Why was Gemini VIII terminated after recovering from the OAMS thruster failure?Was quarantine continued after Apollo 11?Why did the rendezvous attempt fail on Gemini 4?What was mylar used for on the Apollo Command Module space craft? Why is it gold after returning from space?Why didn't Gemini, Apollo or STS use solar panels?Why were ejection seats used in Project Gemini instead of a tower escape system?Where can I find flight manuals (not familiarization manuals) from Project Gemini?Was the Saturn V only going at 1.1km/s after the first stage?How were the Flight Journals of the Apollo missions originally transcribed/recorded?Why did rendezvous on Gemini 4 fail so badly?Agena docking and RCS Brakes in First Man

What does “two-bit (jerk)” mean?

Extracting the parent, leaf, and extension from a valid path

HTML folder located within IOS Image file?

Splitting polygons and dividing attribute value proportionally using ArcGIS Pro?

Is throwing dice a stochastic or a deterministic process?

Where do 5 or more U.S. counties meet in a single point?

Good introductory book to type theory?

In a series of books, what happens after the coming of age?

Is it safe to keep the GPU on 100% utilization for a very long time?

Drug Testing and Prescribed Medications

Game artist computer workstation set-up – is this overkill?

Why is there a cap on 401k contributions?

Why is the episode called "The Last of the Starks"?

shebang or not shebang

How to get the decimal part of a number in apex

In the figure, a quarter circle, a semicircle and a circle are mutually tangent inside a square of side length 2. Find the radius of the circle.

And now you see it

What does the copyright in a dissertation protect exactly?

Employee is self-centered and affects the team negatively

While drilling into kitchen wall, hit a wire - any advice?

How can I test a shell script in a "safe environment" to avoid harm to my computer?

How does "politician" work as a job/career?

If an attacker targets a creature with the Sanctuary spell cast on them, but fails the Wisdom save, can they choose not to attack anyone else?

Does restarting the SQL Services (on the machine) clear the server cache (for things like query plans and statistics)?



Why was Gemini VIII terminated after recovering from the OAMS thruster failure?


Was quarantine continued after Apollo 11?Why did the rendezvous attempt fail on Gemini 4?What was mylar used for on the Apollo Command Module space craft? Why is it gold after returning from space?Why didn't Gemini, Apollo or STS use solar panels?Why were ejection seats used in Project Gemini instead of a tower escape system?Where can I find flight manuals (not familiarization manuals) from Project Gemini?Was the Saturn V only going at 1.1km/s after the first stage?How were the Flight Journals of the Apollo missions originally transcribed/recorded?Why did rendezvous on Gemini 4 fail so badly?Agena docking and RCS Brakes in First Man













4












$begingroup$


This NASA source states that the mission was terminated after Neil Armstrong used 75% of the RCS propellent to cancel the rotation from the OAMS thruster failure. If the mission had enough RCS left to have a safe re-entry and policy was to not use the RCS until the end of the mission anyways, why did they not attempt to dock again and complete the mission?



As a second question, if they had not undocked from Agena and had used the RCS to recover anyways, would they have still terminated the mission?










share|improve this question







New contributor



kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$
















    4












    $begingroup$


    This NASA source states that the mission was terminated after Neil Armstrong used 75% of the RCS propellent to cancel the rotation from the OAMS thruster failure. If the mission had enough RCS left to have a safe re-entry and policy was to not use the RCS until the end of the mission anyways, why did they not attempt to dock again and complete the mission?



    As a second question, if they had not undocked from Agena and had used the RCS to recover anyways, would they have still terminated the mission?










    share|improve this question







    New contributor



    kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    $endgroup$














      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$


      This NASA source states that the mission was terminated after Neil Armstrong used 75% of the RCS propellent to cancel the rotation from the OAMS thruster failure. If the mission had enough RCS left to have a safe re-entry and policy was to not use the RCS until the end of the mission anyways, why did they not attempt to dock again and complete the mission?



      As a second question, if they had not undocked from Agena and had used the RCS to recover anyways, would they have still terminated the mission?










      share|improve this question







      New contributor



      kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      $endgroup$




      This NASA source states that the mission was terminated after Neil Armstrong used 75% of the RCS propellent to cancel the rotation from the OAMS thruster failure. If the mission had enough RCS left to have a safe re-entry and policy was to not use the RCS until the end of the mission anyways, why did they not attempt to dock again and complete the mission?



      As a second question, if they had not undocked from Agena and had used the RCS to recover anyways, would they have still terminated the mission?







      crewed-spaceflight apollo-program project-gemini






      share|improve this question







      New contributor



      kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.










      share|improve this question







      New contributor



      kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor



      kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.








      asked 9 hours ago









      kikjezrouskikjezrous

      1211




      1211




      New contributor



      kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




      New contributor




      kikjezrous is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          9












          $begingroup$

          I haven't been able to find the Gemini rules online. But we can infer what they stated based on comments in the Gemini VIII post flight report.




          MCC-H made the decision for early mission termination. This
          decision was based on data which showed RCS propellant remaining in
          both rings to be less than half the amount loaded. Also, both rings
          of the RCS had been activated and significant propellant had been
          used. Mission rules required termina­tion of the mission under
          these conditions.




          So the situation was:



          • Primary attitude control system failed and unusable.

          • Backup attitude control systems have been activated early and
            significant propellant has been used.

          This is what we would have called in Shuttle a "zero fault tolerant" situation. In other words, if anything else bad had happened to the RCS, the crew would have died. When the mission rules were written, they must have stated that this type of situation called for early mission termination.



          The truly interesting thing about this situation is that the flight director followed the mission rules, terminated the mission early, and it ended his career as a flight director.



          As Wayne Hale writes:




          NASA management found out about the situation after the crew was in
          the ocean. According to the legend, Hodge did not take the time to
          pick up the phone and call the Program Manager, the Center Director,
          or even his boss, the Chief of the Flight Director office. The
          situation was stable, and even though waiting around was not
          necessarily a good thing, there was no reason that a couple of hours
          delay would have significantly increased the crew risk. Upper
          management was severely out of sorts with Blue Flight because they
          were not called in to review a critical action that really could have
          waited, despite what the Flight Rules called for.



          Bottom line: John Hodge never served as Flight Director in Mission
          Control again.




          Which is why we sarcastically referred to the Flight Rules as "Flight Guidelines".



          There are only two ways to mess up in Mission Control: following the Flight Rules, or not following the Flight Rules.



          Update: Hale goes on to say




          But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all
          rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time
          that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few
          minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight
          Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line.




          Note: the linked Post Flight Mission Report is a terrific reference on this mission. Highly recommended.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 4




            $begingroup$
            Reading the second half of this is a bit painful. It's no wonder they had the later organization safety issues, with precedents like that being set. There should be no punishment for following flight safety rules to 'failsafe.'
            $endgroup$
            – Saiboogu
            9 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Agreed, (and I do not defend their actions) but management was angry because they were not informed more than because the rules were followed. Hale goes on to say "But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line."
            $endgroup$
            – Organic Marble
            8 hours ago











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "508"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );






          kikjezrous is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35975%2fwhy-was-gemini-viii-terminated-after-recovering-from-the-oams-thruster-failure%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          9












          $begingroup$

          I haven't been able to find the Gemini rules online. But we can infer what they stated based on comments in the Gemini VIII post flight report.




          MCC-H made the decision for early mission termination. This
          decision was based on data which showed RCS propellant remaining in
          both rings to be less than half the amount loaded. Also, both rings
          of the RCS had been activated and significant propellant had been
          used. Mission rules required termina­tion of the mission under
          these conditions.




          So the situation was:



          • Primary attitude control system failed and unusable.

          • Backup attitude control systems have been activated early and
            significant propellant has been used.

          This is what we would have called in Shuttle a "zero fault tolerant" situation. In other words, if anything else bad had happened to the RCS, the crew would have died. When the mission rules were written, they must have stated that this type of situation called for early mission termination.



          The truly interesting thing about this situation is that the flight director followed the mission rules, terminated the mission early, and it ended his career as a flight director.



          As Wayne Hale writes:




          NASA management found out about the situation after the crew was in
          the ocean. According to the legend, Hodge did not take the time to
          pick up the phone and call the Program Manager, the Center Director,
          or even his boss, the Chief of the Flight Director office. The
          situation was stable, and even though waiting around was not
          necessarily a good thing, there was no reason that a couple of hours
          delay would have significantly increased the crew risk. Upper
          management was severely out of sorts with Blue Flight because they
          were not called in to review a critical action that really could have
          waited, despite what the Flight Rules called for.



          Bottom line: John Hodge never served as Flight Director in Mission
          Control again.




          Which is why we sarcastically referred to the Flight Rules as "Flight Guidelines".



          There are only two ways to mess up in Mission Control: following the Flight Rules, or not following the Flight Rules.



          Update: Hale goes on to say




          But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all
          rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time
          that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few
          minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight
          Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line.




          Note: the linked Post Flight Mission Report is a terrific reference on this mission. Highly recommended.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 4




            $begingroup$
            Reading the second half of this is a bit painful. It's no wonder they had the later organization safety issues, with precedents like that being set. There should be no punishment for following flight safety rules to 'failsafe.'
            $endgroup$
            – Saiboogu
            9 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Agreed, (and I do not defend their actions) but management was angry because they were not informed more than because the rules were followed. Hale goes on to say "But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line."
            $endgroup$
            – Organic Marble
            8 hours ago















          9












          $begingroup$

          I haven't been able to find the Gemini rules online. But we can infer what they stated based on comments in the Gemini VIII post flight report.




          MCC-H made the decision for early mission termination. This
          decision was based on data which showed RCS propellant remaining in
          both rings to be less than half the amount loaded. Also, both rings
          of the RCS had been activated and significant propellant had been
          used. Mission rules required termina­tion of the mission under
          these conditions.




          So the situation was:



          • Primary attitude control system failed and unusable.

          • Backup attitude control systems have been activated early and
            significant propellant has been used.

          This is what we would have called in Shuttle a "zero fault tolerant" situation. In other words, if anything else bad had happened to the RCS, the crew would have died. When the mission rules were written, they must have stated that this type of situation called for early mission termination.



          The truly interesting thing about this situation is that the flight director followed the mission rules, terminated the mission early, and it ended his career as a flight director.



          As Wayne Hale writes:




          NASA management found out about the situation after the crew was in
          the ocean. According to the legend, Hodge did not take the time to
          pick up the phone and call the Program Manager, the Center Director,
          or even his boss, the Chief of the Flight Director office. The
          situation was stable, and even though waiting around was not
          necessarily a good thing, there was no reason that a couple of hours
          delay would have significantly increased the crew risk. Upper
          management was severely out of sorts with Blue Flight because they
          were not called in to review a critical action that really could have
          waited, despite what the Flight Rules called for.



          Bottom line: John Hodge never served as Flight Director in Mission
          Control again.




          Which is why we sarcastically referred to the Flight Rules as "Flight Guidelines".



          There are only two ways to mess up in Mission Control: following the Flight Rules, or not following the Flight Rules.



          Update: Hale goes on to say




          But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all
          rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time
          that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few
          minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight
          Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line.




          Note: the linked Post Flight Mission Report is a terrific reference on this mission. Highly recommended.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 4




            $begingroup$
            Reading the second half of this is a bit painful. It's no wonder they had the later organization safety issues, with precedents like that being set. There should be no punishment for following flight safety rules to 'failsafe.'
            $endgroup$
            – Saiboogu
            9 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Agreed, (and I do not defend their actions) but management was angry because they were not informed more than because the rules were followed. Hale goes on to say "But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line."
            $endgroup$
            – Organic Marble
            8 hours ago













          9












          9








          9





          $begingroup$

          I haven't been able to find the Gemini rules online. But we can infer what they stated based on comments in the Gemini VIII post flight report.




          MCC-H made the decision for early mission termination. This
          decision was based on data which showed RCS propellant remaining in
          both rings to be less than half the amount loaded. Also, both rings
          of the RCS had been activated and significant propellant had been
          used. Mission rules required termina­tion of the mission under
          these conditions.




          So the situation was:



          • Primary attitude control system failed and unusable.

          • Backup attitude control systems have been activated early and
            significant propellant has been used.

          This is what we would have called in Shuttle a "zero fault tolerant" situation. In other words, if anything else bad had happened to the RCS, the crew would have died. When the mission rules were written, they must have stated that this type of situation called for early mission termination.



          The truly interesting thing about this situation is that the flight director followed the mission rules, terminated the mission early, and it ended his career as a flight director.



          As Wayne Hale writes:




          NASA management found out about the situation after the crew was in
          the ocean. According to the legend, Hodge did not take the time to
          pick up the phone and call the Program Manager, the Center Director,
          or even his boss, the Chief of the Flight Director office. The
          situation was stable, and even though waiting around was not
          necessarily a good thing, there was no reason that a couple of hours
          delay would have significantly increased the crew risk. Upper
          management was severely out of sorts with Blue Flight because they
          were not called in to review a critical action that really could have
          waited, despite what the Flight Rules called for.



          Bottom line: John Hodge never served as Flight Director in Mission
          Control again.




          Which is why we sarcastically referred to the Flight Rules as "Flight Guidelines".



          There are only two ways to mess up in Mission Control: following the Flight Rules, or not following the Flight Rules.



          Update: Hale goes on to say




          But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all
          rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time
          that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few
          minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight
          Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line.




          Note: the linked Post Flight Mission Report is a terrific reference on this mission. Highly recommended.






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          I haven't been able to find the Gemini rules online. But we can infer what they stated based on comments in the Gemini VIII post flight report.




          MCC-H made the decision for early mission termination. This
          decision was based on data which showed RCS propellant remaining in
          both rings to be less than half the amount loaded. Also, both rings
          of the RCS had been activated and significant propellant had been
          used. Mission rules required termina­tion of the mission under
          these conditions.




          So the situation was:



          • Primary attitude control system failed and unusable.

          • Backup attitude control systems have been activated early and
            significant propellant has been used.

          This is what we would have called in Shuttle a "zero fault tolerant" situation. In other words, if anything else bad had happened to the RCS, the crew would have died. When the mission rules were written, they must have stated that this type of situation called for early mission termination.



          The truly interesting thing about this situation is that the flight director followed the mission rules, terminated the mission early, and it ended his career as a flight director.



          As Wayne Hale writes:




          NASA management found out about the situation after the crew was in
          the ocean. According to the legend, Hodge did not take the time to
          pick up the phone and call the Program Manager, the Center Director,
          or even his boss, the Chief of the Flight Director office. The
          situation was stable, and even though waiting around was not
          necessarily a good thing, there was no reason that a couple of hours
          delay would have significantly increased the crew risk. Upper
          management was severely out of sorts with Blue Flight because they
          were not called in to review a critical action that really could have
          waited, despite what the Flight Rules called for.



          Bottom line: John Hodge never served as Flight Director in Mission
          Control again.




          Which is why we sarcastically referred to the Flight Rules as "Flight Guidelines".



          There are only two ways to mess up in Mission Control: following the Flight Rules, or not following the Flight Rules.



          Update: Hale goes on to say




          But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all
          rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time
          that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few
          minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight
          Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line.




          Note: the linked Post Flight Mission Report is a terrific reference on this mission. Highly recommended.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 4 hours ago

























          answered 9 hours ago









          Organic MarbleOrganic Marble

          62.3k4167262




          62.3k4167262







          • 4




            $begingroup$
            Reading the second half of this is a bit painful. It's no wonder they had the later organization safety issues, with precedents like that being set. There should be no punishment for following flight safety rules to 'failsafe.'
            $endgroup$
            – Saiboogu
            9 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Agreed, (and I do not defend their actions) but management was angry because they were not informed more than because the rules were followed. Hale goes on to say "But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line."
            $endgroup$
            – Organic Marble
            8 hours ago












          • 4




            $begingroup$
            Reading the second half of this is a bit painful. It's no wonder they had the later organization safety issues, with precedents like that being set. There should be no punishment for following flight safety rules to 'failsafe.'
            $endgroup$
            – Saiboogu
            9 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Agreed, (and I do not defend their actions) but management was angry because they were not informed more than because the rules were followed. Hale goes on to say "But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line."
            $endgroup$
            – Organic Marble
            8 hours ago







          4




          4




          $begingroup$
          Reading the second half of this is a bit painful. It's no wonder they had the later organization safety issues, with precedents like that being set. There should be no punishment for following flight safety rules to 'failsafe.'
          $endgroup$
          – Saiboogu
          9 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Reading the second half of this is a bit painful. It's no wonder they had the later organization safety issues, with precedents like that being set. There should be no punishment for following flight safety rules to 'failsafe.'
          $endgroup$
          – Saiboogu
          9 hours ago




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Agreed, (and I do not defend their actions) but management was angry because they were not informed more than because the rules were followed. Hale goes on to say "But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line."
          $endgroup$
          – Organic Marble
          8 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Agreed, (and I do not defend their actions) but management was angry because they were not informed more than because the rules were followed. Hale goes on to say "But that is not the point of the fable. The moral of the story for all rookie Flight Directors is ALWAYS INVOLVE YOUR MANAGEMENT. Any time that a critical action can reasonably be delayed for even a few minutes GET ON THE PHONE WITH THE BOSS. No matter what the Flight Rules say. After all, it’s just your career on the line."
          $endgroup$
          – Organic Marble
          8 hours ago










          kikjezrous is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          kikjezrous is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          kikjezrous is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          kikjezrous is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














          Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f35975%2fwhy-was-gemini-viii-terminated-after-recovering-from-the-oams-thruster-failure%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Log på Navigationsmenu

          Creating second map without labels using QGIS?How to lock map labels for inset map in Print Composer?How to Force the Showing of Labels of a Vector File in QGISQGIS Valmiera, Labels only show for part of polygonsRemoving duplicate point labels in QGISLabeling every feature using QGIS?Show labels for point features outside map canvasAbbreviate Road Labels in QGIS only when requiredExporting map from composer in QGIS - text labels have moved in output?How to make sure labels in qgis turn up in layout map?Writing label expression with ArcMap and If then Statement?

          Nuuk Indholdsfortegnelse Etyomologi | Historie | Geografi | Transport og infrastruktur | Politik og administration | Uddannelsesinstitutioner | Kultur | Venskabsbyer | Noter | Eksterne henvisninger | Se også | Navigationsmenuwww.sermersooq.gl64°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.75064°10′N 51°45′V / 64.167°N 51.750°V / 64.167; -51.750DMI - KlimanormalerSalmonsen, s. 850Grønlands Naturinstitut undersøger rensdyr i Akia og Maniitsoq foråret 2008Grønlands NaturinstitutNy vej til Qinngorput indviet i dagAntallet af biler i Nuuk må begrænsesNy taxacentral mødt med demonstrationKøreplan. Rute 1, 2 og 3SnescootersporNuukNord er for storSkoler i Kommuneqarfik SermersooqAtuarfik Samuel KleinschmidtKangillinguit AtuarfiatNuussuup AtuarfiaNuuk Internationale FriskoleIlinniarfissuaq, Grønlands SeminariumLedelseÅrsberetning for 2008Kunst og arkitekturÅrsberetning for 2008Julie om naturenNuuk KunstmuseumSilamiutGrønlands Nationalmuseum og ArkivStatistisk ÅrbogGrønlands LandsbibliotekStore koncerter på stribeVandhund nummer 1.000.000Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq – MalikForsidenVenskabsbyerLyngby-Taarbæk i GrønlandArctic Business NetworkWinter Cities 2008 i NuukDagligt opdaterede satellitbilleder fra NuukområdetKommuneqarfik Sermersooqs hjemmesideTurist i NuukGrønlands Statistiks databankGrønlands Hjemmestyres valgresultaterrrWorldCat124325457671310-5