Documents / Official release

Gemini 5 Technical Debriefing, Part II, 1965

National Aeronautics and Space Administration · 1965 · 325 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is a preliminary Part II transcript of the Gemini 5 (GT-5) flight crew debriefing, prepared by the Spacecraft Operations Branch of NASA's Flight Crew Support Division and dated September 2, 1965. It records astronauts Cooper and Conrad at the Crew Quarters, Cape Kennedy. They discuss how the spacecraft systems worked, including the platform and the OAMS thruster failures. The transcript also covers operational checks, visual sightings, experiments, training, premission planning, and medical aspects. It was originally classified Confidential.

From the source:Release of 2026-06-12 Incident: August 30 - September 2, 1965, Cape Kennedy, Florida. This document is a preliminary transcript (Part II) derived from voice recordings of the Gemini 5 flight crew technical debriefing. NASA conducted this debriefing between August 30, 1965, and September 2, 1965, at the Crew Quarters, Cape Kennedy, Florida. Astronauts L. Gordon Cooper and Charles “Pete” Conrad described observing debris and “snow” and “all sorts of glittering pieces of this, that and the other thing” in the “Visual Sightings” section of the document (pages 157-220).

  • p. 5 …257 MISSION CONTROL 13. l GO/NO GO ••. . ... •. ....... ... ... . . . . ...... •• •. •• • ... . 261 13. 2 FLA and CLA Updates .. .. .... ... ... ....... . .. ... .. . .. 261…
  • p. 275 I Conrad We didn't always agree with Mission Control. One example--! would have l oved…
  • p. 276 …Anything else on the fuel cells , batteries, or mission control? Conrad No . 13 . 4 F'light…
  • p. 277 …Cooper I do to , but we are talking here about flight plan changes in mission controlling…
  • p. 278 …Mission Control for syst ems . I think the biggest handle you have on systems is right…
280
similar contr ol torques on the GMS to Eee what
kind of off - sets it would take before contr ol
problems are encountered. I don ' t belj eve that
you would actually set one of the rockeits off
enough to bother you. Possibly, you could
since it is not a straightline functi on.
Cooper We had had adequate amount of reentry ·;raining.
If we ' d had a thousand hours more we would not have
done anything differently than we did.
Conrad The reent ry in the simul a tor and the roentry •
in flight up to a point went right down the
line , I would say to slightly after guidance
initiate . Then, the ball angles were ~xtremely
steep in flight in comparison to the h·ainer. I
would very much like to go back and ta«e a look at
this on the t rainer while it is fresh in my mind.
I always use the horizon for roll reference in addi
tion to the r oll bug. The horizon di sappeared too
soon on our reentry. We were looking at all white
on the ball there for a long t ime.
Cooper We pitched on up pretty good.
Conrad Yes, we trimmed out at an awful high angle. The
stagnation point on the spacecraft inc.icated we were

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 325 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.