Talk:Apollo Lunar Module

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Spaceflight (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Correction at "Masses" in Description[edit]

It should be: "Total at beginning of Descent" or "mission payload", "total at end of descent", and "total at ascent" the "total" in the Mass description its disturbing...

Productions Flights: Perilune[edit]

This article currently says:

"This meant that the complete spacecraft, including the CSM, orbited the Moon with a 9.1-nautical-mile (16.9 km) perilune, enabling the LM to begin its powered descent from that altitude with a full load of descent stage fuel, leaving more reserve fuel for the final approach. The CSM would then raise its perilune back to the normal 9.1 nautical miles (16.9 km).[10]".

It appears that both the powered descent altitude perilune and the CSM's "normal" orbital perilune should not both be 9.1 nautical miles. At least one of these must be wrong. Also, there should be some standard of hyphenating or not hyphenating "9.1 nautical miles".

Bugsi (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bugsi (talkcontribs) 13:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for catching my mistake; the normal perilune was around 60 nautical miles. As for hyphenation, the standard is built into the Template:Convert: "9.1-nautical-mile" is used as an adjective, so the hyphen is used to separate the number and the unit. (Someone apparently thought the appropriate style was also to insert the hyphen between words of a compound unit, "nautical-mile".) JustinTime55 (talk) 15:12, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

"The Lunar Module was the first, and to date only, manned spacecraft to operate exclusively in the airless vacuum of space.[edit]

The International Space Station is engineered to work in the vacuum of space. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewota (talkcontribs) 04:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
I guess that depends on one's definition of spacecraft, and whether or not it includes space stations. Space stations obviously don't survive landing on moons or planets, and certainly Skylab didn't. - BilCat (talk) 04:44, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
I wouldn't normally think of Skylab or ISS as a spacecraft, but there's an argument that could be made: they do operate entirely in vacuum & weren't intended to re-enter. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 20:48, 26 December 2015 (UTC)