Documents / Official release

Preliminary Gemini 4 Crew Debriefing, Part I, 1965

National Aeronautics and Space Administration · 1965-06-09 · 340 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is a preliminary transcript of Part I of the Gemini 4 (GT-4) flight crew debriefing. The Spacecraft Operations Branch of NASA's Flight Crew Support Division prepared it on June 16, 1965, from recordings of the debriefing held aboard the USS Wasp on June 9, 1965. In it, astronauts McDivitt and White describe the mission from an operational viewpoint, covering countdown, powered flight, insertion, orbital operations, reentry, landing and recovery. According to the preface, visual sightings were left for a later part.

From the source:Release of 2026-06-12 Incident: 6/9/65, North Atlantic Ocean. This document is a preliminary transcript (Part I) derived from voice recordings of the Gemini 4 flight crew debriefing taken aboard the recovery ship, USS Wasp, on June 9, 1965. Astronaut Ed White recounts seeing “sparkles” during the flight.

  • p. 264 …We performed the P~e r etro Checklist well in advance of when it was supposed…
  • p. 267 …I set the event timer up well in advance of Carnarvon . At Carnarvon, I got the…
  • p. 273 …So we went through what we could in advance of T -5. The things we couldn…
  • p. 278 …You punched the SEP OAMS. We heard the bang. He followed wit h a SEP ELECTRIC…
  • p. 279 …advance. " So , I armed retro squibs , and we discussed whether or not to punch off the…
268
other hand , it didn't seem to make the space
craft roll either. Then I turned that ring off
and went over and ddd it on the other ring.
Identically the same thing happened . I thought
I might have trouble with the roll -gyro . I
turmid the roll gyro to SECONDARY . That didn 't
seem to make any difference . We went back to
PRIMARY . I remember commenting at that time
that the RCS was a lot looser in control than
the OAMS. It seemed to me that the OAMS held
the spacecraft attitude better. It seemed like
it controlled to a rate deadband that was
smaller than the RCS deadband . I don't know
why you're using the same gyros and the same
electronics . The only thing that could be
different would be the attitude drivers on the
RCS might be activiating slower than they are
in the OAMS. It seemed like the rates were
such a--seems like there must be a lag in the
whole system. It seemed like the deadband in
the RCS was twice what it was in the OAMS . It
operated properly. There's so much difference
between looking at that ball on firing retros
~N-FIE>ENl~L

Cases discussed

About this file

Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 340 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.