This is the same evidence set used for the original Neil Armstrong case, accessed on 25 August 2026. The v8 page changes the presentation and adds the supplied Builder examples. The four tendencies retain the original audit’s pole assignments and scores.
Think it through · 66 / Map the path · 78 / Go deeper · 59 / Understated · 71
Download the original audit workbook ↗NASA · n.d.
Documents naval aviation, NACA/NASA engineering and test flight, Gemini 8, Apollo 11, aeronautics administration, university teaching, and later commissions.
Limit: Compressed biography; limited evidence about habitual work style.
View original source ↗NASA Johnson Space Center · 2001-09-19
Armstrong describes self-directed aviation reading, research-pilot engineering, training/planning/testing, reliance on specialists, shared crew responsibility, risk thresholds, team reliability, and teaching.
Limit: Recorded three decades after Apollo 11; memory and self-presentation may shape emphasis.
View original source ↗NASA · 2016-03-16
After an uncontrolled roll, Armstrong isolated the stuck thruster, shut down the orbital system, used re-entry controls, stabilized the spacecraft, and accepted the mandatory abort.
Limit: Narrative summary; crew coordination detail is limited.
View original source ↗NASA / Apollo 11 crew · 1969
The crew critiques simulator fidelity, favors operator checklists tied to use, calls for more realistic practice, and documents the transition to manual control over the lunar boulder field.
Limit: Technical focus reveals little about behavior outside mission work.
View original source ↗NASA Apollo Lunar Surface Journal · 1969-07-20 / annotated edition
Records program alarms, Mission Control go/no-go inputs, Armstrong’s manual-control check, the boulder field, Aldrin’s callouts, and the final landing sequence.
Limit: Radio brevity is task-constrained and should not be generalized to all communication.
View original source ↗NASA Apollo Lunar Surface Journal · annotated edition
Explains why Armstrong overflew the crater and boulder field, the planned division of tasks, and the manual-control choice when the required correction exceeded the fine-tuning system.
Limit: Later commentary interprets rather than merely reproduces events.
View original source ↗NASA · 2006
Shows that realistic free-flight training made human override usable when Apollo 11’s automated landing path led toward unsafe terrain.
Limit: Program-level history; not a complete account of Armstrong’s individual contribution.
View original source ↗Purdue University Archives and Special Collections · collection
Nearly 500 digitized speech transcripts permit direct inspection of researched public writing across decades.
Limit: Prepared public speech is not identical to everyday writing or spontaneous conversation.
View original source ↗Purdue University Libraries · 2024-09-27
Describes 7,700 pages of speech transcripts with Armstrong’s contextual notes, jokes, arrows, and wording changes.
Limit: Describes the archive; does not independently evaluate each manuscript.
View original source ↗University of Cincinnati Libraries · 2012 recollections
Students and colleagues recall Armstrong connecting engineering concepts to flight experience, teaching demanding courses, and returning promptly to class after technical work.
Limit: Memorial context can amplify positive selection and hindsight.
View original source ↗University of Cincinnati · 2013
Colleagues describe Armstrong as seeking ordinary treatment, limiting media attention, and focusing on engineering teaching rather than celebrity.
Limit: Retrospective memorial framing; reserve should not be equated with social isolation.
View original source ↗NASA Apollo Lunar Surface Journal · 2012
Colleagues recall productive sampling decisions and speeches that were heavily researched, clear, and historically informed.
Limit: Tributes are favorable by genre and require triangulation.
View original source ↗NASA · 2024-07-15
Documents Armstrong’s early ambition to become an NACA test pilot and the engineering work that preceded his astronaut career.
Limit: Career narrative cannot establish every later tendency.
View original source ↗Purdue University College of Engineering · 2013-01-30
Preserves Armstrong’s humorous self-description as an engineer rather than a heroic exception.
Limit: A single rhetorical passage should not carry the archetype by itself.
View original source ↗