apollo 13 creative problem solving

The Mars Generation®

BUILDING A STRONGER TOMORROW

How Creativity Saved the Crew of Apollo 13

April 11, 2021 By Abigail Harrison 4 Comments

This month, we celebrate the 51st anniversary of the Apollo 13 mission. This mission was supposed to make history as the third to land on the Moon, but instead, it left a much greater impact. When an oxygen tank failed, it was up to NASA and Apollo’s three-person crew to improvise a solution to get everyone home safe. This mission demonstrated that even in the face of danger, when people work together, they can accomplish incredible things.

As I wrote in Chapter Seven of my book, Dream Big!: How to Reach for Your Stars , “One of the most unifying human qualities is creativity.” It was creativity that brought people from all around the world together to save the crew of Apollo 13. Their teamwork showed what humanity can achieve when we work together towards a common goal, and the lessons learned from this mission taught people the power of innovation. Keep reading to learn more about the power of creativity and how it brought the crew of Apollo 13 home safely!

Apollo 13 mission emblem Image credit: NASA

Apollo 13: The Mission

Apollo 13 is one of the most well-known space missions in history. It was the seventh crewed Apollo mission and was commanded by Jim Lovell . Lovell served alongside command module pilot Jack Swigert and Apollo Lunar Module pilot Fred Haise . While Lovell was a veteran astronaut, Apollo 13 was the first mission for Swigert and Haise, and it sure put all their training to the test!

NASA’s Apollo Program

NASA’s Apollo program began in 1961 and was dedicated to landing the first humans on the Moon. It was the United States’ third human spaceflight program, preceded by Project Mercury and Project Gemini . Project Mercury capsules could carry one crew member, Project Gemini’s could carry two, and the Apollo spacecraft could carry three.

The Apollo spacecraft consisted of three main parts:

• The command module, which carried the astronauts from launch to landing.
• The service module which supported this Command Module and contained a service propulsion engine and a fuel cell power generation system.
• The Apollo Lunar Module, which was designed to land on the lunar surface with two astronauts and then return them back to the command module after they completed their mission.

In total, there were seventeen Apollo missions, and ultimately, twelve astronauts stepped foot on the Moon . These missions were momentous in space exploration and each made history in their own right. However, these accomplishments didn’t come without trial, error, and hard work, and they wouldn’t be possible without the remarkable team rallying behind them.

The Mission of Apollo 13

Before Apollo 13, there were seven crewed Apollo missions. Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 were the first and second to land on the Moon, and Apollo 13 was meant to be the third.

On the lunar surface, Apollo 13 was set to conduct numerous experiments to study the composition of the Moon.

After months of testing and preparation, the mission launched on April 11, 1970, from the John F Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The command, service, and lunar modules were carried on board a Saturn V rocket. The Command and Service Module was nicknamed Odyssey and the Apollo Lunar Module was nicknamed Aquarius . These spacecraft carried Jim Lovell, John Swigert, and Fred Haise on a mission meant to last four days. But after technical failure two days in, the mission went on to be much longer.

Disaster Strikes Apollo 13

“Houston, we’ve had a problem.”

These famous words were uttered by Jim Lovell as he reported an explosion in the spacecraft to NASA. The second oxygen tank had blown up, and as a result, the regular supply of oxygen, water, and electricity were shut down. Odyssey, where the astronauts were living, was leaking oxygen and losing fuel cells at a rapid pace as the spacecraft flew farther and farther from Earth.

Just minutes before, Lovell had been conducting a routine task in which he turned on the fans in the fuel and oxygen tanks. This was meant to stir the oxygen to avoid it separating into layers. Unknown to the astronauts, inside the second oxygen tank, there was a damaged wire . When the fans were turned on, the wire caused a spark and started a fire. Soon after, the tank exploded and severely damaged other equipment in the area.

Apollo 13: Creative Thinking Saves the Day

When disaster struck Apollo 13, the crew found themselves trapped 200,000 miles away from Earth. The worst was feared as NASA faced a crisis they had never dealt with before. Scientists from around the world needed to come together and think creatively in order to bring the astronauts back home safely.

The Problems

The explosion aboard the spacecraft presented numerous problems. The crew now faced a severe shortage of oxygen, water, electricity, and light. Temperatures dropped drastically, hitting a low of roughly 38 °F, and food became inedible. Oxygen vented out of the spacecraft at a rapid pace, and attitude control thrusters were damaged by the explosion and unable to stabilize the spacecraft. Life support systems were inoperable and in order to conserve resources for reentry, Command Module systems needed to be shut down. These systems helped the spacecraft operate, navigate, and support the astronauts, but the ones that were nonessential were turned off until it was time to return home.

In order to survive, the crew had to transfer to Aquarius, the Landing Module meant to land on the Moon. They moved to this part of the spacecraft quickly, around an hour after the explosion occurred. However, this spacecraft was only designed to support two men for two days and lacked a heat shield needed for reentry. Scientists and engineers needed to figure out how to solve each of these problems and conserve limited and damaged resources.

The Solution

The first problem NASA teams needed to work out was what flight path the astronauts could take home. With limited supplies, conserving time was of utmost importance. However, taking a shorter path was a riskier approach, and no one wanted to take any chances. Due to this, mission control decided to guide the spacecraft on a longer route – traveling around the Moon before heading back to Earth – and they came up with creative ways to conserve supplies.

This new flight path would take four days. For this duration, the astronauts transferred to stay in Aquarius, which scientists reconfigured to support the three of them. One system they created was a “mail box.”

This arrangement took lithium hydroxide canisters from the Command Module to get rid of carbon dioxide from the Landing Module. This “mail box” was made solely out of a plastic bag, a spacesuit hose, cardstock, and duct tape and successfully kept carbon dioxide levels down for the duration of the flight.

To deal with issues of food and water, the crew had to ration what they consumed. Each astronaut was limited to six ounces of water per day (that’s about half a standard plastic water bottle!), and they lost a total of 31 pounds during their mission. Their intake was strictly monitored because not only did the astronauts need water, but the spacecraft did as well. Water helps cool machinery down and prevents any further damage caused by heat exposure.

The temperature in the spacecraft, which dropped to 38℉, was also an issue. Lovell and Haise put on the boots they were supposed to wear when they walked on the Moon. Swigert didn’t have a pair (because he was never supposed to walk outside the spacecraft) so instead, he had to put on extra clothing to keep warm.

While conditions were rough, everyone came together to make sure the astronauts made it back home alive. NASA teams worked round the clock to improvise solutions to help the crew stay safe during their four-day journey home, and ultimately, they were successful. On April 17, the astronauts splashed down in the South Pacific Ocean. They were successfully picked up by American ships, but two ships from the Soviet Union were also present at the site in case more help was needed. Haise suffered from a kidney and urinary tract infection, but the crew had otherwise made it back home unharmed.

Apollo 13: The Legacy

What could have been a terrible failure turned into an important moment in history. Apollo 13 demonstrated the power of humanity and how, when great minds come together, people can accomplish extraordinary things. The lessons we learned from Apollo 13 have changed both the space industry and the world of science.

Public Response

When the astronauts began their descent back to Earth, countries around the world were ready to pick them up. Soviet Union ships were at the landing area ready to offer assistance, and multiple other countries offered resources as well, including France, Uruguay, and Burundi. Years prior, many of these countries had signed the International Agreement for the Safe Return of Astronauts , which said they would take any and all needed steps to rescue astronauts in distress. This agreement exemplified the power of international collaboration.

Tens of millions of people everywhere watched Apollo 13’s splashdown, united in their concern for the crew As Jack Gould, a reporter for the New York Times , put it:

“The venture, which came so close to tragic disaster, in all probability united the world in mutual concern more fully than another successful landing on the moon would have.”

Change in Mission Design

While this mission was a close call, the experience helped NASA make improvements to their spacecraft and ultimately learn. For subsequent Apollo missions, oxygen tanks were redesigned, thermostats were modified, and stirring fans were removed. Emergency water and batteries were added to the Command Module, and another oxygen tank was added so that one would never go below half full. This third tank was set up so that it could be isolated from fuel cells and the other oxygen tanks if an emergency arose. Furthermore, all electrical wiring was upgraded to be lined with stainless steel and monitoring systems were changed to detect and alert the crew of anomalies sooner.

The Power of Space Exploration

As evident with Apollo 13, space exploration has the power to bring the world together. Scientists and engineers everywhere gave their all to help rescue the three stranded astronauts. In their efforts, they developed innovations and technologies that revolutionized spaceflight. The creative solutions they came up with have assisted people everywhere, not just astronauts, and have had lasting impacts on our lives.

Apollo 13 demonstrated the power of teamwork as people achieved things that had never been done before. While the mission didn’t fulfill its intended goal, it was by no means a failure. Without the lessons we learned from Apollo 13, we would not be able to achieve the things we have today.

The Power of Creativity

Apollo 13 showed us just how powerful creativity is. Creativity can turn failures into extraordinary successes, but none of that would be possible without people’s hard work and dedication. To learn more about the importance of creativity in achieving your goals, check out my new book, Dream Big!: How to Reach For Your Stars . Inside, I share my advice for chasing after your dreams, developing your creativity, and discuss important habits to develop that’ll help you get there.

April 28, 2021 at 3:05 pm

This was an interesting and knowledgeable thing to know about. Admire the great brains. Thank you Mars Generation for sharing this informative post.

… [Trackback]

[…] Informations on that Topic: themarsgeneration.org/how-creativity-saved-the-crew-of-apollo-13/ […]

[…] After all, mistakes are how we learn and grow. For instance, after technical failures on the Apollo 13 mission, scientists redesigned oxygen tanks, monitoring systems, and thermostats. They also added emergency […]

[…] taken to limit technical errors, failures do still happen. In 1970, an explosion occurred on the Apollo 13 spacecraft, causing the three crew members to evacuate to a landing module only meant to hold two of them. A […]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Jim Lovell, Jack Swigert, and Fred Haise were meant to be the third Apollo crew to journey to the Moon on a lunar landing mission. On April 11, 1970, the Apollo 13 astronauts launched from Kennedy Space Center. However, disaster struck before the crew reached their destination: An explosion on one of the service module’s oxygen tanks caused damage to the spacecraft. The mission to get to the Moon quickly turned into a challenge to return safely back to Earth. Lovell, Swigert, and Haise piled into the lunar module (LM), a craft built for two, aborted the lunar landing, and began the necessary steps to return home.

While oxygen supplies were sufficient for three, the carbon dioxide produced by the astronauts exceeded the capacity of the onboard LM lithium hydroxide filters. The filters in the lunar module and the command module (CM) were not interchangeable due to differences in shape, so Mission Control engineers back in Houston had to get creative to use the CM filters with the system on the LM, using only materials the astronauts had available to them in the spacecraft.

Deke Slayton demonstrates the modified LiOH canister to Mission Control during the Apollo 13 mission. (NASA image S70-35013)

Using a clever solution of a plastic bag, cardstock, a spacesuit hose, and that stuff that holds everything together, duct tape, the engineers in Mission Control mocked up an altered lithium hydroxide filter. The astronauts then recreated the contraption (nicknamed “the mailbox”) on the LM.  It was a massive success! The mailbox successfully coupled with the LM and kept the carbon dioxide levels down for the duration of the trip. 

Custom Image Caption

Photograph of modified LiOH canister in use on the LM (NASA image AS13-62-8929)

Photograph of Swigert and the LiOH canister on board the LM (NASA image AS12-62-9004)

To capture this great moment in NASA history, in 1975 the National Air and Space Museum commissioned a replica from the original personnel who had worked on the Apollo 13 mission.  The replica of the modified lithium hydroxide cannister is slated for display in the new Destination Moon exhibition (scheduled to open in 2022).

While this was not the original mockup created during the Apollo 13 mission (the original “mailbox” was left on the LM which was jettisoned before reentry), the artifact captures the ingenuity of the engineers and serves as an important historical “document” of the event. Therefore, like any conservation treatment, the care of the artifact was prominently at the forefront of all discussions. 

As can be imagined, such a jury-rigged piece of equipment came with its own set of conservation concerns. Gravity and time had taken its toll on this artifact. The weight of the hose combined with the failed adhesive of the duct tape caused rips in the plastic, distortions in the cardstock, misplacement of several pieces of duct tape, detachment of the hose, and deformation of the plastic bag.  Comparisons with early photographs of this artifact also revealed that the cardstock was originally more aloft and less compressed.

Before treatment; note distortion of the plastic, the failed adhesive of the duct tape, and the adhesive residues left by the tape

Before treatment; note adhesive residues and stressed plastic caused by the hose's weight

Before treatment; note tears in the plastic caused by the weight of the hose

Before treatment; note the distorted, compressed appearance of the cardstock caused by the weight of the hose

Apollo 13 lithium hydroxide canister mockup before treatment; note that the hose is removed as it was detached from the object

The aim of the conservation treatment was to bring the object to a stable and more accurate configuration. The main concerns were the shape of the cardstock and safe reattachment of the lifting duct tape and hose. Treatment commenced after a thorough documentation and approval from the curator. Numerous steps were undertaken as part of the treatment, and I will share the most important steps below.    

Repositioning of the Cardstock

The shape of the cardstock was significantly distorted and was no longer in keeping with the intent of the engineers. To accurately represent the modified cannister used during the mission, the cardstock required reshaping. Paper artifacts are often reshaped and distortions removed through the addition of water vapor, a step referred to as “controlled humidification.” However, humidification was an unfavorable options due to the limited access to the interior and the potential to create condensation and a microclimate.  Instead, a mechanical approach was undertaken through the small access hole on the bag. Using hand tools, it was determined that the cardstock was still pliable and could be repositioned into its original orientation without stressing the paper. To provide support to the cardstock and help keep its shape, a tear drop-shaped Tyvek pillowcase was inserted underneath the cardstock and filled with archival batting. The pillow provided the cardstock much needed support and reinstated the correct configuration.

Apollo 13 lithium hydroxide canister mockup after treatment; note the pillow underneath the cardstock and the reattached hose

Duct Tape Reattachment

After the pillow support was installed, the hose was reattached. The placement of the hose was guided by early photographs of the artifact and an appropriate adhesive was selected to re-adhere the original duct tape to the plastic bag. To avoid introducing organic solvents to the aging plastic bag, an aqueous-based acrylic dispersion, Lascaux 498HV, was selected. Brush applications of the adhesive were applied to the underside of the lifted duct tape and gently held in place using weights until dry. Once the hose was reattached, it was determined that the weight of the hose still had the potential to damage the artifact over time. To prevent this, the storage mount and the display mount will support the weight of the hose. 

After the treatment was complete, the artifact was representative of what was used on the Apollo 13 mission. Come check out this amazing artifact when it goes on view in 2022!

After treatment; note reattached hose and correctly positioned cardstock

After treatment; note the reattachment point of the hose

We rely on the generous support of donors, sponsors, members, and other benefactors to share the history and impact of aviation and spaceflight, educate the public, and inspire future generations.  With your help, we can continue to preserve and safeguard the world’s most comprehensive collection of artifacts representing the great achievements of flight and space exploration.

• Get Involved
• Host an Event

Thank you. You have successfully signed up for our newsletter.

Error message, sorry, there was a problem. please ensure your details are valid and try again..

• Free Timed-Entry Passes Required
• Terms of Use

Apollo 13 creativity: in-the-box innovation

Affiliation.

• 1 Cultural Studies & Analysis, Philadelphia, PA 19147, USA.
• PMID: 11541760
• DOI: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.1997.tb00801.x

A study of the Apollo 13 mission, based on the themes showcased in the acclaimed 1995 film, reveals the grace under pressure that is the condition of optimal creativity. "Apollo 13 Creativity" is a cultural and creative problem-solving appreciation of the thinking style that made the Apollo mission succeed: creativity under severe limitations. Although creativity is often considered a "luxury good," of concern mainly for personal enrichment, the arts, and performance improvement, in life-or-death situations it is the critical pathway not only to success but to survival. In this case. the original plan for a moon landing had to be transformed within a matter of hours into a return to earth. By precluding failure as an option at the outset, both space and ground crews were forced to adopt a new perspective on their resources and options to solve for a successful landing. This now-classic problem provides a range of principles for creative practice and motivation applicable in any situation. The extreme situation makes these points dramatically.

• Aerospace Medicine
• Astronauts / psychology*
• Creativity*
• Equipment Failure
• Group Processes
• Problem Solving*
• Space Flight / instrumentation
• Space Flight / organization & administration*
• Spacecraft / instrumentation
• United States
• United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration
• Weightlessness*

• 888 744 9992

• Our Leadership
• Services Overview
• Program Management
• Enterprise Architecture
• Systems Engineering
• Design Thinking
• Enterprise UI Design
• UNANET/Outsourced Accounting
• Human Resources Services
• Tax Services
• CMS Beneficiary Protection Case
• CMS ISPG ACT
• DHA AHLTA Sustainment
• DHA AHLTA Integration
• DHA MHS Genesis
• ONC FHA PMO
• ONC PMAL Project
• FHIR® Terminology for VSAC
• FHIR® Server for VHDR
• Register- FHIR® for Execs (ACT-IAC)
• " onclick="window.open(this.href,'win2','status=no,toolbar=no,scrollbars=yes,titlebar=no,menubar=no,resizable=yes,width=640,height=480,directories=no,location=no'); return false;" rel="nofollow"> Print

How Design Thinking Saved the Apollo 13 Astronauts

“ Houston, we’ve had a problem .” – Jim Lovell

Apollo 13 was supposed to be NASA's third moon-landing mission. Instead, in an instant, the spacecraft pivoted from a moon-bound mission to a crippled vessel. The spaceflight stands today as a demonstration of NASA Design Thinking, and vividly illustrates the dangers of working in space.

On April 10, 1970, the Apollo 13 astronauts launched for the moon.  After the successful moon landing of Apollo 11, many Americans had started to regard space travel as routine. Three astronauts were about to make another trip within a capsule not much larger than the interior of a VW Beetle.  As the Apollo crew closed in on the moon, an oxygen tank exploded forcing the three-man crew to abort their mission, power down the command module, and move into the lunar module for the journey home. All three men "abandoned" the command module (CM) for the close confines of the lunar module (LM). The LM was intended for two men (Lovell and Haise) to use in their landing on the lunar surface and then their return to the command module. It wasn’t designed or built to be used extensively by three men, but Apollo 13’s crew had no other options

For the next four days, the world was transfixed as the crew of Apollo 13—Jim Lovell, Fred Haise, and Jack Swigert fought to stay alive in the cold vacuum of space. The world looked to the NASA engineers and flight controllers to come up with a miracle, and fast.

Planning for an Emergency NASA had been planning for an emergency like this for decades. Gene Krantz, NASA flight director, had assumed there would eventually be an unforeseen emergency and team members would need to rely on a thinking strategy to solve problems that were impossible to predict. Gene worked very hard to ensure the approved budget included exact replica spacecraft simulators and full-scale mockups here on Earth. Ground-based engineers, scientists, and standby pilots would need to have access to an exact replica of Apollo spacecraft systems, clothing, tools, and objects the astronauts had in space. With these tools, NASA team members could think outside the box and initiate Design Thinking to work towards creative problem solving as needed.

What is Design Thinking? At the heart of Design Thinking is the intention to improve products by analyzing and understanding how users interact with products and investigating the real-world conditions in which they operate. Team members employing Design Thinking ask significant questions and challenge assumptions.

Design Thinking is a problem-solving approach which assesses known aspects of a problem as well as ambiguous of peripheral factors that may contribute to the conditions to a problem. This contrasts with the Scientific Method where the concrete and known aspects are tested to arrive at a solution Had the astronauts tried this approach, they would most likely would have blacked out as they tested their gauges to see of they were indeed reading correct CO 2 levels.

Design Thinking is an iterative process in which knowledge is constantly being questioned and acquired so it can help us redefine a problem to identify alternative strategies and solutions that might not be instantly apparent with our initial level of understanding.

DESIGN THINKING PROCESS

Empathize The first step is to pain an understanding of the problem you are trying to solve. Empathy is crucial to human-centered design process and allows design thinkers to set aside their own assumptions and gain insight into the user and their needs. In the movie Apollo 13, Gary Sinise (Ken Mattingly) is placed inside the scale model of the Apollo 13 spacecraft to actually BE an astronaut in peril, cold, no sleep, and communicating with ground-based team members through a microphone and speakers. This is an essential element. He was experiencing the same issues the astronauts were experiencing on the far side of the moon.

Define During the Define stage, team members pull together the information you have created and gathered during the Empathize stage. Rather than define the problem as We need to… a much better way would be “The Apollo 13 astronauts need to…” This stage is a focus on solving the problem for the end user. Gene Krantz, NASA Flight director, made sure the engineers and scientists were solving the astronaut’s problem, not the problem being worked on within the simulator on Earth. In fact, there is an actual problem statement and directive given to the team. Defining a problem for real people ensures that empathy, gathered in step 1, is at the very top of solving the problem.

The Lunar Module had to be used as a lifeboat for all three astronauts for several days, but it was only built for two people for1.5 days. The more air the crew breathed, the higher the CO 2 levels raised. Eventually, the entire crew would be lost due to high levels of CO 2 .

The problem statement eventually boiled down to: How do we connect a square CO 2 air filter to a round CO 2 air filter using the tools we currently have on the spacecraft to get the CO2 levels down to safe range before our astronauts black out and die from high levels of CO 2 ?

Ideate During the third stage of the Design Thinking process, team members begin to start generating ideas. With understanding the users’ needs and a human centered Problem Statement in place, it’s time to look at alternative ways to solve the problem. Brainstorming sessions erupted immediately for the Apollo 13 team as engineers and scientists bounced ideas off one another.

Prototype The design team is now tasked with making a quick prototype of the solution. Prototypes are often tested and shared within the internal team with the aim to provide the best possible solution for each of the problems identified during the first three stages. The solutions are implemented into the prototype and the team will be accepted, improved, re-examined, or rejected based on the users’ experiences.

The Apollo 13 ground-based crew had access to everything the astronauts had. The prototype was based on real objects including creative things like socks, bungee cords, and the cover sheet of the flight manual. A working prototype was tested internally and the procedure for making the prototype was relayed to the internal crew for testing.

TEST Designers or evaluators rigorously test the complete product using the best solutions identified during the prototyping phase. This is often an iterative process, and the results often redefine one or more problems the product was intended for. The testing phase is an opportunity for constant improvement and team members can dive deep to learn more about some of periphery elements that may have initiated the problem.

The NASA team had done some internal tests on the air scrubber prototype, but they were running out of time. The engineering team hand-delivered a working prototype and a procedure list to the flight operations team as the astronauts were on the verge of passing out. Had they waited for exhaustive internal testing the outcome of the Apollo 13 would have been much different. The best tests are initiated with real users very early on in the prototyping process to solve problems quickly and to anticipate new problems and iterate as needed. In this case, the speed of the process literally meant life or death.

The Take Away

Solving complex problems, we face isn’t rocket science. In fact, many of the problems can be solved The IRIS team has embraced a Design Thinking approach to solve problems with next generation health care systems.

IRIS Releases FHIRView™, for Easier Access to Health IT Standards

IRIS Wins GSA Professional Services Schedule Contract

IRIS Health Solutions, LLC Wins GSA IT-70 Schedule Contract

Quick Links

Press Inquiries

Privacy Policy

Capabilities Statement

The @DavidGeurin Blog

Education - Leadership - Innovation

• Future Driven Book
• Facebook Page
• My Author Page

Monday, June 9, 2014

What apollo 13 can teach us about project-based, collaborative learning.

No comments:

Post a comment.

College of Engineering

Working out the problems of apollo 13.

50 years later, two Georgia Tech engineering alumni reflect on their experience in Apollo 13’s mission control

 “Houston we’ve had a problem” – we all know those infamous words that were transmitted from the crew of Apollo 13 back to mission control at 02:07:55:35 into the flight that took off on April 11, 1970. The mission that was later called a “successful failure” had captured the attention of the entire world, as three astronauts were suddenly in a critical state of danger.  Something had gone terribly wrong onboard the spacecraft and suddenly the mission objective quickly changed from landing on the moon for scientific exploration to finding a way to get these astronauts home safely to Earth.

There was much uncertainty.  At approximately 56 hours into the mission on their way to the moon, the crew reported a “pretty large bang” after a routine stir of an oxygen tank followed by a caution/warning alarm.  It seemed that the command service module was losing power and oxygen fast but there was no determined reason why.  It was very clear though after monitoring the situation for a short time that the command service module was severely damaged and out of commission.  Fortunately, the crew had already docked to the lunar module before the accident occurred so it was determined that the crew would have to move into the lunar module and use it as a lifeboat to get the majority of the way back home. 

We recently talked to two flight controllers who were among the mission control team in Houston tasked with finding a way to get these astronauts home.  Spencer Gardner graduated from Georgia Tech with an aerospace engineering degree in 1967 and joined NASA soon after.  He was a Flight Activity Officer (FAO) for the Apollo missions which involved working on on-board flight plans, crew checklists, and being responsible for the data file that was carried on-board by the crew.  Jack Knight graduated from Georgia Tech with an electrical engineering degree in 1965. He was a Telemetry, Electrical, EVA Mobility Unit (TELMU) officer on all of the Apollo missions and monitored the lunar module electrical and environmental systems.

Gardner: “I was supposed to work the lunar descent phase of the mission and I had gone off shift probably eight or 10 hours before the accident happened.  I was sitting at home watching television when a report came out about an issue with the spacecraft.  So, I called my backroom and asked what was going on, and the FAO on duty said, ‘We’re not going to land and you better get some sleep because you guys are going to have a hard time trying to re-work what’s going to happen.’ So, I immediately crawl into bed and about 30 minutes later I get a phone call that says, ‘This is much more serious, and you better get over here.’ Fortunately, I lived right across the street from the center and was able to join the meeting that Gene Kranz had in the backroom with all those folks he pulled together to try to work the problem.”

Knight: “For me the most stressful time is when you have a lot of uncertainty. And a lot of the uncertainty happened very early.”

Gardner: “The most stressful time for me was when I first walked into mission control and all that was going on and nobody really knew what the heck was happening for sure.  But when you start working the problem and pull things together, it becomes less and less stressful because you’re now concentrating on the problem.  We were trained to deal with that pressure and stress and concentrate on working the problem that was presented.”

After flight director Gene Kranz gathered everyone together for a meeting, it was determined that the best option was to have the spacecraft continue its journey to orbit the moon, then make a free-return trajectory back to earth minimizing the use of power onboard.  A propulsion burn would be needed though on the way back to speed the return to Earth by 10 hours in order to splash down in the Pacific Ocean rather than the Indian Ocean.

Jack Knight was scheduled to work his post at mission control once the lunar module was powered up and being used for the lunar landing, however, circumstances had drastically changed.  The lunar module would now be the living quarters and control center of the spacecraft for most of the remainder of the mission.  The crew had to work fast to transfer guidance data from the command module to the lunar module and shut down the command module to leave enough power for reentry to Earth later.

Knight: “We had two basic problems in my systems area with respect to the lunar module.  The first problem was carbon dioxide removal.  The second problem was how long was it going to take because we had limited battery power and water inside the lunar module. Early on until we got around the moon, the flight directors really needed to keep the lunar module at a fairly high-power mode to maintain the knowledge of where we were in space because the command service module was down at that point. The crew had copied all the data over when the lunar module was powered up and it had to stay that way for a while.  Once we got around the moon and made a burn to speed things up, we went into a power down.  We got power down to about 300 watts, and at that point, consumable wise, they could make it.  So, if nothing else bad happened from the lunar module perspective, we could make it.  And then it was a matter of monitoring.”

Gardner: “One of the things that my group was concerned with was helping guidance have the ability to sight on the stars.  The crew used the sun in this whole process.  We had to figure out where we were and confirm what the guidance system was saying. The other thing that we were involved in was trying to set up the passive thermal control which was important because we wanted to make sure the spacecraft didn’t get heated or cooled too much on one side.  This was very difficult to do with a minimal amount of energy expenditure and without a computer after the power down.”

Knight: “After the power down, the spacecraft started to get cold.  The command module batteries had been partially depleted, so we were very nervous about when we had to power back up.  They had to delay power up as much as possible.”

An additional problem was the astronauts now had a very limited amount of drinking water onboard because of the accident that occurred in the service module.  To conserve water for the remainder of the mission, each astronaut would only drink 0.2 liters of water per day.  Astronaut Fred Haise developed a urinary tract infection during the mission probably caused by the reduced water intake and the three astronauts lost a total of 31 pounds among them by the end of the mission.

Gardner: “Drinking water was normally produced when hydrogen and oxygen were combined to make electricity for the command module.  Therefore, the astronauts would have plenty of water in a normal situation.  But in this case, the water was gone, and the only source of water was the limited supply in the lunar module.”

Knight: “I think people knew immediately that the Co2 was going to be a problem – but it wasn’t a ‘this minute’ problem.  It was going to be a problem when you ran out of the lithium hydroxide cartridges in the lunar module.  But they had time to work on that.  They had to figure out how can we take these square cartridges from the command module and run air through them in the lunar module.”

After a mid-course correction burn was completed manually and the CO2 problem had been solved, the crew was now approaching Earth and needed to power up the command module again to prepare for re-entry.  This meant the command module had to separate from the lunar module (the lifeboat spacecraft) and the service module (where the technical failure had occurred).  When the command module separated from the service module, the crew could see through the window that an entire panel had been blown off the service module. It was clear that a large explosion and much damage had occurred which brought another question that was out of everyone’s control: Was the heat shield damaged?

Knight: “The entry corridor is, if I remember correctly, 40 miles wide and 10 miles high at a certain altitude.  And you need to be in that entry corridor to have them come down at the right place at the right time, and not either skip our or burn up.  So, until they came out of blackout, I’m sitting there with my fingers crossed – I’m sure everybody else was too.”

Blackout took roughly two minutes longer than normal which added to the stress of those watching on Earth, but suddenly the most “beautiful” sight appeared in the sky. Three large parachutes had opened, slowly carrying down the command module to the Pacific Ocean, just 3.5 nautical miles from a rescue aircraft carrier - they had made it safely back to Earth.

Gardner:   “You had spacecraft that were not supposed to be together, controlled by the lunar module which was not supposed to control the stack, and you’re doing not only that long burn but you’re doing this mid-course correction that was essentially done manually which was unlike anything the crew had ever practiced.  And, the crew had to essentially learn to do these things as they were doing them.”

After Apollo 13, Jack Knight continued on with NASA working on the remaining Apollo missions, Skylab, ASTP, and shuttle missions until he retired in 2006.  Spencer Gardner worked in mission control for the remaining Apollo missions other than 17 and eventually became a lawyer and still practices today.

The College of Engineering in Space

A Legacy Not Forgotten

It Came From Outer Space with Brian Gunter

About Aerospace Engineering

Georgia Tech's Prox-1 Satellite Journey

Feel Good Teaching

Brain-busting work disguised as fun

Apollo 13: The Ultimate STEM Challenge

April 9, 2017 by feelgoodteaching Filed Under: Uncategorized

As I look back on my life, there were several seminal moments that lead to me becoming completely obsessed with the power of STEM Challenges. We’re nearing the 47th anniversary of one of those moments. While I wasn’t actually alive for the Apollo 13 mission (launched April 11, 1970), the 1995 movie that dramatized it made an impact that would inform the kind of teacher I became.

The Apollo 13 mission shows how seemingly insurmountable obstacles can be overcome with scientific reasoning and problem solving. Specifically, the carbon dioxide filter fix shows why STEM Challenges are so much more than just “fun.”

I didn’t really know anything about the mission before the movie, so it left a huge impression on me — all the problems the crew encountered, all the odds stacked against them at every turn … problem after problem, yet the crew returned home safely on April 17, 1970, due to the power of scientific reasoning and resilient, determined action! Seriously, you can say all you want for survival instinct, but I think a lot of people would have cracked under the pressure.

It’s been over twenty years since the film came out, but if you’ve seen the movie, you already know the scene I’m going to discuss. It should come as no surprise because it was the ultimate, extremely high-stakes, STEM Challenge!

The Problem:

Carbon dioxide was reaching dangerous levels in the cabin. The crew had filters, but they were for another part of the ship and were the wrong shape. Thus, NASA engineers were presented with one of the most dramatic STEM Challenges ever.

How the Movie Compares to Real Life …

Incredible! This scene gives me chills every time. Isn’t it awesome — in the truest sense of the word — that this group of engineers saved the lives of the crew with their design?! Imagine the pressure they must have felt, crunched for time and with such limited materials to make it work! But they didn’t give up. They made it work!

This story is so inspiring to share with students! Sure, most STEM Challenges don’t require one to save lives in a uber-dramatic fashion, yet practicing thinking creatively and flexibly to solve problems ultimately prepares you for such unlikely “impossible” situations.

STEM Challenges are fun, but they are so much more than that! The story of the Apollo 13 mission illustrates that point perfectly, don’t you think?

Don’t forget, we’re also coming up on Earth Day , so don’t forget to plan a STEM Challenge to mark the day! 🙂

April 9, 2017 at 2:36 pm

I've always loved astronomy and this post and awesome lesson is so enticing. When I was a kid I used to play outer space with my friends.lol… Stem challenges are such a great hands on learning activity.

April 10, 2017 at 2:49 am

Apollo 13 is always one of my favorite movies to show problem solving & engineering! You know my classes LOVE all your STEM challenges! Keep creating!

April 11, 2017 at 1:44 am

Thanks, Kathie! I love seeing the pics you post of your students' designs!

April 16, 2017 at 4:55 pm

What a great way to bring the challenge to life with the movie! Love it.

April 20, 2017 at 3:40 pm

W.O.W. This was an amazing lesson and journey.I love that you are taking a REAL historical problem to solve in your STEM lesson!

April 25, 2017 at 1:57 pm

I love incorporating this major event into the classroom. What a perfect hook!

• Easy STEM Activities in 30 Minutes or Less
• 5 Amazing Apple STEM Activities for Back to School STEM, Fall STEM, Apple Week STEM or Anytime STEM!
• Back-to-School Ice Breaker
• Top 10 Reasons to Start the School Year with STEM Challenges