradient of the upper 3 meters of the lunar crust and the thermal conductivity of the lunar surface materials. Lunar heat flow calculations could be based on the measurements. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 1.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.125 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.331 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.075, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.62 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:09 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.259, Max reward: 0.746 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: I'll need to search for a Gemini spaceflight mission that involved midcourse corrections. -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: HISTORY of space exploration yaw control systems -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -attitude error needles to maintain attitude. Attitude control during the maneuver was performed by manually nulling the pitch and roll error needles. This maneuver necessarily required crew-cooperation, since the Lunar Module Pilot controlled pitch and the Commander controlled roll. Yaw attitude was maintained automatically by the abort guidance system. The Command Module Pilot called out the engine start and stop times, and the entire l4-second firing was performed at l0 percent thrust. The engine was shut down l second short of the calculated firing time to preclude an overburn which might require use of minus-X thrusters and cause plume impingement on the command module. The control and alignment techniques to accomplish such a contingency midcourse maneuver are believed to be satisfactory. ------- -Result 2: -to command rotation about the vehicle pitch and roll axes and the attitude controller for yaw commands. The pilot's task was further complicated by having the flight director attitude indicators powered down. Without these displays, it was necessary to monitor attitudes by observing gimbal angles on the display and keyboard assembly. Because the spacecraft yaw axis was not coincident to that of the platform yaw axis, either a pitch or roll command would cause a change in both of the corresponding gimbal-angle displays. After the vehicle attitude was changed to more closely align with the platform and to reduce the yaw gimbalangle disparity, passive thermal control was established satisfactorily. Both guidance systems were then powered down until l05 hours. At that time, the abort guidance system was powered up for control during the first transearth midcourse correction. The passive thermal control mode was reestablished and the abort system was powered down. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Transit control systems for Voyager 1 mission" -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Spacecraft control system for the first transearth mission -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: query: "trans-Earth midcourse correction yaw control system -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -With primary guidance available, guidance system steering was manually followed to trim the spacecraft attitudes for the maneuver. Although the displayed attitudes looked favorable in comparison to groundsupplied and out-the-window readings , the primary guidance steering needles read full scale left in roll and yaw (section 6.4). At about 137 hours 40 minutes, the lunar module reaction control system was used to provide a 2.9-ft/sec velocity correction. The maneuver was completed using manual pitch and roll control and abort guidance yaw control in a manner similar to that for the previous midcourse correction. - -8.9.4 Service Module Separation and Photography ------- -Result 2: -to command rotation about the vehicle pitch and roll axes and the attitude controller for yaw commands. The pilot's task was further complicated by having the flight director attitude indicators powered down. Without these displays, it was necessary to monitor attitudes by observing gimbal angles on the display and keyboard assembly. Because the spacecraft yaw axis was not coincident to that of the platform yaw axis, either a pitch or roll command would cause a change in both of the corresponding gimbal-angle displays. After the vehicle attitude was changed to more closely align with the platform and to reduce the yaw gimbalangle disparity, passive thermal control was established satisfactorily. Both guidance systems were then powered down until l05 hours. At that time, the abort guidance system was powered up for control during the first transearth midcourse correction. The passive thermal control mode was reestablished and the abort system was powered down. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: i am searching for: Lunar module reaction control system, Transearth navigation, yaw control systems -2025-04-09 at 02:16:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Instrument unit for Lunar Module descent propulsion of Transterah mission -2025-04-09 at 02:16:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: query: Apollo 10 mission yaw control system during midcourse correction -2025-04-09 at 02:16:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System March 1970 2 Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Perfornance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluati on Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluation Descent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 8 Evaluati on Cancelled 9 Analysis of Apollo lo Photography and Visual Observations In publication 10 11 Entry Postflight Analysis Communi cations System Performance December 1969 December 1969 Apollo ๏ผ‰11 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation May 1970 September 1970 Review Review ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: i am searching for: Transearth reaction control system, command and service module reaction control system -2025-04-09 at 02:16:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- -Result 2: -A.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: query: Apollo 10 yaw control system for transearth midcourse correction -2025-04-09 at 02:16:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -With primary guidance available, guidance system steering was manually followed to trim the spacecraft attitudes for the maneuver. Although the displayed attitudes looked favorable in comparison to groundsupplied and out-the-window readings , the primary guidance steering needles read full scale left in roll and yaw (section 6.4). At about 137 hours 40 minutes, the lunar module reaction control system was used to provide a 2.9-ft/sec velocity correction. The maneuver was completed using manual pitch and roll control and abort guidance yaw control in a manner similar to that for the previous midcourse correction. - -8.9.4 Service Module Separation and Photography ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: i am searching for: Lunar Module Reaction Control System, Transearth -2025-04-09 at 02:16:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 3/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, True, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [130, 321, 408, 232, 304, 249, 189, 369] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [40, 40, 40, 40, 40, 40, 40, 40] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 275.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 40.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 6.88 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 4/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- -Result 2: -A.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105...', 'Result 1:\n1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJEC...', 'Result 1:\nand Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion Sy...', 'Result 1:\nand Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion Sy...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -attitude error needles to maintain attitude. Attitude control during the maneuver was performed by manually nulling the pitch and roll error needles. This maneuver necessarily required crew-cooperation, since the Lunar Module Pilot controlled pitch and the Commander controlled roll. Yaw attitude was maintained automatically by the abort guidance system. The Command Module Pilot called out the engine start and stop times, and the entire l4-second firing was performed at l0 percent thrust. The engine was shut down l second short of the calculated firing time to preclude an overburn which might require use of minus-X thrusters and cause plume impingement on the command module. The control and alignment techniques to accomplish such a contingency midcourse maneuver are believed to be satisfactory. ------- -Result 2: -to command rotation about the vehicle pitch and roll axes and the attitude controller for yaw commands. The pilot's task was further complicated by having the flight director attitude indicators powered down. Without these displays, it was necessary to monitor attitudes by observing gimbal angles on the display and keyboard assembly. Because the spacecraft yaw axis was not coincident to that of the platform yaw axis, either a pitch or roll command would cause a change in both of the corresponding gimbal-angle displays. After the vehicle attitude was changed to more closely align with the platform and to reduce the yaw gimbalangle disparity, passive thermal control was established satisfactorily. Both guidance systems were then powered down until l05 hours. At that time, the abort guidance system was powered up for control during the first transearth midcourse correction. The passive thermal control mode was reestablished and the abort system was powered down. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nattitude error needles to maintain attitude. Attitude control during the mane...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\n1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJEC...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105...', 'Result 1:\n1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJEC...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -With primary guidance available, guidance system steering was manually followed to trim the spacecraft attitudes for the maneuver. Although the displayed attitudes looked favorable in comparison to groundsupplied and out-the-window readings , the primary guidance steering needles read full scale left in roll and yaw (section 6.4). At about 137 hours 40 minutes, the lunar module reaction control system was used to provide a 2.9-ft/sec velocity correction. The maneuver was completed using manual pitch and roll control and abort guidance yaw control in a manner similar to that for the previous midcourse correction. - -8.9.4 Service Module Separation and Photography ------- -Result 2: -to command rotation about the vehicle pitch and roll axes and the attitude controller for yaw commands. The pilot's task was further complicated by having the flight director attitude indicators powered down. Without these displays, it was necessary to monitor attitudes by observing gimbal angles on the display and keyboard assembly. Because the spacecraft yaw axis was not coincident to that of the platform yaw axis, either a pitch or roll command would cause a change in both of the corresponding gimbal-angle displays. After the vehicle attitude was changed to more closely align with the platform and to reduce the yaw gimbalangle disparity, passive thermal control was established satisfactorily. Both guidance systems were then powered down until l05 hours. At that time, the abort guidance system was powered up for control during the first transearth midcourse correction. The passive thermal control mode was reestablished and the abort system was powered down. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System March 1970 2 Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Perfornance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluati on Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluation Descent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 8 Evaluati on Cancelled 9 Analysis of Apollo lo Photography and Visual Observations In publication 10 11 Entry Postflight Analysis Communi cations System Performance December 1969 December 1969 Apollo ๏ผ‰11 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation May 1970 September 1970 Review Review ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -With primary guidance available, guidance system steering was manually followed to trim the spacecraft attitudes for the maneuver. Although the displayed attitudes looked favorable in comparison to groundsupplied and out-the-window readings , the primary guidance steering needles read full scale left in roll and yaw (section 6.4). At about 137 hours 40 minutes, the lunar module reaction control system was used to provide a 2.9-ft/sec velocity correction. The maneuver was completed using manual pitch and roll control and abort guidance yaw control in a manner similar to that for the previous midcourse correction. - -8.9.4 Service Module Separation and Photography ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nWith primary guidance available, guidance system steering was manually follow...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Recons...', 'Result 1:\nThe first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 0.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.075, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:21 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.304, Max reward: 0.611 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: throttle position vs engine throttle? -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: throttle position Piloted autonomous vehicles -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -A descent propulsion system maneuver to reestablish a free-return trajectory was planned for 6l-l/2 hours using primary guidance. The docked configuration was maneuvered manually to null out guidance system error needles using the thrust/translation controller assembly for roll and pitch control and the attitude controller assembly for yaw control. It was not difficult to control the docked configuration in this manner. There was, however, some concern as to the effect the use of the thrust/ translation controller assembly would have on the trajectory. After the error needles were nulled, attitude was maintained using primary guidance with attitude control in "Auto." - -Primary guidance system performance was nomi nal $\cdot$ during the mi dcourse maneuver to a free return. There were no vehicle attitude excursions, and the firing time was as predicted. The abort guidance system was not powered up for this maneuver. ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: throttle position final in car automotive -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The passive thermal control modes attempted at 7:43:02 and 32:2l:49 were not successful and had to be reinitiated. The attempt at 7:43:02 resulted in a divergent coning angle because the roll rate was established using one rather than two roll engines, as required by the checklist. In addition, an incorrect roll rate was loaded into the digital autopilot. The attempt at 32:2l:49 resulted in a divergent coning angle because an unplanned minimum impulse engine firing occurred l3 seconds after initiating the roll rate. The engine firing command (two negative roll engines) was generated when the roll manual attitude switch was changed from the rate-command position to the acceleration-command position. The engine ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: throttle position vs throttle levers -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: 2023 NASCAR Cup Series final race car throttle position -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: throttle position final -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 6 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: engine throttle final corrected position maneuver -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth firing throttle profile -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection maneuver 2023 NASCAR Cup Series final race throttle profile -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection throttle profile -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection maneuver throttle profile compensation -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection maneuver throttle profile verification -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: NASCAR Cup Series throttle position transearth injection profile -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: min throttle transearth injection -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: compensating throttle maneuver for propellant tank fracture avoidance -2025-04-09 at 02:16:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection throttle position -2025-04-09 at 02:16:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection throttle tolerance compensation minimum -2025-04-09 at 02:16:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection third midcourse correction NASCAR Cup Series final race throttle position -2025-04-09 at 02:16:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: NASCAR Cup Series third midcourse correction throttle position at 12% full thrust -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The first midcourse correction maneuver, performed at the second option point, was completely nominal. The service propulsion engine was started and stopped on time, and residuals were negligible. In conjunction with this service propulsion maneuver, some differences were noted with respect to the command module simulator. When gimbal motors were turned on, an 8- to l0-ampere increase was noted, with a slightly faster jump than had been seen in the simulator. The major distinction was the fact that fuel cell flowrate indications are barely seen to move, whereas there is a very noticeable change in the simulator. At engine ignition, the ball valve indicators moved slowly to open, but in the simulator, they instantaneously move to open. After turning off the battery bus ties, the battery voltage slowly rose from 32 volts to the open circuit voltage of about 37 volts, whereas in the simulator there is an instantaneous recovery. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, False, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.33 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [173, 292, 369, 247, 710, 11, 1996, 108] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 488.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 13.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 37.56 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 5/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nCondition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third mid...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -A descent propulsion system maneuver to reestablish a free-return trajectory was planned for 6l-l/2 hours using primary guidance. The docked configuration was maneuvered manually to null out guidance system error needles using the thrust/translation controller assembly for roll and pitch control and the attitude controller assembly for yaw control. It was not difficult to control the docked configuration in this manner. There was, however, some concern as to the effect the use of the thrust/ translation controller assembly would have on the trajectory. After the error needles were nulled, attitude was maintained using primary guidance with attitude control in "Auto." - -Primary guidance system performance was nomi nal $\cdot$ during the mi dcourse maneuver to a free return. There were no vehicle attitude excursions, and the firing time was as predicted. The abort guidance system was not powered up for this maneuver. ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nA descent propulsion system maneuver to reestablish a free-return trajectory ...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The passive thermal control modes attempted at 7:43:02 and 32:2l:49 were not successful and had to be reinitiated. The attempt at 7:43:02 resulted in a divergent coning angle because the roll rate was established using one rather than two roll engines, as required by the checklist. In addition, an incorrect roll rate was loaded into the digital autopilot. The attempt at 32:2l:49 resulted in a divergent coning angle because an unplanned minimum impulse engine firing occurred l3 seconds after initiating the roll rate. The engine firing command (two negative roll engines) was generated when the roll manual attitude switch was changed from the rate-command position to the acceleration-command position. The engine ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nCondition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third mid...', 'Result 1:\nCondition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third mid...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nThe descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midc...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The first midcourse correction maneuver, performed at the second option point, was completely nominal. The service propulsion engine was started and stopped on time, and residuals were negligible. In conjunction with this service propulsion maneuver, some differences were noted with respect to the command module simulator. When gimbal motors were turned on, an 8- to l0-ampere increase was noted, with a slightly faster jump than had been seen in the simulator. The major distinction was the fact that fuel cell flowrate indications are barely seen to move, whereas there is a very noticeable change in the simulator. At engine ignition, the ball valve indicators moved slowly to open, but in the simulator, they instantaneously move to open. After turning off the battery bus ties, the battery voltage slowly rose from 32 volts to the open circuit voltage of about 37 volts, whereas in the simulator there is an instantaneous recovery. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nCondition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third mid...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nCondition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third mid...', 'Result 1:\nCondition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third mid...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Guidance system performance was again nominal and there were no significant attitude excursions.. The throttle profile was started in the idle position, then moved to 40 percent for 2l seconds, and finally to full throttle for the remainder of the firing. The maneuver residuals were 0.2, 0.0, and 0.3 ft/sec in the X, Y, and Z axes, respectively. The abort guidance system was powered up and was used to monitor both attitude and velocity change and agreed with primary system readouts throughout the maneuver. - -8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST - -8.9.1 Coast Phase Activities -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance system controlling the descent propulsion system. The throttle profile was 5 seconds at 12.6 percent, 2l seconds at 40 percent, and the remainder at full throttle. During both periods of throttle increase, the roll-gimbal drive actuator traveled approximately l.35 degrees negatively from its value at ignition. These excursion were somewhat larger than expected, but simulations have since shown them to be normal and result from engine compliance and mistrim. Spacecraft dynamics were nominal throughout the firing. The first transearth midcourse correction was the last maneuver to use the descent propulsion system. The maneuver was performed by manually controlling pitch and roll using the hand controllers and by automatically controlling yaw with the abort guidance system attitude-hold mode. The l4-second firing was accomplished at 10-percent throttle with no adverse dynami cs. - -6.4.3 Alignment ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nCondition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third mid...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed with the primary guidance sys...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 0.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.075, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.356, Max reward: 0.633 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:41 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: system-A propellant manifold pressures decrease duration -2025-04-09 at 02:16:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: -"Artemis SLS propulsion manifold pressure decrease duration" -2025-04-09 at 02:16:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System ignitiontime, hr:min:sec Firing time, sec Velocity change, ft/sec Resultant entry interface condition Plight-path angle,deg, Velocity, ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Entry arrival time, hr:min:sec Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Descent propulsion 79:27:39 263.6 860.5 No entry (vacuum perigee= 8o.6 miles) Descent prcpulsion 105:18:28 14.0 7.8 -6.24 36 210.6 28.22S 173.49E 142:40:47 Fourth midcourse Lunarmodulereaction correction control 137:39:51.5 21.5 3.0 -6.26 36 210.9 28.23S 173.46E 142:40:46 ------- -Result 2: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of decrease in system-A propellant manifold pressure -2025-04-09 at 02:16:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of decrease in system-A propellant manifold pressures -2025-04-09 at 02:16:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of decrease in system A propellant manifold pressure duration -2025-04-09 at 02:16:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 3/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, True, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.33 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [479, 316, 108, 295, 279, 244, 360, 91] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 271.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 14.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 19.39 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Maneuver System ignitiontime, hr:min:sec Firing time, sec Velocity change, ft/sec Resultant entry interface condition Plight-path angle,deg, Velocity, ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Entry arrival time, hr:min:sec Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Descent propulsion 79:27:39 263.6 860.5 No entry (vacuum perigee= 8o.6 miles) Descent prcpulsion 105:18:28 14.0 7.8 -6.24 36 210.6 28.22S 173.49E 142:40:47 Fourth midcourse Lunarmodulereaction correction control 137:39:51.5 21.5 3.0 -6.26 36 210.9 28.23S 173.46E 142:40:46 ------- -Result 2: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -During launch the suit pressure transducer reading remained consistent with cabin pressure unti1 00:02:45, then suddenly dropped from 6.7 to 5.7 psia cQincidentally with S-II engine ignition (fig. 14-l2). The difference between the two measurements decreased to only 0.2 by l-l/2 hours, when the cabin reached its nominal regulated pressure of 5.0 psia. For this shirtsleeve mode, the suit and cabin pressure readings should be nearly equal. During normal variations in the command module cabin pressure, the suit pressure measurement responded sluggishly and indicated as much as l psi low. Subsequently, the measurement output decayed and remained in the 4.1 to 4.3 psia range for a cabin pressure of 5.0 psia until system deactivation at about 59 hours (fig. 14-l2). - - - -(a)Lift-off through $4$ minutes. Figure l4-l2.- Suit and cabin pressure. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 3.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.375 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.100, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:16:46 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.166, Max reward: 0.647 -2025-04-09 at 02:16:47 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: total propellant loaded into service propulsion system -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: total propellant loaded into tanks service propulsion system -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: total amount of propellant loaded into the tanks for a space shuttle main engine -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: total propellant loaded into tanks for service propulsion system of spacecraft like Apollo or Mars Curiosity -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:16:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: total amount of propellant loaded into service propulsion system, command module propellant usage for overall mission -2025-04-09 at 02:16:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- -Result 2: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: service propulsion system propellant total load -2025-04-09 at 02:16:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: information on propellant usage before and after the oxygen tank anomaly -2025-04-09 at 02:16:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:16:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Service propulsion system and command module propellant usage Orion mission -2025-04-09 at 02:17:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Orion spacecraft descent propulsion propellant usage -2025-04-09 at 02:17:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: descent propulsion total propellant load for initial Saturn SR-IO Entry Descent and Lunar Module (EDL) procedures -2025-04-09 at 02:17:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: total propellant load for Saturn SR-IO Descent Propulsion System -2025-04-09 at 02:17:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Orion spacecraft of Saturn S-I0 mission propellant usage for S-IVB stage -2025-04-09 at 02:17:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: S-IVB stage of Apollo 11 mission propellant usage -2025-04-09 at 02:17:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -Ignition and lift-off occurred on schedule. A listing_of major flight plan events as they occurred is contained in figure 8-l. Firststage performance was nominal and coincided very closely with simulations. Communications during the high noise level phase of flight were excellent. Staging of the S-IC occurred nearly on time and was accompanied by three distinct longitudinal oscillations. S-Il ignition and thrusting was smooth until about 00:05:32, when a sudden buildup in vibration was felt, followed by illumination of the number 5 engine out light. The Mission Control Center confirmed that engine 5 had shut down approximately 2 minutes early. S-II performance after that time was smooth with no noticeable abnormalities. S-II staging and S-IVB ignition occurred late, at 9 minutes 57 seconds. S-IVB performance was nominal but seemed to be accompanied by more vibration than was noted during Apollo 8. [The Apollo l3 Commander had been the Command Module Pilot for Apollo 8]. All three ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: S-IVB stage future segment of Apollo mission propellant usage -2025-04-09 at 02:17:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: S-IVB stage midcourse correction and lunar orbit insertion -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- -Result 2: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 2/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, True, False, True, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [1764, 438, 296, 187, 1386, 440, 1008, 301] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 727.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 5.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 145.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- -Result 2: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -and Service Module Reaction Control System Apri1 1970 5 Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 6 Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation December 1969 8 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 9 Cancelled 10 Stroking Test Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 12 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -Ignition and lift-off occurred on schedule. A listing_of major flight plan events as they occurred is contained in figure 8-l. Firststage performance was nominal and coincided very closely with simulations. Communications during the high noise level phase of flight were excellent. Staging of the S-IC occurred nearly on time and was accompanied by three distinct longitudinal oscillations. S-Il ignition and thrusting was smooth until about 00:05:32, when a sudden buildup in vibration was felt, followed by illumination of the number 5 engine out light. The Mission Control Center confirmed that engine 5 had shut down approximately 2 minutes early. S-II performance after that time was smooth with no noticeable abnormalities. S-II staging and S-IVB ignition occurred late, at 9 minutes 57 seconds. S-IVB performance was nominal but seemed to be accompanied by more vibration than was noted during Apollo 8. [The Apollo l3 Commander had been the Command Module Pilot for Apollo 8]. All three ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 10: Result 1: -As on Apollo l2, the S-IVB was targeted for a high-pericynthion free-return translunar profile, with the first major spacecraft maneuver intended to lower the pericynthion to the planned orbital altitude of 60 miles. Upon execution of this maneuver, the spacecraft was intentionally placed on a non-free-return trajectory. The achieved pericynthion altitude at translunar injection was 415.8 miles. The accuracy of the translunar injection maneuver was such that the option for the first planned midcourse correction was not exercised. The velocity change required at the second planned midcourse option point, intended as the time for entering the non-free-return profile, was 23.2 ft/sec. The trajectory parameters for the translunar injection and all spacecraft maneuvers are presented in table 4-II. - -TABLE 4-I.- DEFINITION OF TRAJECTORY AND ORBITAL PARAMETERS ------- -Result 2: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nAll service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to t...', 'Result 1:\nAll service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to t...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nFuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 2.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.250 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.433 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.125, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:06 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.277, Max reward: 0.791 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what percentage of battery load is provided by battery 2 after a sudden increase in current is exceeded -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -Evidence indicates that battery 2 may have experienced an electrical fault of some type. The most probable condition is electrolyte leaking from one or more cells and bridging the high-voltage or low-voltage terminal to the battery case (fig. 14-17). This bridging results in water electrolysis and subsequent ignition of the hydrogen and oxygen so generated. The accompanying "explosion" would then blow off or rupture the seal of the battery lid and cause both a thump and venting of the free liquids in the battery case, resulting in "snowflakes." - -Postflight tests have shown the following: ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: effect of surge current on battery capacity percentage -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "percentage of load carried by battery after surge in electrical energy systems -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What is Short-Circuit Capacity (SCC) of a lithium-ion battery and how is it calculated? -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The battery potting will be improved to prevent electrolyte bridging between the battery terminals and case. These improvements include coating the inside of the battery case with epoxy paint before the battery is assembled and changing the potting material used at the ends of the case to a material which has better adhesion characteristics. Also, the cell chimneys will be manifolded together and to the case vent-valve with plastic tubing. - -In addition, tests are being performed to determine if the quantity of free electrolyte in each cell can be reduced. Preliminary results indicate a reduction of from 360 to 340 cc per cell is possible. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: How much of the current load is a 2-circuit breaking device designed to protect responding immediately to a surge in electrical current? -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -Electrical shorts in the fan circuit ignited the wire insulation, causing pressure and temperature increases within oxygen tank 2. During the pressure rise period, the fuses opened in both fan circuits in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. A short-circuit conduction in the quantity gaging system cleared itself and then began an open-circuit condition. When the pressure reached the tank-2 relief-valve full-flow conditions of 1008 psia, the pressure decreased for about 9 seconds, after which time the relief valve probably reseated, causing another momentary pressure increase. Approximately $1/4$ second after this momentary pressure increase, a vibration disturbance was noted on the command module accelerometers. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what percentage of battery load a battery provides after a sudden increase in current that exceeds its capacity -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The battery potting will be improved to prevent electrolyte bridging between the battery terminals and case. These improvements include coating the inside of the battery case with epoxy paint before the battery is assembled and changing the potting material used at the ends of the case to a material which has better adhesion characteristics. Also, the cell chimneys will be manifolded together and to the case vent-valve with plastic tubing. - -In addition, tests are being performed to determine if the quantity of free electrolyte in each cell can be reduced. Preliminary results indicate a reduction of from 360 to 340 cc per cell is possible. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: description of battery 2 current surge percentage -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: current surge capacity calculation -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -During the mission, the fuel cells supplied approximately l20 kW-h of energy at ar average current of approximately 24 amperes per fuel cell and at an average bus voltage of 29.4 volts. - -5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What is a 60-ampere current surge in an electrical circuit and what type of circuit breaking device is typically used for such a capacity? -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: battery current surges and percentage of total load -2025-04-09 at 02:17:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: how do the interrupter mechanisms work in aerospace applications and what type of disconnecting device is typically used in cryogenic systems? -2025-04-09 at 02:17:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Based upon an analysis of the interrupter design, its location, and its relationship to adjacent equipment, it is concluded that gas will not escape prior to the completion of the deadfacing function and that, should such escape occur, the gas will not adversely affect any other components. Therefore, no hardware modification is necessary. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.2 LUNAR MODULE - -14.2.l Abnormal Supercritical Helium Pressure Rise ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:19 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: percentage of battery load providing during a surge event exceeding 100 amps -2025-04-09 at 02:17:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what is the purpose of a deadfacing mechanism in aerospace interrupter systems? -2025-04-09 at 02:17:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Based upon an analysis of the interrupter design, its location, and its relationship to adjacent equipment, it is concluded that gas will not escape prior to the completion of the deadfacing function and that, should such escape occur, the gas will not adversely affect any other components. Therefore, no hardware modification is necessary. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.2 LUNAR MODULE - -14.2.l Abnormal Supercritical Helium Pressure Rise ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: rate of surge of descent battery 2 current -2025-04-09 at 02:17:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of surge when battery 2 provided 80% of total current load -2025-04-09 at 02:17:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of surge when battery provided 80% of total current load -2025-04-09 at 02:17:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:27 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: when battery 2 surged beyond 100 amperes with crew report of increased noise -2025-04-09 at 02:17:27 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:27 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: duration of surge exceeding 100 amperes when spaceship had thumping noise and snowflakes -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 97 hours 14 minutes, the crew reported a thumping noise and snowflakes venting from quadrant 4 of the lunar module descent stage (fig. l4-l5). All four descent batteries experienced current transients at 97:13:53 for about 2 seconds, with corresponding drops in dc bus voltage (fig. l4-l6). Also, the water glycol pressure differential for the heat transport system decreased momentarily, indicating that the glycol pump momentarily slowed down. - - - -Figure 14-l5.- Descent stage battery location. - - - -The thumping noise occurred at about the same time as the current spikes._ The current spikes show that a momentary short circuit existed in the Lunar-Module-Pilot side of the dc electrical system, which includes descent batteries l and 2 (fig. 14-l6). The current surge was not of sufficient duration either to open the balance-load cross-tie circuit breakers, to display a reverse current indication, or to trip a batteryoff relay as a result of an overcurrent condition. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 4/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, True, True, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [1253, 414, 2031, 144, 389, 959, 408, 422] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 752.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 10.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 75.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 4/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -Evidence indicates that battery 2 may have experienced an electrical fault of some type. The most probable condition is electrolyte leaking from one or more cells and bridging the high-voltage or low-voltage terminal to the battery case (fig. 14-17). This bridging results in water electrolysis and subsequent ignition of the hydrogen and oxygen so generated. The accompanying "explosion" would then blow off or rupture the seal of the battery lid and cause both a thump and venting of the free liquids in the battery case, resulting in "snowflakes." - -Postflight tests have shown the following: ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The battery potting will be improved to prevent electrolyte bridging between the battery terminals and case. These improvements include coating the inside of the battery case with epoxy paint before the battery is assembled and changing the potting material used at the ends of the case to a material which has better adhesion characteristics. Also, the cell chimneys will be manifolded together and to the case vent-valve with plastic tubing. - -In addition, tests are being performed to determine if the quantity of free electrolyte in each cell can be reduced. Preliminary results indicate a reduction of from 360 to 340 cc per cell is possible. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -At 97 hours 14 minutes, the crew reported a thumping noise and snowflakes venting from quadrant 4 of the lunar module descent stage (fig. l4-l5). All four descent batteries experienced current transients at 97:13:53 for about 2 seconds, with corresponding drops in dc bus voltage (fig. l4-l6). Also, the water glycol pressure differential for the heat transport system decreased momentarily, indicating that the glycol pump momentarily slowed down. - - - -Figure 14-l5.- Descent stage battery location. - - - -The thumping noise occurred at about the same time as the current spikes._ The current spikes show that a momentary short circuit existed in the Lunar-Module-Pilot side of the dc electrical system, which includes descent batteries l and 2 (fig. 14-l6). The current surge was not of sufficient duration either to open the balance-load cross-tie circuit breakers, to display a reverse current indication, or to trip a batteryoff relay as a result of an overcurrent condition. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The battery potting will be improved to prevent electrolyte bridging between the battery terminals and case. These improvements include coating the inside of the battery case with epoxy paint before the battery is assembled and changing the potting material used at the ends of the case to a material which has better adhesion characteristics. Also, the cell chimneys will be manifolded together and to the case vent-valve with plastic tubing. - -In addition, tests are being performed to determine if the quantity of free electrolyte in each cell can be reduced. Preliminary results indicate a reduction of from 360 to 340 cc per cell is possible. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -During the mission, the fuel cells supplied approximately l20 kW-h of energy at ar average current of approximately 24 amperes per fuel cell and at an average bus voltage of 29.4 volts. - -5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -Electrical shorts in the fan circuit ignited the wire insulation, causing pressure and temperature increases within oxygen tank 2. During the pressure rise period, the fuses opened in both fan circuits in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. A short-circuit conduction in the quantity gaging system cleared itself and then began an open-circuit condition. When the pressure reached the tank-2 relief-valve full-flow conditions of 1008 psia, the pressure decreased for about 9 seconds, after which time the relief valve probably reseated, causing another momentary pressure increase. Approximately $1/4$ second after this momentary pressure increase, a vibration disturbance was noted on the command module accelerometers. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Based upon an analysis of the interrupter design, its location, and its relationship to adjacent equipment, it is concluded that gas will not escape prior to the completion of the deadfacing function and that, should such escape occur, the gas will not adversely affect any other components. Therefore, no hardware modification is necessary. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.2 LUNAR MODULE - -14.2.l Abnormal Supercritical Helium Pressure Rise ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Based upon an analysis of the interrupter design, its location, and its relationship to adjacent equipment, it is concluded that gas will not escape prior to the completion of the deadfacing function and that, should such escape occur, the gas will not adversely affect any other components. Therefore, no hardware modification is necessary. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.2 LUNAR MODULE - -14.2.l Abnormal Supercritical Helium Pressure Rise ------- -Result 2: -The two interrupters open the electrical circuits about 30 milliseconds before the wires are severed by the command module/service module umbilical guillotine. As illustrated in the figure, a cam fork is moved by a piston, which is operated by propellant gas from redundant cartridges, to function a lift plate. Motion of this plate disconnects the male and female portions of electrical connectors located, respectively, in the lift plate and in the base plate of the interrupter. At the completion of the stroke, the fork is brought to rest by impacting and crushing an aluminum block mounted on the interrupter housing. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The data show that descent battery 2 experienced at least a 60-ampere current surge. This condition could have been a reverse current into the battery, since the instrumentation system does not indicate the direction of current. Immediately after the current surges, battery l current returned to its original value while battery 2 provided about 80 percent of the total current load. After sustaining a surge load, the battery terminal voltage normally increases for a short period of time. Since battery 2 experienced the highest surge, it should have temporarily assumed the most load. Within l0 minutes all batteries were properly sharing the current load, and no subsequent abnormal performance was observed. At 99:5l:09, battery 2 gave an indication of a battery malfunction, discussed in more detail in the next section. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 5.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.625 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.125, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:29 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.377, Max reward: 0.825 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: stationary fuel cells operating in low oxygen pressure -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: ford fuel cell fuel cell oxygen pressure loss -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- -Result 2: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 fuel cell performance under low-pressure conditions -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Temperature changes were noted in bays 3 and 4 of the service module in response to a high heat pulse or high pressure surge. Fuel cell 2 was turned off about 2 hours later because of the loss of pressure from cryogenic oxygen tank l. - -The cryogenic oxygen tank design will be changed to eliminate the mechanisms which could initiate burning within the tank and ultimately lead to a structural failure of the tank or its components. All electrical wires will be stainless-steel sheathed and the quantity probe will be made from stainless steel instead of aluminum. The fill-line plumbing internal to the tank will be improved, and a means of warning the crew of an inadvertent closure of either the fuel cell hydrogen or oxygen valves will be provided. A third cryogenic oxygen tank will be added to the service module for subsequent Apollo missions. The fuel cell oxygen ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "fuel cell type that continued to operate after loss of oxygen pressure tank failure in space Shuttle Columbia" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- -Result 2: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "fuel cell that continues to operate with reduced oxygen pressure" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: fuel cell oxygen tank failure and continued operation after pressure loss -2025-04-09 at 02:17:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "fuel cells that continue to operate after oxygen tank loss" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:37 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:39 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: hydrogen fuel cell and simultaneous operation after oxygen tank failure -2025-04-09 at 02:17:39 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:39 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "fuel cell model or type operated after oxygen tank 2 loss in space" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:39 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:39 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 8/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [115, 309, 1028, 238, 616, 274, 151, 147] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 359.75 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 11.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 32.70 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nUnusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were obse...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- -Result 2: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nFollowing recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation cha...', 'Result 1:\nUnusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were obse...', 'Result 1:\nUnusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were obse...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Temperature changes were noted in bays 3 and 4 of the service module in response to a high heat pulse or high pressure surge. Fuel cell 2 was turned off about 2 hours later because of the loss of pressure from cryogenic oxygen tank l. - -The cryogenic oxygen tank design will be changed to eliminate the mechanisms which could initiate burning within the tank and ultimately lead to a structural failure of the tank or its components. All electrical wires will be stainless-steel sheathed and the quantity probe will be made from stainless steel instead of aluminum. The fill-line plumbing internal to the tank will be improved, and a means of warning the crew of an inadvertent closure of either the fuel cell hydrogen or oxygen valves will be provided. A third cryogenic oxygen tank will be added to the service module for subsequent Apollo missions. The fuel cell oxygen ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- -Result 2: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nFollowing recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation cha...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Unusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were observed in the 3-minute period preceding the tank pressure loss. These variations were caused by the simultaneous pressure excursions taking place in cryogenic oxygen tank 2. The fuel cell l regulated nitrogen pressure indication went to the lower limit of the measurement when the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 dropped. Analysis of related fuel cell parameters confirmed this discrepancy to be a loss of instrumentation readout and not an actual loss of the regulated nitrogen pressure. Performance of fuel cells l and 3 degraded within 3 minutes after the Oxygen tank 2 pressure dropped. The degradation is considered to have been caused by the fuel cell oxygen shutoff valves closing abruptly because of the shock generated when the bay 4 panel separated. A more detailed discussion is contained in reference l. ------- -Result 2: -Following recovery of the data, the vehicle had experienced a translation change of about 0.4 ft/sec, primarily in a plane normal to bay 4. The oxygen tank 2 pressure indication was at the lower limit of the readout. The oxygen tank l heaters were on, and the tank l pressure was decaying rapidly. A main-bus-B undervoltage alarm and a computer restart also occurred at this time. - -Fuel cells l and 3 operated for about 2-l/2 minutes after the reactant valves closed. During this period, these fuel cells consumed the oxygen trapped in the plumbing, thereby reducing the pressure below minimum requirements and causing total loss of fuel cell current and voltage output from these two fuel cells. Because of the loss of performance by two of the three fuel cells and the subsequent load switching by the crew, numerous associated master alarms occurred as expected. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nUnusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were obse...', 'Result 1:\nUnusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were obse...', 'Result 1:\nUnusual variations in the oxygen flow rates to all three fuel cells were obse...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Prior to lift-off, the crew experienced erratic readings from all three fuel cell flow indicators when cycling the switch, but system operation was normal. - -During the flight, the three fuel cells operated as expected until the sudden loss of pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2, as discussed in Section l4.l.l. Fuel cell 3 condenser exit temperature varied periodically. A behavior present on all previous flights, and characteristic of the system umder certain operating conditions. Soon after the loss of oxygen pressure in tank 2, fuel cells l and 3 lost power and were shut down. Fuel cell 2 sustained the total command and service module load until the depletion of oxygen pressure in tank l. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 0.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.075, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:41 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.173, Max reward: 0.621 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:42 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: space spacecraft breech plenum material -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: space-brech plenum material -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Materials used in space-grade interstitial fuel tank liners" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Temperature changes were noted in bays 3 and 4 of the service module in response to a high heat pulse or high pressure surge. Fuel cell 2 was turned off about 2 hours later because of the loss of pressure from cryogenic oxygen tank l. - -The cryogenic oxygen tank design will be changed to eliminate the mechanisms which could initiate burning within the tank and ultimately lead to a structural failure of the tank or its components. All electrical wires will be stainless-steel sheathed and the quantity probe will be made from stainless steel instead of aluminum. The fill-line plumbing internal to the tank will be improved, and a means of warning the crew of an inadvertent closure of either the fuel cell hydrogen or oxygen valves will be provided. A third cryogenic oxygen tank will be added to the service module for subsequent Apollo missions. The fuel cell oxygen ------- -Result 2: -in figure 6.7-l, one corner of the bag was Sealed to the inlet of the suit circuit hose. The cabin atmosphere then returned to the lunar module suit circuit through these supplemental cartridges by way of the two outlet hoses. The mass flow through this arrangement was partially restricted with tape to properly load the suit-circuit compressors. After approximately 20 hours of operation with two command module cartridges, an additional unit was stacked on each original cartridge to improve the carbon dioxide removal capability. With this supplemental configuration, when only command module cartridges were being used, the indicated carbon dioxide level was maintained between 0.l arid i.8 mm Hg. The supplemental removal configuration using the command module lithium hydroxide cartridge was assembled and tested on the ground during the flight prior to its actual use in the spacecraft. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "breech plenum material for spacecraft future" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: breach plenum material for future spacecraft -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: material used in spacecraft breech plenum -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: MSC-02680 contents -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Materials used for high-temperature and pressure-resistant components in spacecraft" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: material used for breech plenum area on spacecraft -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: aluminum vs other metals used in spacecraft breech plenum -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Appliances for spacecraft breech plenum -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Spacecraft internal breech plenum area insulation" -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: materials used in Apollo spacecraft interior -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -During periods when the lunar module and the command module cabins were interconnected, the lunar module and command module cabin pressure readings were approximately equal, verifying the operation of the command module cabin pressure transducers. - - - -(c) 142:45 through 142:56 hours. Figure l4-l2.- Concluded. - -The suit measurement indicated correctly during the brief instrumentation power-up periods at l02 and 123 hours. However, just prior to entry, the suit indication was approximately 0.3 psi lower than cabin pressure but increased to 7.7 psia when the cabin pressure was reading 13.9 psia just prior to landing. - -This transducer also behaved erratically on Apollo l2. Postflight analysis of both the Apollo l2 and Apollo l3 transducers determined the cause to be internal contamination from electroless nickel plating particles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: materials used for spacecraft gusset plenum covers -2025-04-09 at 02:17:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: polyimide sheeting for spacecraft components -2025-04-09 at 02:17:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: thermal protection for spacecraft components -2025-04-09 at 02:17:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:55 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar lander structural issues -2025-04-09 at 02:17:55 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:55 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar lander mission objectives -2025-04-09 at 02:17:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:57 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: _february 1969 apollo lunar mission objectives -2025-04-09 at 02:17:57 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:57 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:58 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo l3 moon landing mission objectives -2025-04-09 at 02:17:58 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The lunar module was jettisoned l hour before entry, which was performed nominally using the primary guidance and navigation system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l within sight of the recovery ship. The landing point was reported as 2l degrees 38 minutes 24 seconds south latitude and l65 degrees 2l minutes 42 seconds west longitude. The crew were retrieved and aboard the recovery ship within 45 minutes after landingใ€‚ - -2.0 INTRODUCTION - -Apollo l3 was the thirteenth in a series of missions using Apollo specification flight hardware and was to be the third lunar landing. The primary mission objective was a precise lunar landing to conduct scientific exploration of deep-rooted surface material. ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:58 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apolo 13 mission report -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, True, False, False, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [295, 379, 1956, 166, 461, 915, 243, 296] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 588.88 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 9.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 65.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 5/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -CHANGE SHEET - -FOR - -NASA-MSC INTERNAL REPORT - -APOLLO 13 MISSION REPORT - -Change 1 - - - -May 1970 - -James A. MeDivitt Colonel, USAF Manager, Apollo Spacecraft Program - -After the attached enclosures (pages 7-3, 7-4, 7-7, 7-8, 11-3 through 11-6, E-3, E-4, and back cover), which are replacement pages, have been inserted, insert this CHANGE SHEET between the cover and title page and write on the cover "Change l inserted." - -In addition to the attached changes, please complete the attached Mission Report Questionaire and return as indicated. - -NOTE: A black bar in the margin of affected pages indicates the information that was changed or added. - -7.1.6 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 10: Result 1: -The lunar module was jettisoned l hour before entry, which was performed nominally using the primary guidance and navigation system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l within sight of the recovery ship. The landing point was reported as 2l degrees 38 minutes 24 seconds south latitude and l65 degrees 2l minutes 42 seconds west longitude. The crew were retrieved and aboard the recovery ship within 45 minutes after landingใ€‚ - -2.0 INTRODUCTION - -Apollo l3 was the thirteenth in a series of missions using Apollo specification flight hardware and was to be the third lunar landing. The primary mission objective was a precise lunar landing to conduct scientific exploration of deep-rooted surface material. ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 11: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Temperature changes were noted in bays 3 and 4 of the service module in response to a high heat pulse or high pressure surge. Fuel cell 2 was turned off about 2 hours later because of the loss of pressure from cryogenic oxygen tank l. - -The cryogenic oxygen tank design will be changed to eliminate the mechanisms which could initiate burning within the tank and ultimately lead to a structural failure of the tank or its components. All electrical wires will be stainless-steel sheathed and the quantity probe will be made from stainless steel instead of aluminum. The fill-line plumbing internal to the tank will be improved, and a means of warning the crew of an inadvertent closure of either the fuel cell hydrogen or oxygen valves will be provided. A third cryogenic oxygen tank will be added to the service module for subsequent Apollo missions. The fuel cell oxygen ------- -Result 2: -in figure 6.7-l, one corner of the bag was Sealed to the inlet of the suit circuit hose. The cabin atmosphere then returned to the lunar module suit circuit through these supplemental cartridges by way of the two outlet hoses. The mass flow through this arrangement was partially restricted with tape to properly load the suit-circuit compressors. After approximately 20 hours of operation with two command module cartridges, an additional unit was stacked on each original cartridge to improve the carbon dioxide removal capability. With this supplemental configuration, when only command module cartridges were being used, the indicated carbon dioxide level was maintained between 0.l arid i.8 mm Hg. The supplemental removal configuration using the command module lithium hydroxide cartridge was assembled and tested on the ground during the flight prior to its actual use in the spacecraft. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- -Result 2: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The experiment consisted of an electronics package with sunshield and reflector, to shade the thermal plate from the direct sunlight, and a sensor package with aperture and dust cover. - -A.4 LAUNCH VEHICLE - -Spray foam was used exclusively as insulation in the S-Il stage to reduce weight. A fourth battery was installed in the instrument unit to extend the tracking capability to lunar distance in support of the S-IVB lunar impact experiment. Telemetry measurements in the inertial platform were added and, in some cases, were relocated to provide a more complete analysis of platform vibrations. Four wires were added to the distributor in the emergency detection system, located in the instrument unit, to provide automatic ground command capability at spacecraft separation in the event of a contingency separation. - -A.5 MASS PROPERTIES ------- -Result 2: -During periods when the lunar module and the command module cabins were interconnected, the lunar module and command module cabin pressure readings were approximately equal, verifying the operation of the command module cabin pressure transducers. - - - -(c) 142:45 through 142:56 hours. Figure l4-l2.- Concluded. - -The suit measurement indicated correctly during the brief instrumentation power-up periods at l02 and 123 hours. However, just prior to entry, the suit indication was approximately 0.3 psi lower than cabin pressure but increased to 7.7 psia when the cabin pressure was reading 13.9 psia just prior to landing. - -This transducer also behaved erratically on Apollo l2. Postflight analysis of both the Apollo l2 and Apollo l3 transducers determined the cause to be internal contamination from electroless nickel plating particles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- -Result 2: -All mechanical systems functioned properly. One mechanical anomaly, however, was a gas leak from one of two breech assemblies in the apex cover jettison system, and this problem is discussed in section 14.l.6. In addition, docking timnel insulation, which normally remains with the lunar module after separation, was noted from photographs to have cracked and expanded radially. Since the cracking is believed to occur during pyrotechnic firing and has been seen in past flights, it is not a problem. - -Structural temperatures remained within acceptable limits throughout the mission. However, because of the long cold-soak period following powering down, the comnand module structure exhibited significantly lower temperatures than has been observed in previous flights. - -5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER - -5.2.1 Batteries ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 5.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.625 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.075, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:17:59 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.306, Max reward: 0.784 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:01 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: When did orbital insertion occur and how late was it compared to predictions for the event? NASA probe insertion time -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- -Result 2: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "NASA orbital insertion delay" -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- -Result 2: -The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Artemis I orbital insertion time -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System ignitiontime, hr:min:sec Firing time, sec Velocity change, ft/sec Resultant entry interface condition Plight-path angle,deg, Velocity, ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Entry arrival time, hr:min:sec Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Descent propulsion 79:27:39 263.6 860.5 No entry (vacuum perigee= 8o.6 miles) Descent prcpulsion 105:18:28 14.0 7.8 -6.24 36 210.6 28.22S 173.49E 142:40:47 Fourth midcourse Lunarmodulereaction correction control 137:39:51.5 21.5 3.0 -6.26 36 210.9 28.23S 173.46E 142:40:46 ------- -Result 2: -The entry attitude and platform alignment were confirmed by a successful sextant star check and moon occulation within l second of the predicted time. The pre-entry check and initialization of the entry monitor system were normal. However, entry monitor system operation was initiated manually when the 0.05g light remained off 3 seconds after the actual $0.05\mathtt{g}$ time (as discussed in section 14.l.5.). In addition, the entry monitor system trace was unexpectedly narrow and required excessive concentration to read. The guided entry was normal in all respects and was characterized by smooth control inputs. The first acceleration peak reached approximately 5g. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: orbital insertion event <ๆ—ถ้—ดๅทฎ -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -At approximately 105 hours, the crew performed a manual descent propulsion maneuver to improve the entry angle. Since the primary guidance and navigation system was powered down, alignment was accomplished manually. The spacecraft was maneuvered to place the cusps of the earth' terminator on the Y-axis reticle of the crewmen optical alignment sight. The illuminated portion of the earth was then placed at the top of the reticle. This procedure positioned the lunar module X-axis perpendicular to the earth's terminator and permitted a retrograde maneuver to be performed perpendicular to the flight path to steepen the entry angle. The proper pitch attitude was maintained by positioning the sun in the top center portion of the telescope. With the spacecraft in the proper attitude, a body-axis alignment using the abort guidance system was followed immediately by entry into an attitude hold mode. This sequence resulted in attitude indications of zero for all axes and permitted use of the ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Orbital insertion time delay for Apollo 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: MSC-02680 manual descent propulsion maneuver lunar module -2025-04-09 at 02:18:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System ignitiontime, hr:min:sec Firing time, sec Velocity change, ft/sec Resultant entry interface condition Plight-path angle,deg, Velocity, ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Entry arrival time, hr:min:sec Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Descent propulsion 79:27:39 263.6 860.5 No entry (vacuum perigee= 8o.6 miles) Descent prcpulsion 105:18:28 14.0 7.8 -6.24 36 210.6 28.22S 173.49E 142:40:47 Fourth midcourse Lunarmodulereaction correction control 137:39:51.5 21.5 3.0 -6.26 36 210.9 28.23S 173.46E 142:40:46 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apoll 8 s ivb insertion time delay -2025-04-09 at 02:18:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunarmodule insertion time -2025-04-09 at 02:18:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Equipment transfer and stowage in both the command module and lunar module was completed about 7 hours prior to entry, with the exception of the cameras that were to be used for service module photography. At 6-1/2 hours before entry, command module activity included powering up the instrumentation and placing entry battery C on main bus A, with main bus B still powered from the lunar module. The command module reaction control thrusters were preheated for 20 minutes, and all instrumented engines were observed to be above the minimum operating temperature l0 minutes after heater operation was terminated. - -8.9.3 Final Midcourse Correction ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apol 8 S I V B insertion time delay -2025-04-09 at 02:18:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunarmodule separation and ltc -2025-04-09 at 02:18:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -Equipment transfer and stowage in both the command module and lunar module was completed about 7 hours prior to entry, with the exception of the cameras that were to be used for service module photography. At 6-1/2 hours before entry, command module activity included powering up the instrumentation and placing entry battery C on main bus A, with main bus B still powered from the lunar module. The command module reaction control thrusters were preheated for 20 minutes, and all instrumented engines were observed to be above the minimum operating temperature l0 minutes after heater operation was terminated. - -8.9.3 Final Midcourse Correction ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: S IV B insertion time of Apol 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 4/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [334, 352, 506, 531, 492, 423, 305, 336] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 409.88 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 5.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 81.97 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- -Result 2: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. ft/sec Resultant pericynthion conditions Altitude sboveianding site,miles Velocity; ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Pericynthion arrival time, hr:min;sec Translunar injection S-IVB 2:35:46.4 350.8 10039 86.8 8184.4 1.47N 178.52E 77:56:22 First midcourse correction Service prcpulsion 30:40:49.6 3.5 23.2 63.2 8277.9 3.34N 178.93E 77:28:39 Second midcourse correction Descentpropulsion 61:29:43.5 34.2 37.8 136. 8053.4 3.02N 179.29W 77:20:57 - -(b) Transearth ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very ...', 'Result 1:\nThe first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\nManeuver System Ignition time, hr:min:sec Firing time; sec Velocity change. f...', 'Result 1:\ncrewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio sh...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The planned launch and earth parking orbit phases for this mission were very similar to those for Apollo l2. However, during the second stage (S-Il) boost into the planned l00-mile circular parking orbit, the center engine cut off about l32 seconds early ard caused the remaining four engines to burn approximately 34 seconds longer than predicted (as discussed in section l3.0 and reference 2). Space vehicle velocity after S-II boost was 223 ft/sec lower than planned, and as a result, the S-IVB orbital insertion maneuver was approximately 9 seconds longer than predicted, with cutoff velocity within about l.2 ft/sec of the planned value. The total time to orbital insertion was about 44 seconds longer than predicted, with actual. parking orbit parameters of l00.2 by 98.0 miles. ------- -Result 2: -The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Maneuver System ignitiontime, hr:min:sec Firing time, sec Velocity change, ft/sec Resultant entry interface condition Plight-path angle,deg, Velocity, ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Entry arrival time, hr:min:sec Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Descent propulsion 79:27:39 263.6 860.5 No entry (vacuum perigee= 8o.6 miles) Descent prcpulsion 105:18:28 14.0 7.8 -6.24 36 210.6 28.22S 173.49E 142:40:47 Fourth midcourse Lunarmodulereaction correction control 137:39:51.5 21.5 3.0 -6.26 36 210.9 28.23S 173.46E 142:40:46 ------- -Result 2: -The entry attitude and platform alignment were confirmed by a successful sextant star check and moon occulation within l second of the predicted time. The pre-entry check and initialization of the entry monitor system were normal. However, entry monitor system operation was initiated manually when the 0.05g light remained off 3 seconds after the actual $0.05\mathtt{g}$ time (as discussed in section 14.l.5.). In addition, the entry monitor system trace was unexpectedly narrow and required excessive concentration to read. The guided entry was normal in all respects and was characterized by smooth control inputs. The first acceleration peak reached approximately 5g. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nManeuver System ignitiontime, hr:min:sec Firing time, sec Velocity change, ft...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The vehicle was launched on an azimuth 90 degrees east of north, and a roll maneuver at l2.6 seconds placed the vehicle on a flight azimuthof $72.043$ degrees east of north. Trajectory parameters were close to nominal during S-IC and S-II boost until early shutdown of the center engine. The premature cutoff caused considerable deviations from certain nominal launch-vehicle trajectory parameters which were particularly evident at S-II outboard engine cutoff. Despite these deviations, the guidance system is designed to operate such that an efficient boost is conducted under engine-out conditions, and near-nominal trajectory parameters were achieved at orbital insertion and at translunar injection. Because of the reduced effective thrust, however, these respective events occurred $44.07$ and 13.56 seconds later than predicted. After spacecraft ejection, various S-IVB attitude and propulsive maneuvers placed the vehicle on a lunar impact trajectory very close to the desired target -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -At approximately 105 hours, the crew performed a manual descent propulsion maneuver to improve the entry angle. Since the primary guidance and navigation system was powered down, alignment was accomplished manually. The spacecraft was maneuvered to place the cusps of the earth' terminator on the Y-axis reticle of the crewmen optical alignment sight. The illuminated portion of the earth was then placed at the top of the reticle. This procedure positioned the lunar module X-axis perpendicular to the earth's terminator and permitted a retrograde maneuver to be performed perpendicular to the flight path to steepen the entry angle. The proper pitch attitude was maintained by positioning the sun in the top center portion of the telescope. With the spacecraft in the proper attitude, a body-axis alignment using the abort guidance system was followed immediately by entry into an attitude hold mode. This sequence resulted in attitude indications of zero for all axes and permitted use of the ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -Maneuver System ignitiontime, hr:min:sec Firing time, sec Velocity change, ft/sec Resultant entry interface condition Plight-path angle,deg, Velocity, ft/sec Latitude, deg Longitude, deg Entry arrival time, hr:min:sec Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Descent propulsion 79:27:39 263.6 860.5 No entry (vacuum perigee= 8o.6 miles) Descent prcpulsion 105:18:28 14.0 7.8 -6.24 36 210.6 28.22S 173.49E 142:40:47 Fourth midcourse Lunarmodulereaction correction control 137:39:51.5 21.5 3.0 -6.26 36 210.9 28.23S 173.46E 142:40:46 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Equipment transfer and stowage in both the command module and lunar module was completed about 7 hours prior to entry, with the exception of the cameras that were to be used for service module photography. At 6-1/2 hours before entry, command module activity included powering up the instrumentation and placing entry battery C on main bus A, with main bus B still powered from the lunar module. The command module reaction control thrusters were preheated for 20 minutes, and all instrumented engines were observed to be above the minimum operating temperature l0 minutes after heater operation was terminated. - -8.9.3 Final Midcourse Correction ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -Equipment transfer and stowage in both the command module and lunar module was completed about 7 hours prior to entry, with the exception of the cameras that were to be used for service module photography. At 6-1/2 hours before entry, command module activity included powering up the instrumentation and placing entry battery C on main bus A, with main bus B still powered from the lunar module. The command module reaction control thrusters were preheated for 20 minutes, and all instrumented engines were observed to be above the minimum operating temperature l0 minutes after heater operation was terminated. - -8.9.3 Final Midcourse Correction ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...', 'Result 1:\nEquipment transfer and stowage in both the command module and lunar module wa...', 'Result 1:\nThe unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry b...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 1.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.125 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.331 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.000, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:13 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.135, Max reward: 0.479 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: airline flight menu options design basis -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- -Result 2: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: flights menu selection airline -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "why choose menu selection airlines" or "basis for airline menu options" or "airline menu strategy behind" -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: flight menu selection criteria for airlines -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: airlines menu selection factors -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: airline menu selection process -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 6 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: spaceflight menu selection water conservation spacecraft -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - -Environmental. control system performance was satisfactory during the abort phase of the mission and provided a habitable environment for the crew for approximately 83 hours, nearly twice the time of a nominal flight. Only one anomaiy, reverse oxygen leakage through one of the as cent stage shutoff valves, occurred but did not compromise system performance. All crew provisions performed as intended except for cracking of a window shade , discussed in 14 .2.5. - -An indicated total of approximately 290 pounds of water was used from the lumar module tanks between activation of the sublimator and undocking, and an indicated total of about 50 pounds of water remained. Most of the water used for drinking and food preparation was obtained from the command rnodule potable water tank before $\mathtt{124}$ hours , and drinking water was subsequently used from the lunar module tanks. Average water usage rates varied between 2.6 and 6.3 lb/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Preflight testing of both command module and lunar module water supplies revealed no significant contaminants. The nickel content from samples taken at the command module hot water port was $0.05~\mathrm{mg/1}$ .Elevated nickel concentration has been a consistent finding in previous missions and has been ruled acceptable in view of no detrimental effects on crew physiology. There was a substantial buildup in total bacterial count from the time of final filling of the command module potable water system until final preflight sampling 24 hours prior to launch. This count was deemed acceptable under the assumption the first inflight chlorination would reduce the bacterial population to specification levels. Preflight procedures will be reviewed to investigate methods of preventing growth of organisms in the command module water system during the countdown phase. The inflight chlorination schedule was followed prior to the incident, after which the potable water was not chlorinated again. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "in-flight meal selection criteria" or " airlines menu planning process" -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: food packaging and stowage issue on a space flight -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 meal selection criteria -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- -Result 2: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:20 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo mission water usage and crew health -2025-04-09 at 02:18:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - -Environmental. control system performance was satisfactory during the abort phase of the mission and provided a habitable environment for the crew for approximately 83 hours, nearly twice the time of a nominal flight. Only one anomaiy, reverse oxygen leakage through one of the as cent stage shutoff valves, occurred but did not compromise system performance. All crew provisions performed as intended except for cracking of a window shade , discussed in 14 .2.5. - -An indicated total of approximately 290 pounds of water was used from the lumar module tanks between activation of the sublimator and undocking, and an indicated total of about 50 pounds of water remained. Most of the water used for drinking and food preparation was obtained from the command rnodule potable water tank before $\mathtt{124}$ hours , and drinking water was subsequently used from the lunar module tanks. Average water usage rates varied between 2.6 and 6.3 lb/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Preflight testing of both command module and lunar module water supplies revealed no significant contaminants. The nickel content from samples taken at the command module hot water port was $0.05~\mathrm{mg/1}$ .Elevated nickel concentration has been a consistent finding in previous missions and has been ruled acceptable in view of no detrimental effects on crew physiology. There was a substantial buildup in total bacterial count from the time of final filling of the command module potable water system until final preflight sampling 24 hours prior to launch. This count was deemed acceptable under the assumption the first inflight chlorination would reduce the bacterial population to specification levels. Preflight procedures will be reviewed to investigate methods of preventing growth of organisms in the command module water system during the countdown phase. The inflight chlorination schedule was followed prior to the incident, after which the potable water was not chlorinated again. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo space mission nutrition and menu planning -2025-04-09 at 02:18:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- -Result 2: -Spacecraft mass properties for the Apollo l2 mission are summarized in table A-I. These data represent the conditions as determined from postflight analyses of expendable loadings and usage during the flight. Variations in spacecraft mass properties are determined for each significant mission phase from lift-off through landing. Expendables usage is based on reported real-time and postflight data as presented in other sections of this report. The weights and centers of gravity of the individual command and service modules and of the lunar module ascent and descent stages were measured prior to flight, and the inertia values were calculated. All changes incorporated after the actual weighing were monitored, and the spacecraft mass properties were updated. - -TABLE A-I.- MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 menu selection criteria -2025-04-09 at 02:18:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- -Result 2: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo mission water contamination nickel -2025-04-09 at 02:18:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Preflight testing of both command module and lunar module water supplies revealed no significant contaminants. The nickel content from samples taken at the command module hot water port was $0.05~\mathrm{mg/1}$ .Elevated nickel concentration has been a consistent finding in previous missions and has been ruled acceptable in view of no detrimental effects on crew physiology. There was a substantial buildup in total bacterial count from the time of final filling of the command module potable water system until final preflight sampling 24 hours prior to launch. This count was deemed acceptable under the assumption the first inflight chlorination would reduce the bacterial population to specification levels. Preflight procedures will be reviewed to investigate methods of preventing growth of organisms in the command module water system during the countdown phase. The inflight chlorination schedule was followed prior to the incident, after which the potable water was not chlorinated again. ------- -Result 2: -6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - -Environmental. control system performance was satisfactory during the abort phase of the mission and provided a habitable environment for the crew for approximately 83 hours, nearly twice the time of a nominal flight. Only one anomaiy, reverse oxygen leakage through one of the as cent stage shutoff valves, occurred but did not compromise system performance. All crew provisions performed as intended except for cracking of a window shade , discussed in 14 .2.5. - -An indicated total of approximately 290 pounds of water was used from the lumar module tanks between activation of the sublimator and undocking, and an indicated total of about 50 pounds of water remained. Most of the water used for drinking and food preparation was obtained from the command rnodule potable water tank before $\mathtt{124}$ hours , and drinking water was subsequently used from the lunar module tanks. Average water usage rates varied between 2.6 and 6.3 lb/hr. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: crew selection criteria for Apollo lunar missions -2025-04-09 at 02:18:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 mission objectives -2025-04-09 at 02:18:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 crew training effectiveness -2025-04-09 at 02:18:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 6/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, True, True, False, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.48 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [96, 445, 680, 337, 916, 600, 521, 1059] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [82, 82, 82, 82, 82, 82, 82, 82] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 581.75 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 82.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 7.09 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 4/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- -Result 2: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\ndiscussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in secti...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - -Environmental. control system performance was satisfactory during the abort phase of the mission and provided a habitable environment for the crew for approximately 83 hours, nearly twice the time of a nominal flight. Only one anomaiy, reverse oxygen leakage through one of the as cent stage shutoff valves, occurred but did not compromise system performance. All crew provisions performed as intended except for cracking of a window shade , discussed in 14 .2.5. - -An indicated total of approximately 290 pounds of water was used from the lumar module tanks between activation of the sublimator and undocking, and an indicated total of about 50 pounds of water remained. Most of the water used for drinking and food preparation was obtained from the command rnodule potable water tank before $\mathtt{124}$ hours , and drinking water was subsequently used from the lunar module tanks. Average water usage rates varied between 2.6 and 6.3 lb/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Preflight testing of both command module and lunar module water supplies revealed no significant contaminants. The nickel content from samples taken at the command module hot water port was $0.05~\mathrm{mg/1}$ .Elevated nickel concentration has been a consistent finding in previous missions and has been ruled acceptable in view of no detrimental effects on crew physiology. There was a substantial buildup in total bacterial count from the time of final filling of the command module potable water system until final preflight sampling 24 hours prior to launch. This count was deemed acceptable under the assumption the first inflight chlorination would reduce the bacterial population to specification levels. Preflight procedures will be reviewed to investigate methods of preventing growth of organisms in the command module water system during the countdown phase. The inflight chlorination schedule was followed prior to the incident, after which the potable water was not chlorinated again. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - -Environmental. control system performance was satisfactory during the abort phase of the mission and provided a habitable environment for the crew for approximately 83 hours, nearly twice the time of a nominal flight. Only one anomaiy, reverse oxygen leakage through one of the as cent stage shutoff valves, occurred but did not compromise system performance. All crew provisions performed as intended except for cracking of a window shade , discussed in 14 .2.5. - -An indicated total of approximately 290 pounds of water was used from the lumar module tanks between activation of the sublimator and undocking, and an indicated total of about 50 pounds of water remained. Most of the water used for drinking and food preparation was obtained from the command rnodule potable water tank before $\mathtt{124}$ hours , and drinking water was subsequently used from the lunar module tanks. Average water usage rates varied between 2.6 and 6.3 lb/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Preflight testing of both command module and lunar module water supplies revealed no significant contaminants. The nickel content from samples taken at the command module hot water port was $0.05~\mathrm{mg/1}$ .Elevated nickel concentration has been a consistent finding in previous missions and has been ruled acceptable in view of no detrimental effects on crew physiology. There was a substantial buildup in total bacterial count from the time of final filling of the command module potable water system until final preflight sampling 24 hours prior to launch. This count was deemed acceptable under the assumption the first inflight chlorination would reduce the bacterial population to specification levels. Preflight procedures will be reviewed to investigate methods of preventing growth of organisms in the command module water system during the countdown phase. The inflight chlorination schedule was followed prior to the incident, after which the potable water was not chlorinated again. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Preflight testing of both command module and lunar module water supplies revealed no significant contaminants. The nickel content from samples taken at the command module hot water port was $0.05~\mathrm{mg/1}$ .Elevated nickel concentration has been a consistent finding in previous missions and has been ruled acceptable in view of no detrimental effects on crew physiology. There was a substantial buildup in total bacterial count from the time of final filling of the command module potable water system until final preflight sampling 24 hours prior to launch. This count was deemed acceptable under the assumption the first inflight chlorination would reduce the bacterial population to specification levels. Preflight procedures will be reviewed to investigate methods of preventing growth of organisms in the command module water system during the countdown phase. The inflight chlorination schedule was followed prior to the incident, after which the potable water was not chlorinated again. ------- -Result 2: -6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL - -Environmental. control system performance was satisfactory during the abort phase of the mission and provided a habitable environment for the crew for approximately 83 hours, nearly twice the time of a nominal flight. Only one anomaiy, reverse oxygen leakage through one of the as cent stage shutoff valves, occurred but did not compromise system performance. All crew provisions performed as intended except for cracking of a window shade , discussed in 14 .2.5. - -An indicated total of approximately 290 pounds of water was used from the lumar module tanks between activation of the sublimator and undocking, and an indicated total of about 50 pounds of water remained. Most of the water used for drinking and food preparation was obtained from the command rnodule potable water tank before $\mathtt{124}$ hours , and drinking water was subsequently used from the lunar module tanks. Average water usage rates varied between 2.6 and 6.3 lb/hr. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintai...', 'Result 1:\n6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL\n\nEnvironmental. control system performance was sati...', 'Result 1:\n6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL\n\nEnvironmental. control system performance was sati...', 'Result 1:\nPreflight testing of both command module and lunar module water supplies reve...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- -Result 2: -Spacecraft mass properties for the Apollo l2 mission are summarized in table A-I. These data represent the conditions as determined from postflight analyses of expendable loadings and usage during the flight. Variations in spacecraft mass properties are determined for each significant mission phase from lift-off through landing. Expendables usage is based on reported real-time and postflight data as presented in other sections of this report. The weights and centers of gravity of the individual command and service modules and of the lunar module ascent and descent stages were measured prior to flight, and the inertia values were calculated. All changes incorporated after the actual weighing were monitored, and the spacecraft mass properties were updated. - -TABLE A-I.- MASS PROPERTIES ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- -Result 2: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. ------- -Result 2: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -a. Perform selenological inspection, survey, and sampling of materials in a preselected region of the Fra Mauro formation. b. Deploy and activate an Apollo lunar surface experiments package. c. Further develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment. d. Obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites. - -Thirteen detailed objectives, listed in table l2-I and described in reference 8, were derived from the four primary objectives. None of these objectives were accomplished because the mission was aborted. In addition to the spacecraft and lunar surface objectives, the following two launch vehicle secondary objectives were assigned: - -TABLE 12-I.- DETAILED OBJECTIVES AND EXPERIMENTS ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The crew rationed water and used it sparingly after the oxygen tank incident. Not more than 24 ounces of water were consumed by each crewman after the incident. The crew reported that the juice bags contained about 20 percent gas, but that this amount was not enough to cause any distress. - -9.2.5 Food - -The flight menus were similar to those of prior Apollo missions and were designed to provide approximately 2lo0 kilocalories per man per day. The menus were selected on the basis of crew preferences determined by preflight evaluation of representative flight foods. There were no modifications to the menu as a result of the late crew change. New food items for this mission included meatballs with sauce, cranberry-orange relish, chicken and rice soup, pecans, natural orange juice crystals, peanut butter, and jelly. Mustard and tomato catsup were also provided for the sandwiches. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintained a complete log of foods consumed.ยท To conserve water during the abort phase, the crew consumed only those foods which did not require water for rehydration. The crew drank juices in preference to plain water to help maintain their electrolyte balance. - -The crew's comments about the quality of the food were generally favorable, but they reported that food packaging and stowage could be improved. The crew encountered some difficulty in removing the meal packages from the lower equipment bay food container and in replacing Some uneaten food items. Preflight briefings of future crews should alleviate these difficulties. ------- -Result 2: -discussion of the flight and associated crew activities is presented in section 8.0 as a complementary description to this section. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe crew followed the flight menus prior to the inflight incident and maintai...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 3.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.375 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.200, Perfect scores: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.88 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:30 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.387, Max reward: 0.931 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Why did the Challenger and Columbia space shuttles experience propellant usage discrepancies before a tank anomaly? -2025-04-09 at 02:18:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "NASA Artemis lunar mission fuel usage comparison" -2025-04-09 at 02:18:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Artemis mission propellant usage vs predicted propellant usage -2025-04-09 at 02:18:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: propellant usage discrepancies space shuttle Challenger Columbia -2025-04-09 at 02:18:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what was the difference between predicted and actual propellant usage before the tank anomaly in the Artemis lunar mission -2025-04-09 at 02:18:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: artificial acceleration mission lunar module propellant usage lunar mission anomalies -2025-04-09 at 02:18:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:40 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:41 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: artificial acceleration lunar module propellant usage Apollo 12 anomaly -2025-04-09 at 02:18:41 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:41 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:42 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: artificial acceleration lunar module descent propulsion propellant usage Apollo 12 lunar module anomaly -2025-04-09 at 02:18:42 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -After powering up the lunar module, co-aligning the two platforms, and shutting down all command and service module systems following the tank anomaly, a naneuver was immediately performed to return the spacecraft to a free-return profile. The maneuver was performed as the second midcourse correction, using the descent propulsion system in the docked configuration, a mode tested successfully during Apollo 9. The resultant landing at earth would have been at 152 hours in the Indian Ocean, with lunar module systems intended to support the crew for the remaining 90 hours. Because consumables were extremely marginal in this emergency mode and because only minimal recovery support existed at this earth landing location, a transearth injection maneuver using the descent propulsion system was planned for execution 2 hours after passing pericynthion. Between these two maneuvers, an alignment check was made of the lunar module inertial platform to verify the maneuver would be executed with ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:42 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module descent phase deviation from planned trajectory artifical acceleration Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -After powering up the lunar module, co-aligning the two platforms, and shutting down all command and service module systems following the tank anomaly, a naneuver was immediately performed to return the spacecraft to a free-return profile. The maneuver was performed as the second midcourse correction, using the descent propulsion system in the docked configuration, a mode tested successfully during Apollo 9. The resultant landing at earth would have been at 152 hours in the Indian Ocean, with lunar module systems intended to support the crew for the remaining 90 hours. Because consumables were extremely marginal in this emergency mode and because only minimal recovery support existed at this earth landing location, a transearth injection maneuver using the descent propulsion system was planned for execution 2 hours after passing pericynthion. Between these two maneuvers, an alignment check was made of the lunar module inertial platform to verify the maneuver would be executed with ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module mid-course correction after artificial acceleration Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:44 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: transearth injection trajectory lunar module reaction control system Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module reaction control system transearth injected trajectory Apollo 12 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:47 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: difference between transearth injection maneuver lunar module reaction control system and descent propulsion system -2025-04-09 at 02:18:47 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:47 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:48 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:18:48 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, False, False, True, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [721, 439, 463, 633, 327, 562, 259, 440] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 480.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 9.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 53.39 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -After powering up the lunar module, co-aligning the two platforms, and shutting down all command and service module systems following the tank anomaly, a naneuver was immediately performed to return the spacecraft to a free-return profile. The maneuver was performed as the second midcourse correction, using the descent propulsion system in the docked configuration, a mode tested successfully during Apollo 9. The resultant landing at earth would have been at 152 hours in the Indian Ocean, with lunar module systems intended to support the crew for the remaining 90 hours. Because consumables were extremely marginal in this emergency mode and because only minimal recovery support existed at this earth landing location, a transearth injection maneuver using the descent propulsion system was planned for execution 2 hours after passing pericynthion. Between these two maneuvers, an alignment check was made of the lunar module inertial platform to verify the maneuver would be executed with ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- -Result 2: -After powering up the lunar module, co-aligning the two platforms, and shutting down all command and service module systems following the tank anomaly, a naneuver was immediately performed to return the spacecraft to a free-return profile. The maneuver was performed as the second midcourse correction, using the descent propulsion system in the docked configuration, a mode tested successfully during Apollo 9. The resultant landing at earth would have been at 152 hours in the Indian Ocean, with lunar module systems intended to support the crew for the remaining 90 hours. Because consumables were extremely marginal in this emergency mode and because only minimal recovery support existed at this earth landing location, a transearth injection maneuver using the descent propulsion system was planned for execution 2 hours after passing pericynthion. Between these two maneuvers, an alignment check was made of the lunar module inertial platform to verify the maneuver would be executed with ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 10: Result 1: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- -Result 2: -The transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth coast time was shortened such that landing was to occur at about l43 hours in the South Pacific, where primary recovery support was located. Guidance errors during this maneuver necessitated a small midcourse correction at about 105 hours to return the projected entry flight path angle to within specified limits. Following this firing, the spacecraft was maneuvered into a passive thermal control mode, and all lunar module systems were powered down except those absolutely required to support the crew. A final midcourse correction was performed 5 hours before entry to raise the entry flight-path angle slightly, and this maneuver was performed using the lumar module reaction control system under abort guidance control. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nTotal oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds o...', 'Result 1:\nCommand module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages can...', 'Result 1:\nCommand module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages can...', 'Result 1:\nCommand module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages can...', 'Result 1:\nThe command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at whi...', 'Result 1:\nThe first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105...', 'Result 1:\nThe unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry b...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth c...', 'Result 1:\nThe transearth injection maneuver was performed on time, and the transearth c...', 'Result 1:\nPerformance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsio...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Command module.- Command module reaction control system propellant usages cannot be accurately assessed, since telemetry data were not available during entry. Until the time of communications blackout, approximately l2 pounds of propellant had been used. For a normal entry, this value would be considered high; however, the system was activated longer than normal and was used during separation from the lunar module. - -Loaded๏ผˆ quantities, lb System 1 System 2 Fuel 44.2 44.6 Oxi di zer 77.8 78.5 Totals 122.0 123.1 - -7.1.3 Cryogenic Flui ds - -Cryogenic oxygen and hydrogen usages were nominal until the time of the incident.. The pressure decay in oxygen tank 2 was essentially instantaneous, while oxygen tank l was not depleted until approximately 2 hours following the incident. Usages listed in the following table are based on an analysis of the electrical power produced by the fuel cells . ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nService module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control sy...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 1.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.125 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.331 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.100, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:18:49 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.189, Max reward: 0.676 -2025-04-09 at 02:18:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Space Shuttle auxiliary propellant gaging system failure" -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The auxiliary dump nozzle was used for the first time on an Apollo mission. Dumping through this nozzle was discontinued and urine was subsequently stored onboard because a considerable number of particles were evident on the hatch window and these interfered with navigation sightingsใ€‚. - -Upon recovery, the outlet valve of the postlanding ventilation was open and the inlet valve was closed, whereas both valves should have been open. This condition is reported in section l0.3.2, and the anomaly is discussed in section 14.l.2. - -The performance of the lumar module systems is discussed in this section. All systems that are not discussed either performed as intended Or were not used. Discrepancies and aromalies are generally mentioned but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary, sections 14.2 and14.3. - -6.1 STRUCTURAL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failure reason -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what was the reason for the failure of the STS-107 space shuttle's service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The auxiliary dump nozzle was used for the first time on an Apollo mission. Dumping through this nozzle was discontinued and urine was subsequently stored onboard because a considerable number of particles were evident on the hatch window and these interfered with navigation sightingsใ€‚. - -Upon recovery, the outlet valve of the postlanding ventilation was open and the inlet valve was closed, whereas both valves should have been open. This condition is reported in section l0.3.2, and the anomaly is discussed in section 14.l.2. - -The performance of the lumar module systems is discussed in this section. All systems that are not discussed either performed as intended Or were not used. Discrepancies and aromalies are generally mentioned but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary, sections 14.2 and14.3. - -6.1 STRUCTURAL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what happened to the service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system on the [ specify location ] launch vehicle -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: failure of service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system Gemini 8 mission -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "service propulsion auxiliary gaging system failure space shuttle -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 6 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: reason for failure of STS-107 service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: investigation report auxiliary propellant gaging system failure on a specific launch vehicle -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: why was the primary oxygen in the service module lost due to the failure of the service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: valve-lock mechanism gaging system SPA design flaw -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- -Result 2: -a. With the handle extended only l/4 inch or less from the valve locked position, both plungers remained locked. b. With the handle extended from 5/16 to 3/8 inch from the valve locked position, the exhaust valve opened but the inlet valve remained closed.' This condition duplicates that of the position of the handle and the operation of the valve found on the Apollo l3 spacecraft after flight. c. When the handle was extended from 3/8 inch to full travel from the valve-locked position, both the inlet and and exhaust valves opened. - -Testing verified that application of power to the valves while the locking pins are being released will prevent the pin from being pulled to the unlock position because the drive shaft torque binds the lock pin. - -NASA-S-70-5841 - - - -Figure l4-l.- Post-landing vent valve lock. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:18:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: reason for increased propellant usage during STS-107 by reaction control system -2025-04-09 at 02:19:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: investigation report gusset-4 breech assembly failure on a specific launch vehicle -2025-04-09 at 02:19:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: cause of reaction control system propellant usage increase during STS-107 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: gusset-4 breech assembly failure cause and effect on service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system -2025-04-09 at 02:19:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 7/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, True, False, True, False, True, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.48 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [719, 347, 475, 777, 385, 670, 843, 394] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [58, 58, 58, 58, 58, 58, 58, 58] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 576.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 58.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 9.94 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The auxiliary dump nozzle was used for the first time on an Apollo mission. Dumping through this nozzle was discontinued and urine was subsequently stored onboard because a considerable number of particles were evident on the hatch window and these interfered with navigation sightingsใ€‚. - -Upon recovery, the outlet valve of the postlanding ventilation was open and the inlet valve was closed, whereas both valves should have been open. This condition is reported in section l0.3.2, and the anomaly is discussed in section 14.l.2. - -The performance of the lumar module systems is discussed in this section. All systems that are not discussed either performed as intended Or were not used. Discrepancies and aromalies are generally mentioned but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary, sections 14.2 and14.3. - -6.1 STRUCTURAL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The auxiliary dump nozzle was used for the first time on an Apollo mission. Dumping through this nozzle was discontinued and urine was subsequently stored onboard because a considerable number of particles were evident on the hatch window and these interfered with navigation sightingsใ€‚. - -Upon recovery, the outlet valve of the postlanding ventilation was open and the inlet valve was closed, whereas both valves should have been open. This condition is reported in section l0.3.2, and the anomaly is discussed in section 14.l.2. - -The performance of the lumar module systems is discussed in this section. All systems that are not discussed either performed as intended Or were not used. Discrepancies and aromalies are generally mentioned but are discussed in greater detail in the Anomaly Summary, sections 14.2 and14.3. - -6.1 STRUCTURAL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The reaction control system was activated at about 58 hours. Total propellant consumption was 467 pounds. - -About 6 minutes after activation, flight data showed a sizeable decrease (approximately 22 psi) in the system-A propellant manifold pressures. This decrease continued for about 4 or 5 seconds and was accompanied by an increase of 7 and 8 psi in the ascent propulsion system fuel and oxidizer manifold pressures, respectively. These manifold pressure changes indicate a high flow rate from the reaction control system. This was verified by a decrease in the indicated quantity by about 15 pounds At this same time, the indicated position for the system-A ascent-feed interconnect valves was open. - -During passive thermal control modes, the cluster heaters were not used and cluster temperatures ranged from $55^{\circ}$ to97ยฐFใ€‚ - -6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -sheet (fig. l4-l0) will be applied to the interior of the breech plenum area on future spacecraft. The protection provided by the polyimide has been proof-tested by firing the assembly without the O-ring, simulating a worst-case condition. - -This anomaly is closed. - - - -Figure. l4-l0.- Tunnel gusset protection. - -14.l.7 Reaction Control Isolation Valve Failure - -During postflight decontamination of the command module reaction control system, the system l fuel isolation valve was found open when it should have been closed. All other propellant isolation valves were in the closed position. The subsequent failure investigation revealed that the lead from the fuel valve closing coil was wired to an unused pin on a terminal board instead of to the proper pin. X-rays of the terminal board and closeout photographs indicate the miswiring occurred during initial installation. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -During postflight inspection, it was discovered that propellant gas had leaked from the gusset-4 breech assembly, which is a part of the ape> cover jettison system (fig. 14-7).ใ€ A hole was burned through the aluminum gusset cover plate (fig. l4-8), and the fiberglass pilot parachute mortar cover on the parachute side of the gusset was charred but not penetrated. The leakage occurred at the breech-plenum interface (fig. l4-9). The breech and plenum are bolted male and female parts which are sealed with a large O-ring backed up with a Teflon ring, as shown in figure l4-7. During operation, the breech pressure reaches approximately 14 000 psi and the gas temperature exceeds $2000^{\circ}$ Fใ€‚The O-ring and backup ring were burned through and the metal parts were eroded by the hot gas at the leak path. The system is completely redundant in that either thruster system will effect apex cover jettison. No evidence of gas leakage existed on the previous firings of 56 units. ------- -Result 2: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The valve-lock mechanism rigging tolerances were found to be within specifications. When reassembled in the spacecraft, the malfunction was duplicated with only partial travel of the handle. - -The ventilation system was designed with two flexible control-cable assemblies linked to one handle, which is pulled to operate the two valves. An inherent characteristic of this design is that one control cable will nearly always slightly lag the other when the handle is pulled. At full extension of the handle, the travel in each cable assembly is more than sufficient to disengage both plungers and allow both valves to operate. Checkout procedures prior to flight were found to be satisfactory. There was no evidence of mechanical failure or malfunction nor were any outof-tolerance components found. ------- -Result 2: -a. With the handle extended only l/4 inch or less from the valve locked position, both plungers remained locked. b. With the handle extended from 5/16 to 3/8 inch from the valve locked position, the exhaust valve opened but the inlet valve remained closed.' This condition duplicates that of the position of the handle and the operation of the valve found on the Apollo l3 spacecraft after flight. c. When the handle was extended from 3/8 inch to full travel from the valve-locked position, both the inlet and and exhaust valves opened. - -Testing verified that application of power to the valves while the locking pins are being released will prevent the pin from being pulled to the unlock position because the drive shaft torque binds the lock pin. - -NASA-S-70-5841 - - - -Figure l4-l.- Post-landing vent valve lock. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 6.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.750 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.433 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.075, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:05 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.385, Max reward: 0.728 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: table time first entry -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What is the time format used in a spreadsheet table -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: table rank vs timestamp -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Tables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems performance analyses and anomaly investigations. Table D-l lists the data from the command and service modules, and table D-II, for the lunar module. For additional information regarding data availability, the status listing of all mission data in the Central Metric Data File, building l2, MSC, should be consulted. - -TABIE D-I.- COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE DATA AVAILABILITY ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: first entry time table date format -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:09 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: earliest entry time table -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -The entry attitude and platform alignment were confirmed by a successful sextant star check and moon occulation within l second of the predicted time. The pre-entry check and initialization of the entry monitor system were normal. However, entry monitor system operation was initiated manually when the 0.05g light remained off 3 seconds after the actual $0.05\mathtt{g}$ time (as discussed in section 14.l.5.). In addition, the entry monitor system trace was unexpectedly narrow and required excessive concentration to read. The guided entry was normal in all respects and was characterized by smooth control inputs. The first acceleration peak reached approximately 5g. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What is the format of time in first time column of tables from various exchange source CSV data -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: moon lander timeline table D-I -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Tables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems performance analyses and anomaly investigations. Table D-l lists the data from the command and service modules, and table D-II, for the lunar module. For additional information regarding data availability, the status listing of all mission data in the Central Metric Data File, building l2, MSC, should be consulted. - -TABIE D-I.- COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE DATA AVAILABILITY ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: earliest time in table -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:12 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: first entry time table 1 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The entry attitude and platform alignment were confirmed by a successful sextant star check and moon occulation within l second of the predicted time. The pre-entry check and initialization of the entry monitor system were normal. However, entry monitor system operation was initiated manually when the 0.05g light remained off 3 seconds after the actual $0.05\mathtt{g}$ time (as discussed in section 14.l.5.). In addition, the entry monitor system trace was unexpectedly narrow and required excessive concentration to read. The guided entry was normal in all respects and was characterized by smooth control inputs. The first acceleration peak reached approximately 5g. ------- -Result 2: -Translunar phase Event Reference body Time, hr:min:sec Latitude, aeg Longitude, deg Altitude above launcn : pad, miles Space-fixed velocity, ft/sec Space-fixed fiight-path angle,deg Space-fixed heading angle, deg E of N S-IVB second ignition Earth 2:35:46.4 22.488 142.45E 105.39 25 573.1 .032 65.708 S-IVB second cutoff Earth 2:41:37.2 9.39S 166.45E 175.71 35 562.6 7.182 59.443 Translunar injection Earth 2:41:47.2 8.92S 167.21E 182.45 35 538.4 7.635 59.318 Cormand and service module/S-IVB separation Earth 3:06:38.9 27.03N 129.67W 3 778.54 25 027.8 45.034 72.297 Docking Earth 3:19:08.8 30.21N 118.10W 5 934.90 21 881.4 51.507 79.351 Spacecraft/S-IVB sepa- ration Earth 4:01:00.8 31.95N 105.30W 12 455.83 16 619.0 61.092 91.491 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutofr Second midcourse correction Earth Earth 30:40:49.6 30:40:53.1 22.93N 22.80N 101.85W 101.86w 121 381.93 121 385.43 4 682.5 4 685.6 77.464 77.743 112.843 112.751 Ignition Cutoff Earth Earth 61:29:43.5 61:30:17.7 20.85N 20.74N ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 9 table D-i -2025-04-09 at 02:19:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Tables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems performance analyses and anomaly investigations. Table D-l lists the data from the command and service modules, and table D-II, for the lunar module. For additional information regarding data availability, the status listing of all mission data in the Central Metric Data File, building l2, MSC, should be consulted. - -TABIE D-I.- COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE DATA AVAILABILITY ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: 00:00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: first entry time s-ivb -2025-04-09 at 02:19:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- -Result 2: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:16 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:17 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 8 translunar injection -2025-04-09 at 02:19:17 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- -Result 2: -8.7 TRANSLUNAR FLIGHT ... 8-7 8.8 TRANSEARTH INJECTION 8-11 8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST ยทยทยทยทยท 8-11 8.10 ENTRY AND LANDING.ยทยท. 8-17 9.0 BIOMEDICAL EVALUATION...... 9-1 9.1 BIOINSTRUMENTATION AND PHYSIOLOGICAL DATA . .. 9-1 9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท ยท 9-2 9.3 PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS . .. ? 9-6 10.0 MISSION SUPPORT PERFORMANCE 10-1 10.1 FLIGHT CONTROL ยทยทยทยท 10-1 10.2 NETWORK๏ผŽยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 10-2 10.3 RECOVERY OPERATIONS...ยท.ยท. ยทยทยท 10-2 11.0 EXPERIMENTSยทยทยทยทยท๏ผŽยทยทยท.ยทยทยทยท. ยทยท 11-1 11.1 ATMOSPHERIC ELECTRICAL PHENOMENA ....... 11-1 11.2 EARTH PHOTOGRAPHY APPLIED TO GEOSYNCHRONOUS SATELLITES๏ผŽยท๏ผŽยทยท๏ผŽยท๏ผŽยทยท๏ผŽยท๏ผŽยทยท๏ผŽยทยท 11-8 11.3 SEISMIC DETECTION OF THIRD STAGE LUNAR IMPACT . 11-9 12.0 ASSESSMENT OF MISSION OBJECTIVES . :. . . . . ยทยท 12-1 13.0 LAUNCH VEHICLE SUMMARYยท......ยท......... 13-1 14.0 ANOMALY SUMMARY ยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 14-1 14.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES . . . . . ยทยท 14-1 14.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 14-24 14.3 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED EQUIPMENT ยทยทยท 14-36 15.0 CONCLUSIONSยทยทยทยท.ยทยทยท.ยทยท๏ผŽยท.๏ผŽยทยท ยทยท 15-1 APPENDIX A - VEHICLE ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:17 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, True, False, False, False, False, False, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [182, 460, 415, 381, 94, 57, 342, 22] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 244.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 5.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 48.83 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -The entry attitude and platform alignment were confirmed by a successful sextant star check and moon occulation within l second of the predicted time. The pre-entry check and initialization of the entry monitor system were normal. However, entry monitor system operation was initiated manually when the 0.05g light remained off 3 seconds after the actual $0.05\mathtt{g}$ time (as discussed in section 14.l.5.). In addition, the entry monitor system trace was unexpectedly narrow and required excessive concentration to read. The guided entry was normal in all respects and was characterized by smooth control inputs. The first acceleration peak reached approximately 5g. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The entry attitude and platform alignment were confirmed by a successful sextant star check and moon occulation within l second of the predicted time. The pre-entry check and initialization of the entry monitor system were normal. However, entry monitor system operation was initiated manually when the 0.05g light remained off 3 seconds after the actual $0.05\mathtt{g}$ time (as discussed in section 14.l.5.). In addition, the entry monitor system trace was unexpectedly narrow and required excessive concentration to read. The guided entry was normal in all respects and was characterized by smooth control inputs. The first acceleration peak reached approximately 5g. ------- -Result 2: -Translunar phase Event Reference body Time, hr:min:sec Latitude, aeg Longitude, deg Altitude above launcn : pad, miles Space-fixed velocity, ft/sec Space-fixed fiight-path angle,deg Space-fixed heading angle, deg E of N S-IVB second ignition Earth 2:35:46.4 22.488 142.45E 105.39 25 573.1 .032 65.708 S-IVB second cutoff Earth 2:41:37.2 9.39S 166.45E 175.71 35 562.6 7.182 59.443 Translunar injection Earth 2:41:47.2 8.92S 167.21E 182.45 35 538.4 7.635 59.318 Cormand and service module/S-IVB separation Earth 3:06:38.9 27.03N 129.67W 3 778.54 25 027.8 45.034 72.297 Docking Earth 3:19:08.8 30.21N 118.10W 5 934.90 21 881.4 51.507 79.351 Spacecraft/S-IVB sepa- ration Earth 4:01:00.8 31.95N 105.30W 12 455.83 16 619.0 61.092 91.491 First midcourse correction Ignition Cutofr Second midcourse correction Earth Earth 30:40:49.6 30:40:53.1 22.93N 22.80N 101.85W 101.86w 121 381.93 121 385.43 4 682.5 4 685.6 77.464 77.743 112.843 112.751 Ignition Cutoff Earth Earth 61:29:43.5 61:30:17.7 20.85N 20.74N ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- -Result 2: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- -Result 2: -8.7 TRANSLUNAR FLIGHT ... 8-7 8.8 TRANSEARTH INJECTION 8-11 8.9 TRANSEARTH COAST ยทยทยทยทยท 8-11 8.10 ENTRY AND LANDING.ยทยท. 8-17 9.0 BIOMEDICAL EVALUATION...... 9-1 9.1 BIOINSTRUMENTATION AND PHYSIOLOGICAL DATA . .. 9-1 9.2 INFLIGHT HISTORY ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท ยท 9-2 9.3 PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS . .. ? 9-6 10.0 MISSION SUPPORT PERFORMANCE 10-1 10.1 FLIGHT CONTROL ยทยทยทยท 10-1 10.2 NETWORK๏ผŽยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 10-2 10.3 RECOVERY OPERATIONS...ยท.ยท. ยทยทยท 10-2 11.0 EXPERIMENTSยทยทยทยทยท๏ผŽยทยทยท.ยทยทยทยท. ยทยท 11-1 11.1 ATMOSPHERIC ELECTRICAL PHENOMENA ....... 11-1 11.2 EARTH PHOTOGRAPHY APPLIED TO GEOSYNCHRONOUS SATELLITES๏ผŽยท๏ผŽยทยท๏ผŽยท๏ผŽยทยท๏ผŽยท๏ผŽยทยท๏ผŽยทยท 11-8 11.3 SEISMIC DETECTION OF THIRD STAGE LUNAR IMPACT . 11-9 12.0 ASSESSMENT OF MISSION OBJECTIVES . :. . . . . ยทยท 12-1 13.0 LAUNCH VEHICLE SUMMARYยท......ยท......... 13-1 14.0 ANOMALY SUMMARY ยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 14-1 14.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES . . . . . ยทยท 14-1 14.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 14-24 14.3 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED EQUIPMENT ยทยทยท 14-36 15.0 CONCLUSIONSยทยทยทยท.ยทยทยท.ยทยท๏ผŽยท.๏ผŽยทยท ยทยท 15-1 APPENDIX A - VEHICLE ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ["Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'g...", "Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'g...", 'Result 1:\nThe entry attitude and platform alignment were confirmed by a successful sext...', 'Result 1:\ncrewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio sh...', 'Result 1:\nNominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are s...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: ["Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'g...", "Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'g..."] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Tables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems performance analyses and anomaly investigations. Table D-l lists the data from the command and service modules, and table D-II, for the lunar module. For additional information regarding data availability, the status listing of all mission data in the Central Metric Data File, building l2, MSC, should be consulted. - -TABIE D-I.- COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE DATA AVAILABILITY ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Tables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems performance analyses and anomaly investigations. Table D-l lists the data from the command and service modules, and table D-II, for the lunar module. For additional information regarding data availability, the status listing of all mission data in the Central Metric Data File, building l2, MSC, should be consulted. - -TABIE D-I.- COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE DATA AVAILABILITY ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Tables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems performance analyses and anomaly investigations. Table D-l lists the data from the command and service modules, and table D-II, for the lunar module. For additional information regarding data availability, the status listing of all mission data in the Central Metric Data File, building l2, MSC, should be consulted. - -TABIE D-I.- COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE DATA AVAILABILITY ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: ["Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'g...", 'Result 1:\nTables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems perf...', 'Result 1:\nTables D-I and D-II are summaries of the data made available for systems perf...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Time, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers words O'graph records isruslh recrds :ipecial plots or tabs Speeial suo.tooal From To 00:00 00:02 00:04 00:07 00:14 01:31 01:33 01:48 02:25 02:34 02:43 02:49 04:44 08:35 12:49 13:18 16:44 17 :15 20 :37 24:53 27:01 37:33 40:55 44:39 00:12 00:14 04:44 00:18 00:28 01:33 01:45 01:59 02:34 02:45 02:50 13:59 08:35 12:49 16:44 17 :12 20 :37 25:00 BDA MSFN VAN CYI GDS MILA CYI CRO HAW HAW GDS MSFN MSFN MSFN HSK MSFN MAD 27:01 MSFN 37:42 GDS 40:55 MSFN 42:47 HSK 44:38 MS FN 52:37 MSFN 58:39 CDS 58:39 MS FN 101:58 GDS 123:12 GDS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- -Result 2: -Time, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'graph records Brush records Special plots or tabs Special programs From To 57:57 57:57 58:12 60:36 61:10 64:52 65:07 68:26 72:32 77:03 78:47 80:29 93:30 94:56 96:29 97:11 97:12 99:24 99:50 100:33 101:00 104 :19 104:57 105 :15 108:36 108:52 109 :12 112:35 117 :33 102:28 133:46 58:05 60:36 59:12 64:50 62:10 68:26 66:07 72:24 77:03 80:29 79:47 96:29 93:40 95 :05 100:33 97:18 97:18 99:57 100:24 104:57 101:07 105:19 108:36 105:53 112: 35 109:08 109:25 GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS MSFN HSK MSFN MSFN MSFN SGD MSFN MAD MAD N&SW MAD ACN GDS GDS MSFN GDS GDS MSFN GDS MSFN GDS GDS 120:28 MSFN MAD 136:52 MSFN 134:39 GDS HSK 136:50 HSK 138:34 MSFN 138:14 HSK 142:38 MSFN 141:35 CRO X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ["Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'g...", "Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computer spxOM O'g...", 'Result 1:\nTime, hr:min Range station MILA Bandpass plots or tabs Bilevels Computers wor...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 0.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.225, Perfect scores: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.75 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:18 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.333, Max reward: 0.835 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "amount of fuel consumed by a space rocket service propulsion system" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: mars curiosity rover propulsion fuel consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Space Shuttle total fuel consumption" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: fuel consumption service propulsion system amount -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: saturn probe voyager power system fuel consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:23 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 11 service propulsion system gas consumption rates" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 propulsion fuel consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Fuel consumption Space Shuttle (total) -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 service propulsion system fuel consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: saturn v launch vehicle s iv electrical system energy consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- -Result 2: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:26 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 descent propulsion system fuel consumption rates" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 spacecraft helium consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 lunar module service propulsion system fuel consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: saturn v structural loads and s iv vibrations -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- -Result 2: -An unexplained characteristic of the S-IVB impact is the rapid buildup from its beginning to the peak value. This initial stage of the signal cannot be explained solely by the scattering of seismic waves in a rubbletype material, as was thought possible from the ascent stage impact data. Several alternate hypotheses are under study, but no firm conclusions have been reached. Signal scattering, however, may explain the character of the later part of the signal. - -The fact that such precise targeting accuracy was possible for the S-IVB impact, with the resulting seismic signals so large, have greatly encouraged seismologists to study possible future S-IvB impacts. For ranges extended to 500 kilometers, the data return could provide a means for determining moon structures to depths approaching 200 kilometers. - -The four primary objectives (see ref. 7) assigned to the Apollo 13 mission were as follows: ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:29 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 fuel flow rates during descent propulsion system operations" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo orbital 13 descent propulsion hydrogen consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 service propulsion system fuel consumption Apollo 13 mission -2025-04-09 at 02:19:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:32 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 descent propulsion system failure report" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 descent propulsion fuel consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:19:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 service propulsion system details -2025-04-09 at 02:19:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:34 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 descent propulsion system fuel gas consumption average" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 service propulsion system evaluation report -2025-04-09 at 02:19:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:36 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 service propulsion system fuel consumption rates" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 service propulsion system reports -2025-04-09 at 02:19:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:38 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:41 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 Lunar Module Descent Propulsion System Fuel Consumption" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:41 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:41 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 descent propulsion system fuel consumption rate reaction control heaters telemetry equipment" -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 2/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, False, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [389, 1323, 544, 388, 563, 596, 343, 254] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 550.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 4.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 137.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 4/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nService module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control sy...', 'Result 1:\nThe command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at whi...', 'Result 1:\nAt the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...', 'Result 1:\nAt the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available...', 'Result 1:\nAt the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nAt the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Total oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds over an 82-hour period, for an average usage rate of 0.25 lb/ hr. Oxygen remaining in the tanks at undocking was 33.5 pounds. During translunar coast, lunar module cabin leakage was about 0.0l4 lb/hr, assuming an average cabin pressure of 4.5 psia. Command module cabin leakage was estimated to have been about 0.027 lb/hr. These values indicate an average metabolic consumption rate throughout the flight of approximately 0.21 1b/hr. ------- -Result 2: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nTotal oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds o...', 'Result 1:\nTotal oxygen usage from the three lunar module oxygen tanks was 20.3 pounds o...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Service module.- At the time the system was powered down, reaction control system propellant usage was l08 poumds higher than predicted. The higher usage is attributed to the increased thruster activity required to null the effects of propulsive venting from both oxygen tanks during the incident. The usages listed in the following table were calculated from telemetered helium tank pressure data using the relationship between pressure, volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Loaded Quad A Quad B Quad( C Quad D 110.4 109.5 110.1 110.1 440.1 225.6 225.5 225.4 226.2 902.7 336.0 335.0 335.5 336.3 1342.8 Consumed Remaining at time 286* 1056.8 - -Preflight planned usage was 178 pounds. ------- -Result 2: -Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- -Result 2: -It is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These are caused by an engine charging current, which is balanced by a corona current loss from the aircraft. For.a conventional jet aircraft, the equilibrium potential can approach a million volts. For the Saturn V launch vehicle, the charging current may be larger than that of a jet aircraft, and therefore, the equilibrium potential for the Saturn vehicle might be on the order of a million volts or more. - -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 2 September 1970 3 Preparati on 4 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation 5 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Preparation ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- -Result 2: -An unexplained characteristic of the S-IVB impact is the rapid buildup from its beginning to the peak value. This initial stage of the signal cannot be explained solely by the scattering of seismic waves in a rubbletype material, as was thought possible from the ascent stage impact data. Several alternate hypotheses are under study, but no firm conclusions have been reached. Signal scattering, however, may explain the character of the later part of the signal. - -The fact that such precise targeting accuracy was possible for the S-IVB impact, with the resulting seismic signals so large, have greatly encouraged seismologists to study possible future S-IvB impacts. For ranges extended to 500 kilometers, the data return could provide a means for determining moon structures to depths approaching 200 kilometers. - -The four primary objectives (see ref. 7) assigned to the Apollo 13 mission were as follows: ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nIt is known that the electrostatic potentials develop on jet aircraft. These ...', 'Result 1:\nAt lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum...', 'Result 1:\nAt lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: Consumable usages for the command and service modules prior to the incident were nominal. Following the incident and the attendant shutdowm of command module power, the only consumables used prior to entry were drinking water and surge-tank oxygen, required to pressurize the potable water tank. Specific consumable usages for appropriate systems are presented in the following paragraphs. - -7.l.l Service Propulsion Propellants - -The service propulsion system was used only for the first midcourse correction. The propellant loadings listed in the following table were calculated from gaging system readings and measured densities prior to lift-off. - -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer, lb Total Loaded In tanks 15 606 24960 In lines "79 124 Total 15 685 25084 40769 Consume d 92.3 147 239.3 Remaining at time of incident 15 592.7 24937 40 529.7 - -7.1.2 Reaction Control Propellants -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 1.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.125 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.331 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.100, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:43 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.229, Max reward: 0.875 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo s-ivb propellant usage initial separation -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -All attitude control functions were satisfactory. Initial separation from the S-IvB was performed by thrusting for 4.28 seconds to impart a velocity change of 0.86 ft/sec. After a manual pitch maneuver, the command and service modules were docked with the lunar module. Rate disturbances noted at docking were 0.l6 deg/sec peak in pitch and yaw, and 0.60 deg/sec peak in roll. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: what was propellant used for initial separation from S-IVB -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: - -(Note: Conducting research on the propellant used during the initial separation from the Gemini command and service module S-IVB) - - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -All attitude control functions were satisfactory. Initial separation from the S-IvB was performed by thrusting for 4.28 seconds to impart a velocity change of 0.86 ft/sec. After a manual pitch maneuver, the command and service modules were docked with the lunar module. Rate disturbances noted at docking were 0.l6 deg/sec peak in pitch and yaw, and 0.60 deg/sec peak in roll. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: 7,000 pounds of propellant -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: NASA, S-IVB propellant usage -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:49 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo s-ivb auxiliary propulsion mass -2025-04-09 at 02:19:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: - - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(section ll.3). ------- -Result 2: -+21.0 +3.0 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: ap10 s-ivb auxiliary propulsion mass used -2025-04-09 at 02:19:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: - - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(section ll.3). ------- -Result 2: -+21.0 +3.0 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: - - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(section ll.3). ------- -Result 2: -+21.0 +3.0 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 6/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, True, True, False, False, False, False, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.48 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [239, 78, 102, 264, 889, 397, 591, 280] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 355.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 9.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 39.44 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -All attitude control functions were satisfactory. Initial separation from the S-IvB was performed by thrusting for 4.28 seconds to impart a velocity change of 0.86 ft/sec. After a manual pitch maneuver, the command and service modules were docked with the lunar module. Rate disturbances noted at docking were 0.l6 deg/sec peak in pitch and yaw, and 0.60 deg/sec peak in roll. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -Nominal first-opportunity translunar injection procedures were used and are satisfactory. Based on S-IVB orbit attitude hold, the ground controllers updated the spacecraft attitude indicators from 18 to 20 degrees. This update was satisfactory and resulted in an essentially zero theta angle in the orbital rate display during the S-IVB translunar injection. S-IVB vibration was greater during translunar injection than that experienced during Apollo 8. These vibrations had high-frequency , - - - -Figure 8-l.- Flight plan activities. - - - - - -Figure 8-l.- Continued - - - -(c) 69 to 122 hours. Figure 8-l.- Continued. - - - -(a) 122 to 143 hours. Figure 8-l.- Concluded. - -low-magnitude characteristics but presented no problems for monitoring of the injection maneuver. At cutoff, the computer-displayed inertial velocity was 35 560 ft/sec, and the entry monitor system accelerometer confirmed the maneuver to be within 3 ft/sec of the desired value. - -8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -crewmen noted the small change in acceleration caused by the mixture ratio shifts during S-II and S-IVB flight. S-IVB engine cutoff occurred at 00:12:30, with the spacecraft guidance system registering the following insertion parameters: velocity 25 565 ft/sec, apogee 102.6 miles, and perigee l00.l miles. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -All attitude control functions were satisfactory. Initial separation from the S-IvB was performed by thrusting for 4.28 seconds to impart a velocity change of 0.86 ft/sec. After a manual pitch maneuver, the command and service modules were docked with the lunar module. Rate disturbances noted at docking were 0.l6 deg/sec peak in pitch and yaw, and 0.60 deg/sec peak in roll. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -(section ll.3). ------- -Result 2: -+21.0 +3.0 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -(section ll.3). ------- -Result 2: -+21.0 +3.0 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -(section ll.3). ------- -Result 2: -+21.0 +3.0 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- -Result 2: -Fuel, 1b Oxi di zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded 7083.6 11 350.9 18 434.5 Consumed 3225.5 5117.4 8 342.9 Remaining at undocking 3858.1 6 233.5 10 091.6 - -7.2.2 Reaction Control Propellants - -The reaction control system propellant consumption, shown in the following table, was calculated from telemetered helium tank data using the relationship between pressure , volume, and temperature. - -Fuel, lb Oxidi zer๏ผŒ lb Total Loaded System A 107.7 107.7 208.8 208.8 316.5 316.5 ' System B 633.0 Total Consumed System A System B 220 247 Total 467 Remaining at undocking System A 96.5 System B 69.5 Total 166 - -7.2.3 0xygen - -Actual oxygen usage closely followed predicted rates from the time of lunar module power-up until undocking, at which time approximately 32 pounds of oxygen remained. The values in the following table are based on telemetered data. - -Loaded; 1b Consumed, 1b Remaining after undocking, lb Descent stage 49.3 21.9 27.4 Ascent stage Tank 1 2.3 2.3 Tank 2 2.4 82.7 Total 54.0 21.9 32.4 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The discarded S-IVB stage was targeted for a lunar impact of 3 degrees south latitude and 30 degrees west longitude. The S-IVB maneuver to achieve lunar impact was initiated at 6 hours, with a firing duration of 2l7 seconds using the auxiliary propulsion system. At approximately 19 hours 17 minutes, tracking data indicated the S-IVB had acquired an unexplained velocity increase of about 5 ft/sec along a projected earth radius which altered the projected lunar impact point closer to the target. The stage impacted the lunar surface at 77:56:40 and at a location of 2.4 degrees south latitude and 27.9 degrees west longitude. The targeted impact point was 125 miles from the Apollo l2 seismometer, and the actual point was 74 miles away, well within the desired 189 mile radius. The S-IVB impact results are discussed in section ll.0. ------- -Result 2: -All service module reaction control parameters were normal from lift-off to the time of the oxygen tank anomaly. A total of 55 pounds of propellant was used for the initial separation from the S-IVB, the turnaround maneuver, docking and ejection. Praor to the tank anomaly, propellant usage was 137 poumds ; 33 pounds less than predicted for that point in the mission. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 5.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.625 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.100, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:19:55 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.180, Max reward: 0.576 -2025-04-09 at 02:19:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "lunar module 7 history kennedy space center" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 7 training Kennedy Space Center" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module LM-7 operations Kennedy Space Center display location -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Kennedy Space Center museum collection of Apollo program history" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Lunar Module Kennedy Space Center training" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Kennedy Space Center Apollo 7 mission history documents" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:03 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 Lunar Module operations Kennedy Space Center" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Kennedy Space Center library archives Apollo 7 mission documents" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:05 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Lunar Module Apollo 13 Operation Ivy Mike" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "NASA Kennedy Space Center Archives Apollo 7" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:07 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 Lunar Module Operations Details" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo/Saturn V Center Apollo 7 history exhibits" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 Crew Training Kennedy Space Center Lunar Module Operations" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 Lunar Module LM-7 Operations Details" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 10 Lunar Module Operations" -2025-04-09 at 02:20:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System March 1970 2 Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Perfornance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluati on Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluation Descent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 8 Evaluati on Cancelled 9 Analysis of Apollo lo Photography and Visual Observations In publication 10 11 Entry Postflight Analysis Communi cations System Performance December 1969 December 1969 Apollo ๏ผ‰11 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation May 1970 September 1970 Review Review ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:15 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:20:15 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 6/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, True, False, True, False, False, False, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.48 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [231, 577, 2038, 398, 288, 762, 1012, 834] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 767.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 10.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 76.75 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.375, Valid formats: 3.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 5/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -d. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction with ground personnel, was reflected in the skili and precision with which the crew responded to the emergency. - -e. Although the mission was not a complete success, a lunar flyby mission, including three planned experiments (lightning phenomena, earth photography, and S-IVB lunar impact), was completed and information which would have otherwise been unavailable, regarding the long-term backup capability of the lunar module, was derived. - -The configuration of the Apollo l3 spacecraft and launch vehicle was nearly identical to that of Apollo l2, and the spacecraft/launch vehicle adapter and launch escape system underwent no changes. The few changes to the command and service modules and the lunar module are discussed in the following paragraphs. A discussion of the changes to the Apollo lunar surface experiments package and a listing of the spacecraft mass properties are also presented. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System March 1970 2 Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Perfornance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluati on Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluation Descent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 8 Evaluati on Cancelled 9 Analysis of Apollo lo Photography and Visual Observations In publication 10 11 Entry Postflight Analysis Communi cations System Performance December 1969 December 1969 Apollo ๏ผ‰11 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation May 1970 September 1970 Review Review ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nd. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction wi...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nd. The effectiveness of preflight crew training, especially in conjunction wi...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Recons...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: ALunar module was docked to the command module from initial docking wntil just prior to entry. "Mass properties are referenced to the coordinate system of the lnar module, which provided spacecraft dynanic control during these phases. - -The history of command and service module (cSM 109) operations at the manufacturer's facility, Downey, California, is shown in figure B-l, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-2. - -The history of the lumar module (LM-7) at the manufacturer's facility, Bethpage, New York, is shown in figure B-3, and the operations at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, in figure B-4. - - - -Figure B-l.- Checkout flow for command and service modules at contractor's facility. - -NASA-S-70-5867 - - - -Figure B-2.- Command and service module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. - -NASA-S-70-5868 - - - -Figure B-3.- Checkout flow for lunar module at contractor's facility. - - - -Figure $\mathbb{R}{-}\mathbb{4}$ .- Lumar module checkout history at Kennedy Space Center. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 1.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.125 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.331 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.275, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 1.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:16 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.050, Max reward: 0.200 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo Lunar Module second descent propulsion system initial current consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:20:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: initial current consumption of vehicle incident second descent propulsion firing -2025-04-09 at 02:20:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:22 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 lunar module electrical power system second descent propulsion system firing current consumption -2025-04-09 at 02:20:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: second descent propulsion system firing initial current consumption STS-133 spacecraft -2025-04-09 at 02:20:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At approximately 56 hours, the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 began to rise at an abnormally high rate and, within about lo0 seconds, the tank abruptly lost pressure. The pressure in tank l also dropped but at a rate sufficient to maintain fuel cell 2 in operation for approximately 2 more hours. The loss of oxygen and primary power in the service module required an immediate abort of the mission. The crew powered up the lunar module, and the first maneuver following the incident was made with the descent propulsion system to place the spacecraft once again on a free-return trajectory. A second maneuver performed with the descent engine 2 hours after passing pericynthion reduced the transearth transit time and moved the earth landing point from the Indian Ocean to the South Pacific. Two small transearth midcourse corrections were required prior toentry. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:24 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: descent propulsion system energy consumption before 2nd firing STS-133 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:25 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, True, False, False, False, False, False, True] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.43 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [359, 892, 961, 183, 180, 370, 220, 859] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 503.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 10.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 50.30 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- -Result 2: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The electrical power system performed all required functions. At lunar module undocking, the descent batteries had delivered 1434.7 amperehours from a nominal total capacity of l6o0 ampere-hours, and the ascent batteries had delivered 200 ampere-hours from a nominal total of 592 ampere-hours. The lunar module initial powered-down configuration required an average electrical energy consumption of 900 watts at 30 amperes. After the second descent propulsion firing, the lunar module was further powered down to about a 360-watt (l2-armpere) level; as discussed in section 7.2. A false battery 2 malfunction and master alarm occurred at 99:54:00 and continued intermittently during the perioas that the battery was on (discussed in section l4.2.3). A review of the data indicates that a current surge of greater than 100 amperes occurred at 97:13:56 concurrent with a crew report of a thumping noise and snowflakes seen through the lunar module window. This occurrence is discussed in section ------- -Result 2: -At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: At the time of power up, 2l79 ampere-hours of electrical energy was available from the four descent- and two ascent-stage batteries. As indicated in figure 7.2-2, initial consumption was at a current of 30 amperes until the second descent propulsion system firing, after which the vehicle was powered down to a l2-ampere load. At approximately ll2 hours, power . was provided to charge the command module entry batteries at a rate of about 7 amperes for approximately l5 hours. The command module was also powered from the lunar module at an ll-ampere rate for a brief period to - -operate the reaction control heaters and telemetry equipment. The estimated total energy transferred to the command module was approximately 129 ampere hours. A total of 410 ampere hours remained in the lunar module batteries at the time of undocking. - - - - - -Figure 7.2-2.- Lunar module total battery capacity during flight. - - - -Apollo 13 flight crew -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- -Result 2: -Condition Maneuver Second midcourse correction Transearth injection Third midcourse correction Fourth midcourBe correction .PGNCS/DPS PGNCS/DPS AGS/DPS AGS/DPS Time Ignition,hr:min:sec Cutoff,hr:min:sec Duration,sec 61:29:43.49 61:30:17.72 34.23 79:27:38.95 79 :32:02.77 105:18:28 105:18:42 137:39:51.5 137:40:13 Velocity change before trin (actual/desired) X# ไบบ +3.0/+2.9 -34.2/-34.3 -15.9/-16.2 -425.9/-426.4 +644.6/+645.6 +378.8/+379.0 7.6/7.8 -1.2/-1.5 -1.9/-2.2 Velocity residual after trim, ft/sec X Y Z +0.2 0.0 +0.3 +1.0 +0.3 0.0 ## 0 0.1 Gimbal drive actuator, in, Initial Pitch Roll Maximum excursion Pitch Roll -0.02 -0.34 +0.31 +0.13 -0.28 Not applicable Not applicable Steady-state -0.27 +0.16 -0.44 Pitch +0.04 +0.21 Roll -0.51 -0.55 Cutoff Pitch +0.10 +0.23 Rol1 -0.31 -0.55 Maximum rate excursion,deg/sec Pitch -0.6 +0.2 Roll -0.8 +0.2 +0.2 +0.8 -0.6 +0.2 ยฑ0.2 +0.4 +0.2 +0.2 Maximum attitude excursion, deg Pitch -3.62 -1.6 -0.6 -0.4 Rol1 +1.69 +6.7 +0.9 -0.6 Yaw -1.60 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -At approximately 56 hours, the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 began to rise at an abnormally high rate and, within about lo0 seconds, the tank abruptly lost pressure. The pressure in tank l also dropped but at a rate sufficient to maintain fuel cell 2 in operation for approximately 2 more hours. The loss of oxygen and primary power in the service module required an immediate abort of the mission. The crew powered up the lunar module, and the first maneuver following the incident was made with the descent propulsion system to place the spacecraft once again on a free-return trajectory. A second maneuver performed with the descent engine 2 hours after passing pericynthion reduced the transearth transit time and moved the earth landing point from the Indian Ocean to the South Pacific. Two small transearth midcourse corrections were required prior toentry. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midcourse correction to enter a free-return trajectory. This maneuver was begun at the minimum throttle position (l2 percent of full thrust), and after 5 seconds, the throttle position was manually increased to approximately 37 percent, which was maintained for the remainder of the firing. The transearth injection maneuver lasted 264 seconds. Approximately 15 seconds prior to engine shutdowm, the pressurization isolation Solenoid was closed to avoid a possible problem with propellant-tank fracture mechanics, and the maneuver was completed in the blowdown mode in which residual helium is the sole pressure source. The third system firing, a midcourse correction maneuver, was l3.7 seconds in duration and was performed in the blowdown mode at the minimum throttle position. Upon completion of this third and final descent propulsion operation, more than half the initial propellant load remained. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was completely powered down at 58 hours 40 minutes, at which time 99 ampere-hours remained in the three entry batteries. By charging the batteries with lunar module power, available battery capacity was increased to ll8 ampere-hours. Figure 7.l-l depicts the battery energy available and used during entry. At landing, 29 ampere-hours of energy remained. - - - -Following lunar module power-up, oxygen, water, and battery power were consumed at the lowest practical rate to increase the duration of spacecraft support from a nominal 44 hours to a required 83 hours plus margins. In addition, the descent propulsion and reaction control systems were used to effect all required translation and attitude maneuvers following the incident. - -7.2.l Des cent Propulsion Propellants - -The loaded quantities of descent propulsion system propellants shown in the following table were calculated from quantity readings in the spacecraft and measured densities prior to lift-off. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midc...', 'Result 1:\nAt approximately 56 hours, the pressure in cryogenic oxygen tank 2 began to r...', 'Result 1:\nThe descent propulsion system performed normally during the 34.3- second midc...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 1.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.125 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.331 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.000, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:27 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.138, Max reward: 0.723 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:28 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What is the angle between the orbit plane and the celestial equator of a reference body? -2025-04-09 at 02:20:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: angle between orbital plane and equatorial plane -2025-04-09 at 02:20:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -gathered from pairs of geosynchronous satellites located l0 to 20 degrees apart in longitude. Calculations indicate, however, that stereoscopic determination of cloud heights from geosynchronous aititudes would be marginal, at best, because of the small disparity angles involved (ref.6). ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: altitude of orbit intersection with spherical Earth -2025-04-09 at 02:20:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -gathered from pairs of geosynchronous satellites located l0 to 20 degrees apart in longitude. Calculations indicate, however, that stereoscopic determination of cloud heights from geosynchronous aititudes would be marginal, at best, because of the small disparity angles involved (ref.6). ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:31 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 3 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:33 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: definition inclination angle -2025-04-09 at 02:20:33 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- -Result 2: -Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:33 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: inclination angle Earth equatorial plane -2025-04-09 at 02:20:33 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Earth-centered inertial coordinates. Bystem. **Change in velocity showm in body X-axis for descent propulsion firings under control of abort guidance - -The primary guidance system was powered up at 133-l/2 hours, after which a coarse alignment to the abort guidance system was performed. The spacecraft axes had previously been aligned to an inertial reference using the abort guidance system by sighting on the earth with the crew optical alignment sight. Alignment accuracy was refined by performing a realignment using the sun and moon as sighting targets for the alignment optical telescope. The star-angle difference of minus l.l2 degrees resulted almost entirely from approximations in stored lunar and solar ephemeris data and computer routines used to calculate sun and moon position vectors. - -6.4.4 Inertial Measurement Unit ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:33 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: flight-path angle definition -2025-04-09 at 02:20:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: inclination angle of orbit plane Earth equatorial plane -2025-04-09 at 02:20:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Earth-centered inertial coordinates. Bystem. **Change in velocity showm in body X-axis for descent propulsion firings under control of abort guidance - -The primary guidance system was powered up at 133-l/2 hours, after which a coarse alignment to the abort guidance system was performed. The spacecraft axes had previously been aligned to an inertial reference using the abort guidance system by sighting on the earth with the crew optical alignment sight. Alignment accuracy was refined by performing a realignment using the sun and moon as sighting targets for the alignment optical telescope. The star-angle difference of minus l.l2 degrees resulted almost entirely from approximations in stored lunar and solar ephemeris data and computer routines used to calculate sun and moon position vectors. - -6.4.4 Inertial Measurement Unit ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:35 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 7/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, True, False, False, False, True, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.38 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.48 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [554, 623, 415, 199, 466, 197, 28, 109] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 323.88 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 11.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 29.44 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.125, Valid formats: 1.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -gathered from pairs of geosynchronous satellites located l0 to 20 degrees apart in longitude. Calculations indicate, however, that stereoscopic determination of cloud heights from geosynchronous aititudes would be marginal, at best, because of the small disparity angles involved (ref.6). ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- -Result 2: -Time hr:min Optian code Star used Ster angle aifference, deg Gyro torquing angles, deg Gyro drift,mERU Comments X Y Z X Z 00:45 05:26 (a) 26 Spica,33 Antares 0.00 -0.067 -0.000 +0.162 10 : 40 (b) 35 Rasalhague,44 Enif 20 0.01 0.00 +0.175 -0.123 +0.172 -0.012 23:47 (b) Dnoces,27 Alkaid 31 Arcturug๏ผŒ36 Vega 0.01 -0.283 -0.113 +0.092 28:49 (b) 30 Menkent,32 Alphecca 0.01 -0.084 -0.161 -0.075 +0.403 +1,4 +0.8 +2.1 Check star 36 9:C7 () 23 Denebola,32 Alphecca 0.00 +0.285 +0.011 +0.146 +0.131 +1.1 +1.0 +1.9 Check Btar 35 Check star 31 40 :43 (c) From lunar module primary 0:52 (a) guidance 0.00 36Vega,40Altair ~1.253 +0.385 +3.263 - -preferred alignment DRererence metrix (REFSMAT) CCoarse alignment ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -gathered from pairs of geosynchronous satellites located l0 to 20 degrees apart in longitude. Calculations indicate, however, that stereoscopic determination of cloud heights from geosynchronous aititudes would be marginal, at best, because of the small disparity angles involved (ref.6). ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Earth-centered inertial coordinates. Bystem. **Change in velocity showm in body X-axis for descent propulsion firings under control of abort guidance - -The primary guidance system was powered up at 133-l/2 hours, after which a coarse alignment to the abort guidance system was performed. The spacecraft axes had previously been aligned to an inertial reference using the abort guidance system by sighting on the earth with the crew optical alignment sight. Alignment accuracy was refined by performing a realignment using the sun and moon as sighting targets for the alignment optical telescope. The star-angle difference of minus l.l2 degrees resulted almost entirely from approximations in stored lunar and solar ephemeris data and computer routines used to calculate sun and moon position vectors. - -6.4.4 Inertial Measurement Unit ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg ------- -Result 2: -Earth-centered inertial coordinates. Bystem. **Change in velocity showm in body X-axis for descent propulsion firings under control of abort guidance - -The primary guidance system was powered up at 133-l/2 hours, after which a coarse alignment to the abort guidance system was performed. The spacecraft axes had previously been aligned to an inertial reference using the abort guidance system by sighting on the earth with the crew optical alignment sight. Alignment accuracy was refined by performing a realignment using the sun and moon as sighting targets for the alignment optical telescope. The star-angle difference of minus l.l2 degrees resulted almost entirely from approximations in stored lunar and solar ephemeris data and computer routines used to calculate sun and moon position vectors. - -6.4.4 Inertial Measurement Unit ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: velocity vector onto the local body-centered, horizontal plane, measured positive eastward from north, deg Apogee Maximum altitude above the oblate earth model, mile Perigee Minimum altitude above the oblate earth model, mfle Apocynthi on Maximum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing Bite altitude, miles Peri cynthi on Minimum altitude above the moon model, referenced to landing site altitude, miles Period Time required for spacecraft to complete 360 de- grees of orbit rotation, min Inclination Acute angle formed at the intersection of the orbit plane and the reference body's equatorial plane, deg Longitude of the ascending node Longitude where the orbit plane crosses the ref- erence body's equatorial plane from below, deg -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 3.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.375 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.484 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.225, Perfect scores: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 3/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:38 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.183, Max reward: 0.774 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:39 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: earth orbit command lunar module separation altitude -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Following separation and translation, a manual pitch maneuver of 1.5 deg/sec was executed. Computer control was reselected, and a translation was initiated to give a small closing velocity. A digital autopilot maneuver was executed to aligm the respective roll attitudes. Maximum spacecraft separation was approximately 80 feet. At the final attitude, the image in the crewman optical alignment sight was almost completely washed out by the sun reflection from the lunar module until the vehicles were separated by 6 feet or less. Contact was made at approximately 0.2 ft/sec with a slight roll misalignment. Subsequent tunnel inspection revealed a roll index angle of minus 2.0 degrees. The handles on latches l and 4 were not locked and were recocked and released manually. Spacecraft ejection was normal. Total reaction control fuel used for transposition, docking, and extraction was reported as 55 pounds - -8.7 TRANSLUNAR FLIGHT - -8.7.1 Coast Phase Activities ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: It's likely that you are referring to the Apollo 11 mission. According to historical records, the altitude of the Command and Service Module (CSM) immediately after the lunar module separation was around 400,000 feet (120,000 meters) above the lunar surface, but after entering lunar orbit, the lunar module separated at an altitude of about 50,000 to 55,000 feet (15,000 to 16,700 meters) above the lunar surface. However, to provide a precise answer without further uncertainty, the height should be around 50,000 to 56,000 feet above the lunar surface. -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 separation altitude -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo lunar module separation altitude -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: command module altitude lunar module separation -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service module was separated $\scriptstyle4-3/4$ hours before entry , affording the crew an opportunity to observe and photograph the damaged bay 4 area. The command moduie was separated from the service module by using the lunar module reaction control system. The lunar module was retained for as long as possible to provide maximum electrical power in the command module for entry . ------- -Result 2: -A major flight control function, in adaition to the monitoring of systems status and maintaining of consumable quantities above red-line values, was to determine the procedures to be used immediately prior to and during entry. After satisfactory procedures were established, they were verified in a simulator prior to advising the crew. These procedures called for first separating the service module, remaining on lunar module environmental control and power as late as possible, coaligning the two platforms, and separating the lunar module using tunnel pressure. The command module tunnel hatch was installed and a leak check was performed prior to lunar module undocking, which occurred about 1 hour before entry. All spacecraft operations were normal from undocking through landing, which occurred very close to the established target. - -10.2 NETWORK ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:43 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar mission aps altitude after lunar module separation -2025-04-09 at 02:20:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 lunar module separation altitude -2025-04-09 at 02:20:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:45 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 17 lunar module altitude after separation -2025-04-09 at 02:20:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 Command Module post-separated altitude -2025-04-09 at 02:20:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:46 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 17 lunar landing altitude command module -2025-04-09 at 02:20:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 11 Command Module post-landing altitude -2025-04-09 at 02:20:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:48 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apoll 17 model lunar landing provided at 142:54:45 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The lunar module was jettisoned l hour before entry, which was performed nominally using the primary guidance and navigation system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l within sight of the recovery ship. The landing point was reported as 2l degrees 38 minutes 24 seconds south latitude and l65 degrees 2l minutes 42 seconds west longitude. The crew were retrieved and aboard the recovery ship within 45 minutes after landingใ€‚ - -2.0 INTRODUCTION - -Apollo l3 was the thirteenth in a series of missions using Apollo specification flight hardware and was to be the third lunar landing. The primary mission objective was a precise lunar landing to conduct scientific exploration of deep-rooted surface material. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:50 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 lunar module altitude after jettison -2025-04-09 at 02:20:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:51 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module helium pressure drama -2025-04-09 at 02:20:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -During the initial cold-soak period following loading of supercritical helium during the Apollo l3 countdown demonstration test, the helium exhibited a pressure rise rate approximately three times greater than expected. A preflight test was devised to determine the pressure-rise rate that would exist at the time of descent engine firing for lunar descent. The predicted tank conditions at that time would be approximately 900 psia pressure and $48$ pounds of helium. Normal procedures were not used to reach 900 psia because 1o0 hours would have been required and the launch schedule would have been impacted; therefore, the pressure was raised to 900 psia by flowing warm helium through the tank heat exchanger. The subsequent pressure rise rate was abnormally high at l4.9 psi/hour. The abnormality of this rate was confirmed by repeating the test on two other ------- -Result 2: -helium tanks, one at the manufacturer's plant and the other at the Manned Spacecraft Center. The results indicated pressure rise rates of 8.8 and 8.7 psi/hour, respectively. - -The heat-leak test during the countdown demonstration indicated a normal rise rate of 7.9 psi/hour at 640 psia, whereas the special test showed an abnormal rise rate of 14.9 psi/hour above 900 psia. At some helium temperature equivalent to a pressure between 640 and 900 psia, the rise-rate characteristics would increase in the manner exhibited during the countdown demonstration test. Extrapolating these results to the flight conditions, it was determined that the helium tank was fully capable of supporting a lunar landing timeline, and the decision was made to proceed with the flight using the existing tank. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:52 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 helium tank pressure rate anomaly -2025-04-09 at 02:20:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -During the initial cold-soak period following loading of supercritical helium during the Apollo l3 countdown demonstration test, the helium exhibited a pressure rise rate approximately three times greater than expected. A preflight test was devised to determine the pressure-rise rate that would exist at the time of descent engine firing for lunar descent. The predicted tank conditions at that time would be approximately 900 psia pressure and $48$ pounds of helium. Normal procedures were not used to reach 900 psia because 1o0 hours would have been required and the launch schedule would have been impacted; therefore, the pressure was raised to 900 psia by flowing warm helium through the tank heat exchanger. The subsequent pressure rise rate was abnormally high at l4.9 psi/hour. The abnormality of this rate was confirmed by repeating the test on two other ------- -Result 2: -Figure $_{14-14}$ .- Inflight profile of supercritical helium tank pressure. - -A screening test was devised for all future flight tanks to supplement normal helium tank testing. The purpose of this test is to determine the pressure rise rate for a wide range of helium temperatures from approximately $9^{\circ}$ to $\bar{\mathsf{1}}\bar{2}\bar{3}^{\circ}$ R. .For a perfect tank, the steady-state.rise rate should remain at approximately 8 psi/hour over the entire range of temperatures. The Apollo 14, l5, and l6 tanks have been subjected to the screening test, and each exhibit the same phenomena observed during Apollo l3, but to a lesser degree. For new tanks, the manufacturer will periodically analyze the gases removed from the vacuum jacket during pump down for possible contaminants. The pressure in the jacket will be measured 2 or 3 weeks after pumpdown to verify vacuum integrity. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.2.2 Abnormal Descent Stage Noise ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:53 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 descent stage noise anomalies -2025-04-09 at 02:20:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -At 97 hours 14 minutes, the crew reported a thumping noise and snowflakes venting from quadrant 4 of the lunar module descent stage (fig. l4-l5). All four descent batteries experienced current transients at 97:13:53 for about 2 seconds, with corresponding drops in dc bus voltage (fig. l4-l6). Also, the water glycol pressure differential for the heat transport system decreased momentarily, indicating that the glycol pump momentarily slowed down. - - - -Figure 14-l5.- Descent stage battery location. - - - -The thumping noise occurred at about the same time as the current spikes._ The current spikes show that a momentary short circuit existed in the Lunar-Module-Pilot side of the dc electrical system, which includes descent batteries l and 2 (fig. 14-l6). The current surge was not of sufficient duration either to open the balance-load cross-tie circuit breakers, to display a reverse current indication, or to trip a batteryoff relay as a result of an overcurrent condition. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:54 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:55 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: lunar module descent stage anomalies apollo 13 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:55 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:55 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 13 lunar landing training -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 2/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [False, False, False, True, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.12 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.33 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [396, 1984, 314, 946, 473, 315, 1525, 481] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 804.25 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 4.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 201.06 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 2/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Following separation and translation, a manual pitch maneuver of 1.5 deg/sec was executed. Computer control was reselected, and a translation was initiated to give a small closing velocity. A digital autopilot maneuver was executed to aligm the respective roll attitudes. Maximum spacecraft separation was approximately 80 feet. At the final attitude, the image in the crewman optical alignment sight was almost completely washed out by the sun reflection from the lunar module until the vehicles were separated by 6 feet or less. Contact was made at approximately 0.2 ft/sec with a slight roll misalignment. Subsequent tunnel inspection revealed a roll index angle of minus 2.0 degrees. The handles on latches l and 4 were not locked and were recocked and released manually. Spacecraft ejection was normal. Total reaction control fuel used for transposition, docking, and extraction was reported as 55 pounds - -8.7 TRANSLUNAR FLIGHT - -8.7.1 Coast Phase Activities ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control System Review 6 Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation September 1970 7 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluati on September 1970 8 Cancelled 9 10 11 Apollo ll Preliminary Science Report Communications System Performance Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 January 1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The lunar module was jettisoned l hour before entry, which was performed nominally using the primary guidance and navigation system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l within sight of the recovery ship. The landing point was reported as 2l degrees 38 minutes 24 seconds south latitude and l65 degrees 2l minutes 42 seconds west longitude. The crew were retrieved and aboard the recovery ship within 45 minutes after landingใ€‚ - -2.0 INTRODUCTION - -Apollo l3 was the thirteenth in a series of missions using Apollo specification flight hardware and was to be the third lunar landing. The primary mission objective was a precise lunar landing to conduct scientific exploration of deep-rooted surface material. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -During the initial cold-soak period following loading of supercritical helium during the Apollo l3 countdown demonstration test, the helium exhibited a pressure rise rate approximately three times greater than expected. A preflight test was devised to determine the pressure-rise rate that would exist at the time of descent engine firing for lunar descent. The predicted tank conditions at that time would be approximately 900 psia pressure and $48$ pounds of helium. Normal procedures were not used to reach 900 psia because 1o0 hours would have been required and the launch schedule would have been impacted; therefore, the pressure was raised to 900 psia by flowing warm helium through the tank heat exchanger. The subsequent pressure rise rate was abnormally high at l4.9 psi/hour. The abnormality of this rate was confirmed by repeating the test on two other ------- -Result 2: -helium tanks, one at the manufacturer's plant and the other at the Manned Spacecraft Center. The results indicated pressure rise rates of 8.8 and 8.7 psi/hour, respectively. - -The heat-leak test during the countdown demonstration indicated a normal rise rate of 7.9 psi/hour at 640 psia, whereas the special test showed an abnormal rise rate of 14.9 psi/hour above 900 psia. At some helium temperature equivalent to a pressure between 640 and 900 psia, the rise-rate characteristics would increase in the manner exhibited during the countdown demonstration test. Extrapolating these results to the flight conditions, it was determined that the helium tank was fully capable of supporting a lunar landing timeline, and the decision was made to proceed with the flight using the existing tank. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -During the initial cold-soak period following loading of supercritical helium during the Apollo l3 countdown demonstration test, the helium exhibited a pressure rise rate approximately three times greater than expected. A preflight test was devised to determine the pressure-rise rate that would exist at the time of descent engine firing for lunar descent. The predicted tank conditions at that time would be approximately 900 psia pressure and $48$ pounds of helium. Normal procedures were not used to reach 900 psia because 1o0 hours would have been required and the launch schedule would have been impacted; therefore, the pressure was raised to 900 psia by flowing warm helium through the tank heat exchanger. The subsequent pressure rise rate was abnormally high at l4.9 psi/hour. The abnormality of this rate was confirmed by repeating the test on two other ------- -Result 2: -Figure $_{14-14}$ .- Inflight profile of supercritical helium tank pressure. - -A screening test was devised for all future flight tanks to supplement normal helium tank testing. The purpose of this test is to determine the pressure rise rate for a wide range of helium temperatures from approximately $9^{\circ}$ to $\bar{\mathsf{1}}\bar{2}\bar{3}^{\circ}$ R. .For a perfect tank, the steady-state.rise rate should remain at approximately 8 psi/hour over the entire range of temperatures. The Apollo 14, l5, and l6 tanks have been subjected to the screening test, and each exhibit the same phenomena observed during Apollo l3, but to a lesser degree. For new tanks, the manufacturer will periodically analyze the gases removed from the vacuum jacket during pump down for possible contaminants. The pressure in the jacket will be measured 2 or 3 weeks after pumpdown to verify vacuum integrity. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.2.2 Abnormal Descent Stage Noise ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -At 97 hours 14 minutes, the crew reported a thumping noise and snowflakes venting from quadrant 4 of the lunar module descent stage (fig. l4-l5). All four descent batteries experienced current transients at 97:13:53 for about 2 seconds, with corresponding drops in dc bus voltage (fig. l4-l6). Also, the water glycol pressure differential for the heat transport system decreased momentarily, indicating that the glycol pump momentarily slowed down. - - - -Figure 14-l5.- Descent stage battery location. - - - -The thumping noise occurred at about the same time as the current spikes._ The current spikes show that a momentary short circuit existed in the Lunar-Module-Pilot side of the dc electrical system, which includes descent batteries l and 2 (fig. 14-l6). The current surge was not of sufficient duration either to open the balance-load cross-tie circuit breakers, to display a reverse current indication, or to trip a batteryoff relay as a result of an overcurrent condition. ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 10: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 11: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nFollowing separation and translation, a manual pitch maneuver of 1.5 deg/sec ...', 'Result 1:\nThe unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry b...', 'Result 1:\nThe command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had b...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...', 'Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...', 'Result 1:\nThe operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory ...', 'Result 1:\nDuring the initial cold-soak period following loading of supercritical helium...', 'Result 1:\nDuring the initial cold-soak period following loading of supercritical helium...', 'Result 1:\nAt 97 hours 14 minutes, the crew reported a thumping noise and snowflakes ven...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nPowering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- -Result 2: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' California, on April 27, 1970, after reaction control system deactivation and pyrotechnic safing in Hawaii. Postflight testing and inspection of the command module for evaluation of the inflight performance and investigation of the flight irregularities were conducted at the contractor's and vendors' facilities in accordance with approved Apollo Spacecraft Hardware Utilization Requests (ASHUR's). The tests performed as a result of inflight problems are described in table C-I and discussed in the appropriate systems performance sections of this report. Tests being conducted for other purposes in accordance with other ASHUR's and the basic contract are not included. - -TABLE C-I.- POSTFLIGHT TESTING SUMMARY ------- -Result 2: -Powering down of the command and service nodules and powering up of the lunar module were completed at 58:40:00. The optimum plan for 8 safe and quick return required an immediate descent engine firing to a free-return circumlunar trajectory, with a pericynthion-plus-2-hour maneuver (transearth injection) to expedite the landing to about 142:30:00. Two other midcourse corrections were performed, the first using the descent engine. Only essential life support, navigation, instrumentation, and communication systems were operated to maximize electrical power and cooling water margins. Detailed monitoring of all consumables was continuously maintained to assess these margins, and the crew was always ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had b...', 'Result 1:\nThe unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry b...', "Result 1:\nThe command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' Californi...", "Result 1:\nThe command module arrived at the contractor's facility in Downey,' Californi..."] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry b...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The service module was separated $\scriptstyle4-3/4$ hours before entry , affording the crew an opportunity to observe and photograph the damaged bay 4 area. The command moduie was separated from the service module by using the lunar module reaction control system. The lunar module was retained for as long as possible to provide maximum electrical power in the command module for entry . ------- -Result 2: -A major flight control function, in adaition to the monitoring of systems status and maintaining of consumable quantities above red-line values, was to determine the procedures to be used immediately prior to and during entry. After satisfactory procedures were established, they were verified in a simulator prior to advising the crew. These procedures called for first separating the service module, remaining on lunar module environmental control and power as late as possible, coaligning the two platforms, and separating the lunar module using tunnel pressure. The command module tunnel hatch was installed and a leak check was performed prior to lunar module undocking, which occurred about 1 hour before entry. All spacecraft operations were normal from undocking through landing, which occurred very close to the established target. - -10.2 NETWORK ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe service module was separated $\\scriptstyle4-3/4$ hours before entry , aff...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: injection Ignition Cutoff 95 424.0 87456.0 379.7 398.4 5.0 5.5 0.7 0.8 56 866 51778 512 837 431285 517 560 437119 11370 9443 2495 2222 3255 3249 Thirdmidcourse correction Ignition Cutoff 87 325.3 87 263.3 398.7 398.9 5.5 5.5. 0.8 0.8 51 681 51642 430 123 429353 435930 435 169 9244 9227 2048 3215 Fowrth midcourse correction Ignition 87 132.1 399.1 5.5 0.8 51 553 428 322 434105 9069 2045 1911 3215 3191 Cutoff Command&servicemodule 87 101.5 399.2 5.6 0.8 51538 428219 433990 9065 1910 3192 b separation Before 87 057.3 399.3 5.6 0.8 51 517 428065 433 819 9058 1909 3194 After (command module/ lunar module) 37 109.7 251.5 2.2 -0.3 24048 92418 93.809 2362 686= 9 Commandmodule/lunar module separation b 37 014.6 Before 12 367.6 252.9 1039.9 1.9 -0.6 23926 93993 95514 2188 -963 -35 After (command module) 0.3 6.1 581.5 5 258 4636 31 409 20 Entry 12 361.4 1039.9 0.3 6.0 5 812 5254 4635 31 -407 21 Drogue deployment 11 869.4 1038.7 0.3 6.0 5727 5002 4405 33 -382 24 Main parachute deployment 11 579.8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 0.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.025, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 1/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:20:56 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.195, Max reward: 0.524 -2025-04-09 at 02:20:58 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "landed spacecraft location -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -TABLE 1O.3-I.- RECOVERY SUPPORT - -Landing area Supporta Remarks Number Unit Launch site 1 LCU Landing craft utility (landing craft with command Launch abort 1 HH-3E module retrieval capability)- USS Paiute Helicopter with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB,Florida 2 HH-53C Helicopters capable of lifting the command module; each with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB, 1 ATF Florida 2 SH-3 Helicopters staged from Norfolk NAS, Virginia 1 DD USS New 3 HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft; one each staged from McCoy AFB, Florida; Pease AFB,New Mexico; and Lajes AFB, โ€™Azores Earth orbit Primary end-of-mission, 2 2 DD HC-130H USS New Fixed wing aircraft staged from Ascension Mid-Pacific earth 1 1 HdT DD USS Iwo Jima 8 SH-3D USS Benjamin Stoddert orbital, and deep- 2 Helicopters staged from USS Iwo Jima space secondary HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft staged from Hickam AFB, Hawaii - -&arotal ship support $=5$ Total aircraft support $\approx$ 23 - -10.3.l Command Module Location and Retrieval ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: 'location of spacecraft landing site' 'spacecraft landing 2023' 'spacecraft landing news recent' -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -TABLE 1O.3-I.- RECOVERY SUPPORT - -Landing area Supporta Remarks Number Unit Launch site 1 LCU Landing craft utility (landing craft with command Launch abort 1 HH-3E module retrieval capability)- USS Paiute Helicopter with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB,Florida 2 HH-53C Helicopters capable of lifting the command module; each with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB, 1 ATF Florida 2 SH-3 Helicopters staged from Norfolk NAS, Virginia 1 DD USS New 3 HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft; one each staged from McCoy AFB, Florida; Pease AFB,New Mexico; and Lajes AFB, โ€™Azores Earth orbit Primary end-of-mission, 2 2 DD HC-130H USS New Fixed wing aircraft staged from Ascension Mid-Pacific earth 1 1 HdT DD USS Iwo Jima 8 SH-3D USS Benjamin Stoddert orbital, and deep- 2 Helicopters staged from USS Iwo Jima space secondary HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft staged from Hickam AFB, Hawaii - -&arotal ship support $=5$ Total aircraft support $\approx$ 23 - -10.3.l Command Module Location and Retrieval ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Where did the Mars Curiosity Rover land on Mars -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Spacecraft landing site" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: " historic spacecraft landing site" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "what spacecraft land location" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:00 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 6 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 landing site" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: '1970 Apollo mission crew recovery' 'Apollo spacecraft crash site' -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: NASA manned spacecraft center Houston Texas -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: amssc msc-02680 national aeronautics and space administration -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger mission" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:02 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 mission landing site" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: 'Apollo 13 mission' 'Apollo 13 recovery' -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Apollo 13 mission landing site -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: apollo 11 landing site -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger launch location" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation was based on launch vehicle onboard data, as reported in reference 2, and from network tracking data. After separation, the actual trajectory information was determined from the best estimated trajectory generated from tracking and telemetry data. The earth and moon models used for the trajectory analysis are geometrically similar to those used for Apollo l2. Table 3-I is a listing of major flight events, and table 4-I defines the trajectory and maneuver parameters listed in table 4-II. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:04 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 astronaut Jim Lovell Apollo 13 recovery site" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: 'Apollo 13 lunar module recovery site' 'Apollo 13 mission landing site' -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: Aborted lunar landing site Apollo 13 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger mission location" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -TABLE 1O.3-I.- RECOVERY SUPPORT - -Landing area Supporta Remarks Number Unit Launch site 1 LCU Landing craft utility (landing craft with command Launch abort 1 HH-3E module retrieval capability)- USS Paiute Helicopter with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB,Florida 2 HH-53C Helicopters capable of lifting the command module; each with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB, 1 ATF Florida 2 SH-3 Helicopters staged from Norfolk NAS, Virginia 1 DD USS New 3 HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft; one each staged from McCoy AFB, Florida; Pease AFB,New Mexico; and Lajes AFB, โ€™Azores Earth orbit Primary end-of-mission, 2 2 DD HC-130H USS New Fixed wing aircraft staged from Ascension Mid-Pacific earth 1 1 HdT DD USS Iwo Jima 8 SH-3D USS Benjamin Stoddert orbital, and deep- 2 Helicopters staged from USS Iwo Jima space secondary HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft staged from Hickam AFB, Hawaii - -&arotal ship support $=5$ Total aircraft support $\approx$ 23 - -10.3.l Command Module Location and Retrieval ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:06 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 4 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:08 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 lunar module return recovery site" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:08 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:08 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger Crew Vehicle Accidental Death Lagoon Tkwa" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:08 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Support for the primary recovery area consisted of the prime recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, five helicopters from the Iwo Jima, and two HC-l30H rescue aircraft. Later, the experimental mine sweeper, USS Granville Hall, and two HC-l30H aircraft were added to the end-of-mission array. One of the helicopters, designated "Recovery," carried the flight surgeon, and was utilized for retrieval of the crew. Two of the helicopters, designated "Swim l" and "Swim 2," carried swimmers and the necessary recovery equipment. A fourth helicopter, designated "Photo" was used as a photographic platform, and the fifth helicopter, designated "Relay," served as a communications relay aircraft. The four aircraft, designated "Samoa Rescue l, 2, 3, and 4," were positioned to track the command module after exit from blackout, as well as to provide pararescue capability had the command module landed uprange or downrange of the target point. The USS Granville Hall was positioned to provide support in the event ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:08 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 lunar module South Pacific recovery" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger launch recovery" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The Mission Control Center and the Manned Space Flight Network provided excellent support throughout this aborted mission. Minor problems occurred at different sites around the network, but all were corrected with no consequence to flight control support. Momentary data losses occurred seven different times as a result of power amplifier faults, computer processor executive buffer depletion, or wave guide faults. On each occasion, data lock-up was regained in just a few minutes. - -10.3 RECOVERY OPERATIONS ------- -Result 2: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:10 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Apollo 13 mission recovery site latitude longitude" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The lunar module was jettisoned l hour before entry, which was performed nominally using the primary guidance and navigation system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l within sight of the recovery ship. The landing point was reported as 2l degrees 38 minutes 24 seconds south latitude and l65 degrees 2l minutes 42 seconds west longitude. The crew were retrieved and aboard the recovery ship within 45 minutes after landingใ€‚ - -2.0 INTRODUCTION - -Apollo l3 was the thirteenth in a series of missions using Apollo specification flight hardware and was to be the third lunar landing. The primary mission objective was a precise lunar landing to conduct scientific exploration of deep-rooted surface material. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger launch failure" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The extensive testing and analyses and the consistency with which the postflight test data repeated preflight acceptance test results indicate the problem was most likely caused either by the Command Module Pilot responding_too quickly to the $0.05\tt{e}$ light not coming on or by an intermittent hardware failure that cleared itself during entry. - -Based on these findings, a change is not warranted to existing procedures or hardware on future flights. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.6 Gas Leak in Apex Cover Jettison System ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:11 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 2 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger mission failure explanation" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The Mission Control Center and the Manned Space Flight Network provided excellent support throughout this aborted mission. Minor problems occurred at different sites around the network, but all were corrected with no consequence to flight control support. Momentary data losses occurred seven different times as a result of power amplifier faults, computer processor executive buffer depletion, or wave guide faults. On each occasion, data lock-up was regained in just a few minutes. - -10.3 RECOVERY OPERATIONS ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:13 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger mission explanation" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation was based on launch vehicle onboard data, as reported in reference 2, and from network tracking data. After separation, the actual trajectory information was determined from the best estimated trajectory generated from tracking and telemetry data. The earth and moon models used for the trajectory analysis are geometrically similar to those used for Apollo l2. Table 3-I is a listing of major flight events, and table 4-I defines the trajectory and maneuver parameters listed in table 4-II. ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:14 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 1 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: "Challenger capsule location" -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -The analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation was based on launch vehicle onboard data, as reported in reference 2, and from network tracking data. After separation, the actual trajectory information was determined from the best estimated trajectory generated from tracking and telemetry data. The earth and moon models used for the trajectory analysis are geometrically similar to those used for Apollo l2. Table 3-I is a listing of major flight events, and table 4-I defines the trajectory and maneuver parameters listed in table 4-II. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:57 - Checking 8 student answers -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:83 - Generating verification responses -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.evaluation:check_student_answers:103 - Verification complete. 5/8 answers correct -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:75 - Correctness metrics: [True, True, True, True, False, False, False, False] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:76 - Average correctness: 0.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:77 - Standard deviation: 0.50 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:82 - Student lengths: [505, 251, 449, 426, 86, 11, 239, 896] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:83 - Teacher lengths: [17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17, 17] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:84 - Average student length: 357.88 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:85 - Average teacher length: 17.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_correctness:86 - Length ratio: 21.05 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_correctness.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:227 - Format reward metrics - Mean: 0.000, Valid formats: 0.0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_format:228 - Responses ending properly: 5/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_format.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -TABLE 1O.3-I.- RECOVERY SUPPORT - -Landing area Supporta Remarks Number Unit Launch site 1 LCU Landing craft utility (landing craft with command Launch abort 1 HH-3E module retrieval capability)- USS Paiute Helicopter with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB,Florida 2 HH-53C Helicopters capable of lifting the command module; each with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB, 1 ATF Florida 2 SH-3 Helicopters staged from Norfolk NAS, Virginia 1 DD USS New 3 HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft; one each staged from McCoy AFB, Florida; Pease AFB,New Mexico; and Lajes AFB, โ€™Azores Earth orbit Primary end-of-mission, 2 2 DD HC-130H USS New Fixed wing aircraft staged from Ascension Mid-Pacific earth 1 1 HdT DD USS Iwo Jima 8 SH-3D USS Benjamin Stoddert orbital, and deep- 2 Helicopters staged from USS Iwo Jima space secondary HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft staged from Hickam AFB, Hawaii - -&arotal ship support $=5$ Total aircraft support $\approx$ 23 - -10.3.l Command Module Location and Retrieval ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -The lunar module was jettisoned l hour before entry, which was performed nominally using the primary guidance and navigation system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l within sight of the recovery ship. The landing point was reported as 2l degrees 38 minutes 24 seconds south latitude and l65 degrees 2l minutes 42 seconds west longitude. The crew were retrieved and aboard the recovery ship within 45 minutes after landingใ€‚ - -2.0 INTRODUCTION - -Apollo l3 was the thirteenth in a series of missions using Apollo specification flight hardware and was to be the third lunar landing. The primary mission objective was a precise lunar landing to conduct scientific exploration of deep-rooted surface material. ------- -Result 2: -The first transearth midcourse correction (table 4-III), was performed at 105:18:28 using the descent propulsion system. The firing was conducted at l0 percent throttle and produced a velocity change of about 7.8 ft/sec to successfully raise the entry flight-path angle to minus 6.52 degrees . - -Spacecraft navigation for the aborted mission proceeded satisfactorily. Post-pericynthion navigation procedures were designed to support transearth injection, and special data processing procedures were required for dual vehicle tracking prior to entry. Less range data than usual were received from tracking stations during the abort phase because the power amplifier in the spacecraft was turned off for most of the time to conserve electrical power. The small amounts of range data received and the resulting large data arcs, however, were sufficient to maintain navigation accuracies approximately equivalent to those of Apollo 12. - -(a) Trans lunar ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 0: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nThe command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had b...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nThe command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had b...', 'Result 1:\nThe lunar module was jettisoned l hour before entry, which was performed nomi...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -TABLE 1O.3-I.- RECOVERY SUPPORT - -Landing area Supporta Remarks Number Unit Launch site 1 LCU Landing craft utility (landing craft with command Launch abort 1 HH-3E module retrieval capability)- USS Paiute Helicopter with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB,Florida 2 HH-53C Helicopters capable of lifting the command module; each with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB, 1 ATF Florida 2 SH-3 Helicopters staged from Norfolk NAS, Virginia 1 DD USS New 3 HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft; one each staged from McCoy AFB, Florida; Pease AFB,New Mexico; and Lajes AFB, โ€™Azores Earth orbit Primary end-of-mission, 2 2 DD HC-130H USS New Fixed wing aircraft staged from Ascension Mid-Pacific earth 1 1 HdT DD USS Iwo Jima 8 SH-3D USS Benjamin Stoddert orbital, and deep- 2 Helicopters staged from USS Iwo Jima space secondary HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft staged from Hickam AFB, Hawaii - -&arotal ship support $=5$ Total aircraft support $\approx$ 23 - -10.3.l Command Module Location and Retrieval ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 10 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis March 1970 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis December 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module Reaction Control System Final review 7 Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 5 Evaluation Performance of Lunar Module Reaction Control Final review 6 System Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight January 1970 7 Evaluati on Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation January 1970 8 9 Cancelled Analysis of Apollo l0 Photography and Visual In publication 10 Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 11 Communications System Performance December 1969 Apollo 1l 1 2 3 4 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Performance of Command and Service Module May 1970 September 1970 Reaction Control System Review Service Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Review 5 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- -Result 2: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 1: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reco...', 'Result 1:\nSupplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstr...', 'Result 1:\nThe command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had b...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 2: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nThe command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had b...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -Crew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based in Houston until December l, l969, when operations were transferred to the launch site.for final training. The training time was adequate to meet the planned launch date of April ll, 1970, and all training objectives were met. The only difficulty in coordinating the training activities was the scheduling of the lunar landing training vehicle for the Commander. The late availability of this vehicle, the large amount of time required for this type of training, and the need to travel between Houston and Cape Kennedy complicated the training Schedule significantly. Because a primary objective was a field geology experiment as part of the second extravehicular excursion, considerable emphasis was placed on geology training. A week-long geology field trip to train the crew as "observers" was completed early in the training cycle. Later field trips emphasized practical geological procedures and timelines. Extensive ------- -Result 2: -The operational support provided by the flight control team was satisfactory and timely in safely returning the Apollo 13 crew. Only the inflight problems which influenced flight control operation and their resultant effects on the flight plan are discussed. - -Prior to laurch, the supercritical.helium pressure in the lunar module descent propulsion system increased at an abnormally high rate. After cold soak ard venting, the rise rate was considered acceptable for launch. At 56 hours during the first entry into the lunar module, the rise rate and pressure were reported to be satisfactory; therefore, a special venting procedure was not required. - -A master caution and warning alarm at 38 hours indicated the hydrogen tank pressures were low. As a result, it was planned to use the cryogenic tank fars more often than scheduled to provide a more even distribution of fluid and to stabilize heat and pressure rise rates. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 3: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...', 'Result 1:\nCrew training for Apollo 13 commenced on August l, 1969. The crew was based i...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 4: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 5: -Search results: [] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had been brought up to nearly full charge using lunar module power. The command module platform was aligned to the lunar module platform, and the spacecraft were unaocked 70 minutes before entry. After undocking, the escaping tunnel pressure provided the necessary separation velocity between the two spacecraft. From this point, the mission was completed nominally, as in previous flights, with the spacecraft landing approximately l mile from the target point. The lunar nodule, including the raaioisotope thermoelectric fuel capsule used to power experiment equipment, entered the atnosphere and impacted in the open sea between Samoa and New Zealand at 25.5 degrees south latitude and 176 degrees west longitude, with surveillance aircraft in the area. The three crewmen were onboard the recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, within 45 minutes of landing, the fastest recovery time for all Apollo manned flights. A narrative ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publi cation date/status Apollo 7 1 2 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis Communication System Performance May 1969 June 1969 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 4 5 Reaction Control System Performance Cancelled August 1969 6 Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 8 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis December 1969 2 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis November 1969 3 Performance of Command and Service Module March 1970 4 Reaction Control System Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 6 Evaluation Analysis of Apollo 8 Photography and December 1969 7 Visual Observations Entry Postflight Analysis December 1969 Apollo 9 1 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis November 1969 2 Command and Service Module Guidance, Navi- gation, and Control System Performance November 1969 3 Lunar Module Abort Guidance System Perform- ance Analysis November 1969 4 Performance of Command ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 6: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\nThe command module was powered up with the three entry batteries, which had b...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:384 - ๐Ÿ“ Ground Truth Chunk: The unusual spacecraft configuration required that new procedures for entry be developed and verified. The resulting timeline called for a final midcourse correction 5 hours before entry, separation of the service module 4 hours 39 minutes before entry, and undocking of the lunar module at l hour ll minutes before entry. Service module separation was performed using the lunar module reaction control system. Separation velocity following lunar module umdocking was provided using pressure in the docking tunnel. - -The final midcourse correction maneuver used the lunar module reaction control system. Landing occurred at 142:54:4l in the Pacific Ocean at 2l degrees 38.4 minutes south latitude and 165 degrees 21.7 minutes west longitude, which was about l mile from the target point. -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 1: Result 1: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- -Result 2: -Trafectory Parameters Definition Geodetic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the earth's equator to the local vertical vector, deg Selenographic latitude Spacecraft position measured north or south from the true lunar equatorial plane to the local ver- tical vector, deg Longitude Spacecraft position measured east or west from the body's prime meridian to the local vertical vec- tor,deg Altitude Perpendicular distance from the reference body to the point of orbit intersect๏ผŒfeet or miles; alti- tude above the lunar surface is referenced to the altitude of the landing site with respect to mean lunar radius Space-fixed velocity Magmitude of the inertial velocity vector refer- enced to the body-centered, inertial reference coordinate system, ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle Flight-path angle measured positive upward from the body-centered, local horizontal plane to the inertial velocity vector, deg Space-fixed heading 8ngle Angle of the projection of the inertial ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 2: Result 1: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- -Result 2: -PREPARED BY - -Mission Evaluation Team - -APPROVED BY - - - -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNEDSPACECRAFTCENTER HOUSTON, TEXAS September 1970 - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - -Section Page ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 3: Result 1: -The analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation was based on launch vehicle onboard data, as reported in reference 2, and from network tracking data. After separation, the actual trajectory information was determined from the best estimated trajectory generated from tracking and telemetry data. The earth and moon models used for the trajectory analysis are geometrically similar to those used for Apollo l2. Table 3-I is a listing of major flight events, and table 4-I defines the trajectory and maneuver parameters listed in table 4-II. ------- -Result 2: -Supplement number Title Publication date/status Apollo 12 Trajectory Reconstruction and Analysis 1 2 3 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Service Propulsion System Final Flight September 1970 September 1970 4 Evaluation Ascent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation Preparation 5 6 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Preparation 7 Apollo l2 Preliminary Science Report Landing Site Selection Processes July 1970 Final review Apollo 13 1 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Performance Analysis Review 2 Descent Propulsion System Final Flight Evaluation Entry Postflight Analysis Preparation - -REFERENCES - -Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo 13 Cryogenic Oxygen Tank 2 Anomaly Report. MSC-02545. June 1970. - -Marshall Space Flight Center: Saturn V Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation Report AS-508 Apollo 13 Mission. MPR-SAT-FE-70-2. June 1970. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 4: Result 1: -TABLE 1O.3-I.- RECOVERY SUPPORT - -Landing area Supporta Remarks Number Unit Launch site 1 LCU Landing craft utility (landing craft with command Launch abort 1 HH-3E module retrieval capability)- USS Paiute Helicopter with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB,Florida 2 HH-53C Helicopters capable of lifting the command module; each with para-rescue team staged from Patrick AFB, 1 ATF Florida 2 SH-3 Helicopters staged from Norfolk NAS, Virginia 1 DD USS New 3 HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft; one each staged from McCoy AFB, Florida; Pease AFB,New Mexico; and Lajes AFB, โ€™Azores Earth orbit Primary end-of-mission, 2 2 DD HC-130H USS New Fixed wing aircraft staged from Ascension Mid-Pacific earth 1 1 HdT DD USS Iwo Jima 8 SH-3D USS Benjamin Stoddert orbital, and deep- 2 Helicopters staged from USS Iwo Jima space secondary HC-130H Fixed wing aircraft staged from Hickam AFB, Hawaii - -&arotal ship support $=5$ Total aircraft support $\approx$ 23 - -10.3.l Command Module Location and Retrieval ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 5: Result 1: -Event Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual contact by Swim 2 1801 1802 helicopters Voice contact by Recovery helicopter 1803 Visual contact by Relay/Recovery helicopters/ 1803 Iwo Jima Command module landed, remained in stable I Swimmers deployed to retrieve main parachutes 1807 1809 First swimmer deployed to command module 1816 Flotation collar inflated 1824 Life preserver unit delivered to lead swimmer 1831 Command module hatch opened 1832 Helicopter pickup of flight crew completed 1842 Recovery helicopter on board Iwo Jima 1853 Command module secured aboard Iwo Jima 1936 April 18 Flight crew departed Iwo Jima 1820 April 20 Flight crew arrival in Houston 0330 Iwo Jima arrival in Hawaii April 24 1930 Safing of command module pyrotechnics completed April_25 0235 Deactivation of the fuel and oxidizer completed April 26 1928 - -10.3.2 Postrecovery Inspection ------- -Result 2: -Support for the primary recovery area consisted of the prime recovery ship, USS Iwo Jima, five helicopters from the Iwo Jima, and two HC-l30H rescue aircraft. Later, the experimental mine sweeper, USS Granville Hall, and two HC-l30H aircraft were added to the end-of-mission array. One of the helicopters, designated "Recovery," carried the flight surgeon, and was utilized for retrieval of the crew. Two of the helicopters, designated "Swim l" and "Swim 2," carried swimmers and the necessary recovery equipment. A fourth helicopter, designated "Photo" was used as a photographic platform, and the fifth helicopter, designated "Relay," served as a communications relay aircraft. The four aircraft, designated "Samoa Rescue l, 2, 3, and 4," were positioned to track the command module after exit from blackout, as well as to provide pararescue capability had the command module landed uprange or downrange of the target point. The USS Granville Hall was positioned to provide support in the event ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 6: Result 1: -The Mission Control Center and the Manned Space Flight Network provided excellent support throughout this aborted mission. Minor problems occurred at different sites around the network, but all were corrected with no consequence to flight control support. Momentary data losses occurred seven different times as a result of power amplifier faults, computer processor executive buffer depletion, or wave guide faults. On each occasion, data lock-up was regained in just a few minutes. - -10.3 RECOVERY OPERATIONS ------- -Result 2: -At lift-off, measured winds, both at the surface and in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, and accelerometer data indicate that structural loads were well below the established limits during all phases of flight. The predicted and calculated spacecraft loads at lift-off, in the region of maximum dynamic pressure, at the end of first stage boost, and during staging were similar to or less than previous Apollo Saturn V launches. Command module accelerometer data prior to S-Ic center-engine cutoff indicate longitudinal oscillations similar to those measured on previous flights. Although longitudinal oscillations in the S-II engine structure and propellant system caused early shutdown of the center engine, the vibrations at the spacecraft during S-Il boost had an amplitude less than 0.05g at a frequency of l6 hertz. The maximum oscillation measured during either of the two S-IVB thrust periods was 0.o6g, also at a frequency of 16 hert z. Oscillations during all four launch vehicle ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 7: Result 1: -The service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to launch and a measurement waiver was granted. The failure, which resulted in shorting of the instrumentation power supply, was caused from fuel leakage into the point sensor module within the tank. Similar failures have occurred on previous flights, and since this system is independent of the primary gaging system, which was operating properly, performance of the mission was not affected. - -5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL ------- -Result 2: -The extensive testing and analyses and the consistency with which the postflight test data repeated preflight acceptance test results indicate the problem was most likely caused either by the Command Module Pilot responding_too quickly to the $0.05\tt{e}$ light not coming on or by an intermittent hardware failure that cleared itself during entry. - -Based on these findings, a change is not warranted to existing procedures or hardware on future flights. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.6 Gas Leak in Apex Cover Jettison System ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 8: Result 1: -The Mission Control Center and the Manned Space Flight Network provided excellent support throughout this aborted mission. Minor problems occurred at different sites around the network, but all were corrected with no consequence to flight control support. Momentary data losses occurred seven different times as a result of power amplifier faults, computer processor executive buffer depletion, or wave guide faults. On each occasion, data lock-up was regained in just a few minutes. - -10.3 RECOVERY OPERATIONS ------- -Result 2: -a. The mission was aborted because of the total loss of primary oxygen in the service module. This loss resulted from an incompatibility between switch design and preflight procedures, a condition which, when combined with an abnormal preflight detanking procedure, caused an inflight shorting and a rapid oxidation within one of two redundant storage tanks. The oxidation then resulted in a loss of pressure integrity in the related tank and eventually in the remaining tank. - -b. The concept of a backup crew was proven for the first time when 3 days prior to flight the backup Command Module Pilot was substituted for his prime-crew counterpart, who was exposed and susceptible to rubella (German measles). - -c. The performance of lunar module systems demonstrated an emergency operational capability. Lunar module systems supported the crew for a period approximately twice their intended design lifetime. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 9: Result 1: -The analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation was based on launch vehicle onboard data, as reported in reference 2, and from network tracking data. After separation, the actual trajectory information was determined from the best estimated trajectory generated from tracking and telemetry data. The earth and moon models used for the trajectory analysis are geometrically similar to those used for Apollo l2. Table 3-I is a listing of major flight events, and table 4-I defines the trajectory and maneuver parameters listed in table 4-II. ------- -Result 2: -1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJECTORY...... ยทยทยท 4-1 5.0 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULE PERFORMANCE . . 5-1 5.1 STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS .ยท 5-1 5.2 ELECTRICAL POWER ยทยทยทยท 5-2 5.3 CRYOGENIC STORAGE.ยทยทยท 5-3 5.4 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT ยท 5-4 5.5 INSTRUMENTATION.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-4 5.6 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL . .ยท 5-5 5.7 REACTION CONTROL.ยทยทยทยทยทยทยท 5-11 5.8 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL .ยท. 5-12 6.0 LUNAR MODULE PERFORMANCE 6-1 6.1 STRUCTURAL ยทยทยท 6-1 6.2 ELECTRICAL POWER 6-1 6.3 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 6-2 6.4 GUIDANCE, NAVIGATION, AND CONTROL .ยท 6-2 6.5 REACTION CONTROL ... 6-8 6.6 DESCENT PROPULSION ยทยทยท 6-8 6.7 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL.ยทยทยท 6-9 7.0 MISSION CONSUMABLES ยทยทยทยทยท. ยทยทใ€ยท 7-1 7.1 COMMAND AND SERVICE MODULES .ยทยทยทยท 7-1 7.2 LUNAR MODULE ยทยทยทยทยท 7-4 8.0 PILOTS' REPORT . . . 8-1. 8.1 TRAIN ING 8-1 8.2 PRELAUNCH PREPARATION .. 8-1 8.3 LAUN CH 8-2 8.4 EARTH ORBIT.. 8-2 Section Page 8.5 TRANSLUNAR INJECTION โ€™ยท 8-2 8.6 TRANSPOSITION AND DOCKING .ยท.. 8-7 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:386 - ๐Ÿ” Searched Chunk 10: Result 1: -The analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation was based on launch vehicle onboard data, as reported in reference 2, and from network tracking data. After separation, the actual trajectory information was determined from the best estimated trajectory generated from tracking and telemetry data. The earth and moon models used for the trajectory analysis are geometrically similar to those used for Apollo l2. Table 3-I is a listing of major flight events, and table 4-I defines the trajectory and maneuver parameters listed in table 4-II. ------- -Result 2: -MSC-02680 - -DISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING - -This paper is not suitable for general distribution or referencing. It may be referenced only in other working correspondence and documents by participating organizations. - -MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON.TEXAS SEPTEMBER1970 ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | WARNING | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:392 - Failed to find correct chunk for prompt 7: -Search results: ['Result 1:\nMSC-02680\n\nDISTRIBUTION AND REFERENCING\n\nThis paper is not suitable for gener...', 'Result 1:\n1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTIONยท. 2-1 3.0 MISSION DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 TRAJEC...', 'Result 1:\nThe analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation w...', 'Result 1:\nTABLE 1O.3-I.- RECOVERY SUPPORT\n\nLanding area Supporta Remarks Number Unit La...', 'Result 1:\nEvent Time, G.m.t. Apri1 17, 1970 S-band contact by Samoa Rescue 4 Visual con...', 'Result 1:\nThe Mission Control Center and the Manned Space Flight Network provided excel...', 'Result 1:\nThe service propulsion auxiliary propellant gaging system failed prior to lau...', 'Result 1:\nThe Mission Control Center and the Manned Space Flight Network provided excel...', 'Result 1:\nThe analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation w...', 'Result 1:\nThe analysis of the trajectory from lift-off to spacecraft/S-IVB separation w...'] -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:402 - Chunk Query Rewards Summary: -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:403 - Total prompts: 8 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:404 - Correct matches: 0.0 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:405 - Average reward: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_em_chunk:406 - Reward std: 0.000 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_em_chunk.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:630 - Search strategy metrics - Mean: 0.000, Perfect scores: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:633 - Initial searches: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:634 - Average info processing steps: 0.00 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_strategy:635 - Final synthesis rate: 0/8 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:log_chat_state:855 - ๐Ÿ’พ Appended 8 chat states to /workspace/DeepSearch/logs/chat_states/chat_states_search_strategy.jsonl -2025-04-09 at 02:21:15 | INFO | src.rewards:reward_search_diversity:811 - Search diversity metrics - Mean reward: 0.316, Max reward: 0.906 -2025-04-09 at 02:21:18 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 8 prompts -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: valves valve leakage why -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(fig. 14-20) caused the leakage. When the valve is installed, the forward O-ring can be rolled and damaged when it passes the manifold port. In the other two valves, the cause was not identified and was assumed to be contamination. - -The production tolerances of the valve and bore were examined to determine if a tolerance buildup problem existed. The manufacturer's specification to which the valve was designed requires that the O-ring be subjected to a compression of between 0.01l5 and 0.0225 inch, whereas the 0-ring supplier recommends between 0.0ll and 0.017 inch. The added compression allowed in the valve design would aggravate the tendancy for the O-ring to roll during valve .assembly. - - - -Figure l4-20.- Ascent stage tank shutoff valve:. ------- -Result 2: -supply valve will be redesigned to isolate polytetrafluoroethylenecoated wires from the oxygen. Warning systems at the Mission Control Center will be modified to provide more immediate and visible warnings of anomalies in all systems. - -A more thorough discussion of this anomaly is presented in reference l. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.2 Postlanding Vent Valve Malfunction - -During postlanding activities, recovery personnel discovered that the postlanding ventilation inlet valve was closed and the exhaust valve wasopen. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: valve leakage causes -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(fig. 14-20) caused the leakage. When the valve is installed, the forward O-ring can be rolled and damaged when it passes the manifold port. In the other two valves, the cause was not identified and was assumed to be contamination. - -The production tolerances of the valve and bore were examined to determine if a tolerance buildup problem existed. The manufacturer's specification to which the valve was designed requires that the O-ring be subjected to a compression of between 0.01l5 and 0.0225 inch, whereas the 0-ring supplier recommends between 0.0ll and 0.017 inch. The added compression allowed in the valve design would aggravate the tendancy for the O-ring to roll during valve .assembly. - - - -Figure l4-20.- Ascent stage tank shutoff valve:. ------- -Result 2: -supply valve will be redesigned to isolate polytetrafluoroethylenecoated wires from the oxygen. Warning systems at the Mission Control Center will be modified to provide more immediate and visible warnings of anomalies in all systems. - -A more thorough discussion of this anomaly is presented in reference l. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.2 Postlanding Vent Valve Malfunction - -During postlanding activities, recovery personnel discovered that the postlanding ventilation inlet valve was closed and the exhaust valve wasopen. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: valves, cause of leakage, system context -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(fig. 14-20) caused the leakage. When the valve is installed, the forward O-ring can be rolled and damaged when it passes the manifold port. In the other two valves, the cause was not identified and was assumed to be contamination. - -The production tolerances of the valve and bore were examined to determine if a tolerance buildup problem existed. The manufacturer's specification to which the valve was designed requires that the O-ring be subjected to a compression of between 0.01l5 and 0.0225 inch, whereas the 0-ring supplier recommends between 0.0ll and 0.017 inch. The added compression allowed in the valve design would aggravate the tendancy for the O-ring to roll during valve .assembly. - - - -Figure l4-20.- Ascent stage tank shutoff valve:. ------- -Result 2: -supply valve will be redesigned to isolate polytetrafluoroethylenecoated wires from the oxygen. Warning systems at the Mission Control Center will be modified to provide more immediate and visible warnings of anomalies in all systems. - -A more thorough discussion of this anomaly is presented in reference l. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.2 Postlanding Vent Valve Malfunction - -During postlanding activities, recovery personnel discovered that the postlanding ventilation inlet valve was closed and the exhaust valve wasopen. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: What causes valve leakage in engines or mechanical systems? -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(fig. 14-20) caused the leakage. When the valve is installed, the forward O-ring can be rolled and damaged when it passes the manifold port. In the other two valves, the cause was not identified and was assumed to be contamination. - -The production tolerances of the valve and bore were examined to determine if a tolerance buildup problem existed. The manufacturer's specification to which the valve was designed requires that the O-ring be subjected to a compression of between 0.01l5 and 0.0225 inch, whereas the 0-ring supplier recommends between 0.0ll and 0.017 inch. The added compression allowed in the valve design would aggravate the tendancy for the O-ring to roll during valve .assembly. - - - -Figure l4-20.- Ascent stage tank shutoff valve:. ------- -Result 2: -supply valve will be redesigned to isolate polytetrafluoroethylenecoated wires from the oxygen. Warning systems at the Mission Control Center will be modified to provide more immediate and visible warnings of anomalies in all systems. - -A more thorough discussion of this anomaly is presented in reference l. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.2 Postlanding Vent Valve Malfunction - -During postlanding activities, recovery personnel discovered that the postlanding ventilation inlet valve was closed and the exhaust valve wasopen. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:121 - ๐Ÿ” Search Query: valve leakage causes -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_tool_calls:124 - โ„น๏ธ Information: Result 1: -(fig. 14-20) caused the leakage. When the valve is installed, the forward O-ring can be rolled and damaged when it passes the manifold port. In the other two valves, the cause was not identified and was assumed to be contamination. - -The production tolerances of the valve and bore were examined to determine if a tolerance buildup problem existed. The manufacturer's specification to which the valve was designed requires that the O-ring be subjected to a compression of between 0.01l5 and 0.0225 inch, whereas the 0-ring supplier recommends between 0.0ll and 0.017 inch. The added compression allowed in the valve design would aggravate the tendancy for the O-ring to roll during valve .assembly. - - - -Figure l4-20.- Ascent stage tank shutoff valve:. ------- -Result 2: -supply valve will be redesigned to isolate polytetrafluoroethylenecoated wires from the oxygen. Warning systems at the Mission Control Center will be modified to provide more immediate and visible warnings of anomalies in all systems. - -A more thorough discussion of this anomaly is presented in reference l. - -This anomaly is closed. - -14.1.2 Postlanding Vent Valve Malfunction - -During postlanding activities, recovery personnel discovered that the postlanding ventilation inlet valve was closed and the exhaust valve wasopen. ------- - -2025-04-09 at 02:21:21 | INFO | src.agent:run_agent_generations:76 - Generating responses for 5 prompts +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:b985fb977cbc98014ef383dc7cb17c4f01ad103035054e9e0be656e020db9629 +size 21436063