D O U G L A S PAPER N O .

3431

SATURN HISTORY DOCUMENT

University o f Alabama Research Institute
History of Science

Date

& Technology Group

---------- Doc. No. ---..---a

APPLICATION O F SATURN SYSTEMS

T O ORBIT LAUNCH OPERATIONS
P R E P A R E D BY:

T. P. SAPP

OPERATIONS ENGINEER
SATURN EXTENSIONS
A D V A N C E SATURN AND L A R G E L A U N C H SYSTEMS

T O BE P R E S E N T E D T O :
AIAA/AAS STEPPING STONES T O MARS M E E T I N G
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND
M A R C H 28-30. 1966

DOUGLAS M / S S / LE 6;SPACE SYSTEMS D/V/S/U/V

SPACE SYSTEMS CENTER

- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA

APPLICATION

OF SATURlV SYSTEMS TO ORBIT LAUNCH OPERATIONS

T. P. Sapp

DOUGLAS MISSILE AND SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION

ABSTRACT
The payload v e l o c i t y spectrum f o r e x i s t i n g and f u t u r e missions a r e compared
with Saturn V c a p a b i l i t i e s .

Maximum system uprating i s considered and t h e

i n c r e a s e i n t h e mission spectrum coverage by use of o r b i t a l assembly and launch

with Saturn V systems i s presented.

The system and operations requirements f o r

an o r b i t launch v e h i c l e a r e assessed and t h r e e o r b i t a l operations support modes

a r e compared t o t h e s e requirements.

The permanent f a c i l i t y mode i s s e l e c t e d

and t h e necessary support elements and t h e i r functions described.

Detailed

o r b i t operations procedures a r e described f o r an o r b i t launch v e h i c l e derived

from t h e S-IVB and task-time networks of t h e procedures a r e presented.

The

r e q u i r e d changes t o t h e b a s i c S-IVB a r e d e l i n e a t e d and t h e Saturn V c a p a b i l i t i e s

b

f o r t h e assembly o r b i t presented.

An example OLO mission i s examined t o d e t e r -

mine t h e t o t a l o r b i t a l operations and support procedures and requirements.

The

ground operations and support procedures and f a c i l i t i e s requirements a r e

assessed and compared t o t h e p r e s e n t l y planned ground launch complex.

It i s

concluded t h a t t h e S-TVB i s adaptable a s a pioneer o r b i t launch v e h i c l e and

t h a t Saturn

po pol lo systems coupled w i t h ' t h e p2esently envisioned o r b i t labo-

r a t o r y systems can form t h e b a s i c components of an e a r l y o r b i t a l launch system

f o r p l a n e t a r y reconnaissance missions i n t h e next decade.

CREDIT

This paper p r e s e n t s a p o r t i o n of t h e r e s u l t s from a Douglas funded study of

Planetary Reconnaissance (SM-46912) conducted by t h e Advance Saturn and Large
Launch Systems D i r e c t o r a t e under t h e d i r e c t i o n of M. W. Root.

APPLICATION OF SATURN SYSTEMS

TO ORBIT LAUNCH OPERATIONS

INTRODUCTION
The o b j e c t i v e of t h i s paper i s t o explore t h e f e a s i b i l i t y and problems of
conducting o r b i t a l launch operations with t h e Saturn system and t o determine
t h e requirements f o r o r b i t a l launch operations and t h e corresponding adaptat i o n s of t h e Saturn ~ / ~ ~ o systems.
l l o

The Saturn V w i l l launch t h e United

S t a t e s i n t o manned space exploration.

I t s development and f a c i l i t i e s r e p r e s e n t

n o t only a l a r g e monetary investment, but an expenditure of an important p o r t i o n

of t h e n a t i o n a l technological c a p a b i l i t y a s well.

By t h e end of t h i s decade,

o
t h e n a t i o n w i l l have invested over 1 7 b i l l i o n d o l l a r s i n t h e ~ a t u r n / ~ p o l lsystems, including approximately 9 b i l l i o n d o l l a r s i n t h e Saturn V launch v e h i c l e
and t h e supporting f a c i l i t i e s .

An a d d i t i o n a l 2 t o 5 b i l l i o n d o l l a r s may be

invested i n t h e development of Earth o r b i t a l l a b o r a t o r i e s .

The scope of t h e s e

programs demands t h e f u l l e s t e x p l o i t a t i o n of t h e i r systems and o p e r a t i o n a l

c a p a b i l i t i e s t o perform f u t u r e missions i n order t o amortize t h e s e investments
over t h e next decade.
Although t h e Saturn V system i s b a s i c a l l y designed f o r l u n a r exploratory missions, numerous s t u d i e s by NASA, Douglas, and other aerospace companies have
evaluated t h e f e a s i b i l i t y of using t h i s booster f o r missions far beyond t h e
manned l u n a r landing.

I f these a p p l i c a t i o n s a r e accepted i n t o l o g i c a l f u t u r e

programs, t h e cost of development may be amortized over a period of t e n t o

f i f t e e n years and permit exploration of t h e e n t i r e s o l a r system.

E x i s t i n g systems and those c u r r e n t l y under development are, however, l i m i t e d

i n payload c a p a b i l i t y and v e l o c i t y required f o r many of t h e more a t t r a c t i v e
f u t u r e missions.

Burnout v e l o c i t i e s on t h e order of fourteen kilometers p e r

second (46,000 f e e t

p2r

second) and payloads of 70 metric tons (154,000 pounds)

a r e r e q u i r e d t o accomplish even t h e minimum manned p l a n e t a r y missions, i . e . ,

low energy ~ a r s / ~ e n uflybys.
s

These requirements exceed t h e Saturn V launch

v e h i c l e d i r e c t ascent performance even with s i g n i f i c a n t uprating.

Even t h e

nuclear t h i r d stage d i r e c t ascent performance i s marginal o r inadequate f o r

t h e s e minimum manned i n t e r p l a n e t a r y missions.
However, t h e o r b i t a l launch concept, u t i l i z i n g Saturn V and t h e technologies
and o p e r a t i o n a l procedures t h a t w i l l be developed f o r t h e manned lunaz landing
program, form t h e b a s i s of a system which w i l l allow t h e Saturn V t o adequately
meet t h e f'uture missions requirements.

This i s not t o say t h a t new development

i s not required, r a t h e r it d e f i n e s t h e a r e a s i n which f u r t h e r and new develop-

ment i s necessary t o f u l l y e x p l o i t t h e systems and f a c i l i t i e s being constructed.

Saturn V Mission Capability

The mission spectrum p o t e n t i a l of t h e Saturn V with a combination of booster
u p r a t i n g and o r b i t a l assembly and launch operations i s shorn i n f i g u r e 1. Upr a t i n g t h e Saturn V shows a considerable increase i n mission c a p a b i l i t y b u t not
enough f o r manned p l a n e t a r y reconnaissance.

O r b i t a l launch operations using

two or t h r e e S-IVB's allow a s i g n i f i c a n t support c a p a b i l i t y f o r a manned l u n a r

base and performance of l i m i t e d Mars and Venus manned flybys with a standard
Saturn V.

O r b i t a l launch of uprated Saturn V-3 provides ample c a p a b i l i t y i n

two new c l a s s e s of manned missions p l u s considerable i n c r e a s e i n c a p a b i l i t y f o r

unmanned capture and landing probes t o J u p i t e r and Mercury.

Further growth

FIGURE 1

( f o u r o r b i t a l launch S-IVB's and use of advanced Saturn V ) w i l l have t h e

c a p a b i l i t y of manned capture missions t o Mars and Venus, and manned explorat i o n of t h e a s t e r o i d s .

O r b i t Launch v s Direct Ascent Comparison

The Saturn V c a p a b i l i t y achieved by uprating and o r b i t a l operations has s i g n i f i c a n t advantages over t h e development of new v e h i c l e s with s i m i l a r payload
capability.

For example, a new v e h i c l e (based on c u r r e n t technology) capable

of launching 70 metric t o n s d i r e c t l y t o t h e Mars flyby t r a j e c t o r y from E a r t h

would have t o be two o r t h r e e times a s l a r g e a s Saturn V.

To send 180 m e t r i c

t o n s t o Mars, a s i n g l e vehicle would have t o be approximately 6 times a s l a r g e

a s Saturn V.

While more advanced approaches such a s high pressure plug nozzle

engines, more e x o t i c p r o p e l l a n t s , e t c . , would reduce t h e growth f a c t o r s , comp l e t e l y new s t a g e s and engine development programs would be required.

The

o r b i t a l launch/uprated Saturn V r e q u i r e s only evolutionary extensions of e x i s t i n g programs, and development of e a r t h o r b i t a l assembly techniques.

An o r b i t a l

launch v e h i c l e assembled from two or t h r e e modified S-IVB s t a g e s would have a

payload c a p a b i l i t y of 90 t o 180 metric tons, which i s s u f f i c i e n t f o r manned
~ a r s / ~ e n uflyby
s
missions.

By t r a d i n g payload f o r higher v e l o c i t y , 30 metric

t o n s can be delivered at 1 9 kilometers per second.

This i s s u f f i c i e n t f o r

extensive exploration of t h e s o l a r system (including s a t e l l i t e s and t h e outer

p l a n e t s ) with unmanned probes.

New Development and F a c i l i t i e s Requirements

The o r b i t a l l a m c h concept w i l l r e q u i r e new development i n some a r e a s t o f u l l y
e x p l o i t t h e systems and f a c i l i t i e s now being constructed.

For example,

rendezvous and docking must be perfected within t h e operational c o n s t r a i n t s

imposed by meeting Earth, o r b i t , and p l a n e t a r y launch window schedules.
assembly and checkout techniques must be developed and t e s t e d .
equipment w i l l be required i n o r b i t .

Orbital

New support

Both modified and a d d i t i o n a l support

equipment and f a c i l i t i e s w i l l be required at t h e Kennedy Space Center and

p o s s i b l y i n t h e world t r a c k i n g network.

The S-TVB stage must be modified t o

extend i t s o r b i t s t a y time and provide a rendezvous, docking, assembly and

checkout c a p a b i l i t y .

The o r b i t a l l a b o r a t o r y w i l l have t o be adapted f o r i t s

d u a l r o l e of o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y ' a n d manned p l a n e t a r y mission module.

O r b i t a l operations developed f o r t h e Saturn po pol lo systems not only would
provide t h e n a t i o n with an e a r l y c a p a b i l i t y t o perform manned p l a n e t a r y reconnaissance b u t it w i l l a l s o provide t h e valuable o p e r a t i o n a l experience and
t e c h n o l o g i c a l base f o r t h e development of more advanced systems i n t h e 1980's
f o r manned p l a n e t a r y landing programs.
Analysis i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e o r b i t a l launch concept i s a f e a s i b l e and l o g i c a l
extension of e x i s t i n g and pianned programs, and t h a t o r b i t a l operations a r e an
e s s e n t i a l i n g r e d i e n t f o r any manned p l a n e t a r y program.

ORBITAL LAUNCH OPERATIONS REQmbIENTS

The b a s i c requirements f o r o r b i t a l launch operations may be grouped i n t o f i v e
broad c a t e g o r i e s a s noted i n f i g u r e 2.

The components must be launched i n t o

ORBIT LAUNCH OPERATIONS

(OLO) REQUIREMENTS
PERSONNEL
CREWS ACCOMMODATIONS AND SAFETY
CREW TRANSFER

BUILD UP

PREPARATIONS

LOGISTICS

COMMAND AND CONTROL

RENDEZVOUS

CHECKOUT

DOCKING

FAULT DETECTION

ASSEMBLY

REPAIR AND REPLACE

FABRICATION

COMMUNICATIONS

PROPELLANT TRANSFER

DATA EVALUATION

MAINTAIN

LAUNCH

PROP'ELLANT CONTROL

COUNTDOWN AND LAUNCH

ENVIRONMENT CONTROL

LAUNCH WINDOWS

ATTITUDE CONTROL

EMERGENCIES AND ABORT

MAINTENANCE AND
SUPPORTING SUPPLIES

TRACKING AND NAVIGATION

FIGURE 2

o r b i t t o build-up t h e o r b i t launch v e h i c l e .

These components must b e main-

t a i n e d i n o r b i t u n t i l t h e o p e r a t i o n s a r e completed and t h e o r b i t p e r s o n n e l
(assembly crews, checkout crews, and t h e mission crew) must be accommodated.
When t h e build-up i s completed, p r e p a r a t i o n must be underway t o perform t h e
launch w i t h i n t h e mission window c o n s t r a i n t s .

Most of t h e s e t a s k requirements

a r e a p p l i c a b l e t o o r b i t launch of any v e h i c l e .

The p a r t i c u l a r manner i n which

t h e o r b i t a l o p e r a t i o n s t a s k s a r e performed w i l l depend i n p a r t on t h e b a s i c
o p e r a t i o n a l mode s e l e c t e d .

O r b i t a l Launch Modes
Figure 3 shows t h e t h r e e b a s i c modes considered f o r t h e o r b i t a l launch v e h i c l e
operations.

Figure

4is

a general evaluation of these modes.

The independent

o r b i t a l launch vehicle concept imposes unacceptable p e n a l t i e s t o t h e o r b i t a l

launch v e h i c l e s t a g e s .
workload per man.

It i s marginal i n crew accommodations and excessive i n

Preparation f o r launch, such a s checkout, r e p a i r , e t c . , a r e

marginal o r severely l i m i t e d .

Rendezvous and assembly of t h e o r b i t a l launch

v e h i c l e and a c t u a l launch from o r b i t appears f e a s i b l e , but l i m i t e d .

Although

a d d i t i o n of temporary o r b i t a l support equipment may permit launch requirements

t o be met, crew accommodations and workloads w i l l have a l i m i t e d margin t o d e a l
with contingencies or with very s o p h i s t i c a t e d o r b i t a l launch systems and operations.

The major f a c t o r against t h e temporary OSE mode may be i t s l i m i t e d

resources f o r achieving and meeting an o r b i t a l launch schedule.

This i s q u i t e

c r i t i c a l f o r such o r b i t a l launch missions a s manned p l a n e t a r y reconnaissance.

The permanent o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y concept r e p r e s e n t s maximum o r b i t a l supp o r t and resources.

It provides added personnel f o r o r b i t operations and a

considerable increase i n t h e command and c o n t r o l functions, contingency response,

r e p a i r c a p a b i l i t y , and resources i n depth t o ensure meeting t h e o p e r a t i o n a l
schedule.

I n s e l e c t i n g t h e permanent o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y mode f o r t h e

o r b i t a l launch concept r a t h e r than t h e temporary o r b i t a l support equipment

mode, two f a c t o r s were paramount.

The f i r s t was t h e added resources i n depth

which w i l l l e a d t o g r e a t e r p r o b a b i l i t y of mission success.

The second i s t h e

assumption t h a t a manned Earth o r b i t s t a t i o n s i m i l a r t o t h e o r b i t a l launch

f a c i l i t y w i l l be developed and deployed s e v e r a l years before o r b i t a l launch
operations a r e conducted.

The permanent o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y approach

simply adds another o p e r a t i o n a l r o l e t o a system previously developed.

The

OLO MODES

SPACECRAFT

',p%h
,r

INDEPENDENT OLV

,
OSE

TEMPORARY OLO SUPPORT

EQUIPMENT (OSE)

SPACECRAFT

\
OSE

PERMANENT
FIGURE 3

OLO MODES EVALUATION

OLO
REQUIREMENTS

INDEPENDENT
OLV

TEMPORARY
OSE

PERMANENT
OLF

BUILDUP

ADEQUATE BUT
LIMITED

ADEQUATE

ADEQUATE

MAINTAIN

INADEQUATE
UNLESS SUPPORT
SYSTEMS ADDED TO OLV
(DECREASED OLV PAYLOAD
INCREASED COMPLEXITY)

ADEQUATE

ADEQUATE

PERSONNEL
PROVISIONS

MARGINAL
TO INADEQUATE

LIMITED

ADEQUATE

PREPARATIONS

MARGINAL
AND SEVERELY
LIMITED

LIMITED

ADEQUATE

LAUNCH

ADEQUATE
BUT
LlMlTED

ADEQUATE

ADEQUATE

FIGURE 4

p e c u l i a r o r b i t a l support equipment hardware must be developed i n e i t h e r of

t h e two adequate modes.

O r b i t a l support equipment development and support

w i l l be e a s i e r i n t h e presence of a manned s t a t i o n which can l a t e r be converted

t o serve a s o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y during o r b i t operations.

The assumption

of p r i o r manned s t a t i o n development i s l o g i c a l i n t h a t it i s e a s i e r t o accomp l i s h than t h e o r b i t launch operation i t s e l f .

I n addition t o providing

(1)e x p e r i e x e i n o r b i t a l operations, ( 2 ) information on man ' s s u r v i v a l capa-

b i l i t y i n o r b i t and long d u r a t i o n space missions, t h e o r b i t a l s t a t i o n hardware

may serve a s a prototype f o r manned i n t e r p l a n e t a r y mission modules.

O r b i t a l Launch Vehicle Svstem Reauirements

I n order t o i d e n t i f y t h e OLV stage requirements, a s p e c i f i c Saturn V s t a g e was

selected f o r analysis.

The S-IVB/~aturnV Stage because of i t s s i x hour o r b i t

s t a y c a p a b i l i t y , r e s t a r t c a p a b i l i t y , and mission p r o f i l e f o r t h e Apollo LOR

Program, i s most s i m i l a r t o an OLV and was s e l e c t e d a s a prototy-pe stage f o r
t h e requirements a n a l y s i s .
An a n a l y s i s of t h e S-TVB f o r t h e Orbit Launch Vehicle (OLV)booster stage i n d i c a t e s t h a t n e i t h e r f a b r i c a t i o n or propellant t r a n s f e r operations are required.
The standard Saturn V booster can d e l i v e r a modified OLS-IVB t o t h e assembly
o r b i t with s u f f i c i e n t p r o p e l l a n t on board t o perform u s e f u l o r b i t launch missions using o r b i t a l assembly only.

Moderate uprating of t h e Saturn V ( 2 5 0 ~

J - 2 ~ ) can d e l i v e r t h e OLS-TVB docked and unfired with 95% of p r o p e l l a n t load

( a rendezvous kick stage, CUSS, i s required f o r t h e Gemini s t y l e rendezvous

g r o s s maneuvers i n any c a s e ) .

Figure 5 is a list of increased or new system requirements which must be provided to adapt or convert an earth launch stage to an orbit launch stage.
Incorporation of all these requirements aboard the OLV stage would represent
an unacceptable burden on the OLV performance and undue complexity in the
stage systems. For these reasons, the concept of separate packages of orbit
support equipment to meet or supplement these requirements is advocated. The
particular requirements which can be off-loaded onto the Orbit Support Equipment (OSE) a-re noted on figure 5. Because of the multiple functions of some
of the systems, they are categorized by design disciplines (propulsion, structures, mechanical, electrical/electronic) rather than functions (rendezvous,

docking, environment control, checkout, etc ) noted under OLO requirements.

Many of these system requirements are due to the time required for orbital
build-up of the OLV and the desire to provide sufficient orbit hold time to
mitigate launch window constraints on the operations schedule. A minimum orbit
stay design time of 20 days was indicated and a desired time of 30 days selected
for system criteria. Performance and control requirements for rendezvous and
docking along with a desire to maintain the main stage propulsion system in a
"buttoned-up" condition until orbit launch ( improving orbit stay time, OLV
performance, safety, and checkout capabilities) led to separate propulsion systems tailored to these functions. A rendezvous kick stage, designated as the
cryogenic utility space stage (CUSS), can perform the major velocity injections
(plane change, slow catch up injection, and near circularization) of a quasiGemini rendezvous technique. Added APS (~uxiliaryPropulsion system) modules
provide rendezvous attitude control, final circularization, and docking propulsion. Propellant control systems are needed to settle the main stage
propellants for venting (thermal control, etc., are designed to allow at least

UI

;D

3
G
c

POWER SUPPLY (DURATION INCREASE)

A
A

ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEMS

PROPELLANT CONTROL SYSTEM (VENT &SETTLE)

TRACKING TRANSPONDERS

DOCKING SYSTEM

ORBlT UMBILICAL CONNECTORS AND ACTUATORS

PNEUMATIC SUPPLY INCREASE

SPACE RADIATORS

THERMAL CONTROL PANELS (AND BLANKETS)

ASSEMBLY LATCHES

DOCKING ACTUATORS

MECHANICAL

ADDEDSUPPORTSTRUCTURESANDBRACKETRY

UMBILICAL TUNNEL

REPAIR &REPLACE ACCESS

A REQUIREMENTS WHICH CAN BE MET

OR SUPPLEMENTED (A) BY OSE

ORBlT ABORT SENSING AND CONTROL

ORBlT F/D TEST POINTS

CHECKOUT INTERFACES

SAFETY MONITOR SENSORS

ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SENSORS

DOCKING ELECTRONICS (APS)

RENDEZVOUS STAGE ELECTRONICS

AND INTERFACE

MICROMETEROID SHlE LDS

ORBlT HANDLING AND ATTACH PTS.

UMBILICAL CONNECTORS AND

CARRY-THRU
ADDED PROPELLANT MONITORING
AND CONTROL ELECTRONICS

INSULATION AND HEAT BLOCKS

DOCKING STRUCTURES (MALE AND FEMALE)

STRUCTURES

DOCKING SENSORS

DIGITAL COMPUTER

HIGH ENERGY PROPELLANTS (MAIN STAGE)

A

COMMUNICATION LINKS
(COMMAND AND CONTROL)

STEP T / w ~ - O . 7

RESTART (S)

INCREASED SEQUENCER PROVISIONS

ABORT &DEBRIS RETRO MOTORS

HORIZON AND STAR SEEKERS

ADDED COMMAND MODES

RENDEZVOUS SYSTEM

PROPULSION

ORBlT LAUNCH VEHICLE (OLV) SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

S-IVB-1982

a 24-hour span between vent operations t o minimize i n t e r f e r e n c e with o r b i t

operations) and f o r launch.

Abort motors a r e required t o r e t r o t h e OLV

s t a g e s away from t h e manned spacecraft f o r a launch a b o r t .

The d e b r i s problem has not been s u f f i c i e n t l y analyzed, b u t p o s s i b l y t h e abort
motors can double a s propulsion u n i t s t o i n j e c t t h e spent OLV s t a g e s i n t o "safe"
junkpile o r b i t s o r d e s t r u c t i v e r e - e n t r y .
Step t h r u s t t o weight r a t i o of 0.7 or g r e a t e r i s d e s i r e d t o minimize g r a v i t y
l o s s e s a t o r b i t launch ( f i r s t stage t h r u s t t o weight should exceed 0.25).
R e s t a r t i s d e s i r e d t o increase t h e o r b i t a l launch window even with a m u l t i s t a g e
OLV ( a

40

second burn a t apogee of t h e intermediate escape e l l i p t i c a l o r b i t

allows about 6'

t o 8' plane change p r i o r t o f i n a l i n j e c t i o n near p e r i g e e ) .

High energy p r o p e l l a n t s a r e d e s i r a b l e f o r OLV stages t o minimize OLV growth

factor.

This w i l l not only decrease t h e c o s t of t h e OLV stage, b u t t h e c o s t

of e a r t h t o o r b i t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n (pounds required i n o r b i t ) a s well.

The s t r u c t u r e requirements l i s t e d i n f i g u r e 5 a r e l a r g e l y s e l f explanatory
an exception might be t h e umbilical tunnel.

...

The dynamics and s t r u c t u r e problems

of removing long umbilical l i n e s (from t h e OSE t o each OLV s t a g e ) with e i t h e r

f l e x i b l e or r i g i d "arms" i n d i c a t e s t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y of a b u i l t - i n u m b i l i c a l
t u n n e l on each stage with automatic connections from stage t o stage.

Use of

t h e standard ground umbilical p l a t e f o r stage i n t e r f a c e does not appear adaptable

t o a d u a l purpose (ground and o r b i t ) i n t e r f a c e .

Proper minimization and

s e l e c t i o n of umbilical l i n e s , and t h e use of staggered stacking connections

minimized t h e penalty thus incurred.

This added burden t o t h e o r b i t a l launch

v e h i c l e (OLV) was considered acceptable i n order t o minimize t h e c o n t r o l

dynamics and d e b r i s problem a t launch, and simplify t h e o r b i t a l assembly operations.,

Pneumatic supply must be increased t o perform periodic valve "dither" t o ensure

valves do not become "frozen" during t h e s e v e r a l weeks i n o r b i t .

This can be

accomplished by pneumatic supply l i n e s from t h e OSE t o t h e stage pneumatic vent

valve downstream of t h e r e g u l a t o r .

Thermal c o n t r o l requirements of t h e s t a g e

systems, subsystems, and components can b e s t be met by a combination of coolant

mounting p l a t e s ( c o l d p l a t e s ) and e l e c t r i c a l heating elements ( b l a n k e t s ) .
w i l l r e q u i r e space r a d i a t o r s on t h e stage.

pumping coolant can be supplied by OSE.

These

Power requirements f o r heating and

Heat r e j e c t i o n from t h e coolant should

employ a secondary closed loop space r a d i a t o r r a t h e r than t h e present secondary

open loop water sublimation.
rJwnerous c o n t r o l and sensor e l e c t r o n i c s a r e needed t o perform t h e o r b i t a l
operations.

A major e l e c t r i c a l requirement i s t h e long d u r a t i o n power supply

and p o s s i b l e load i n c r e a s e s .

This requirement would present an unacceptable

weight p e n a l t y i f incorporated on t h e OLV stage.

Power supply f o r t h e OLV

s t a g e while docked i n o r b i t can be supplied by t h e OSE.

Stage power systems

must be modified t o meet t h e increased requirements during o r b i t a l rendezvous

and p o s s i b l y during o r b i t a l launch.

O r b i t a l umbilical i n t e r f a c e must be

incorporated i n t h e power, command, and d a t a systems.

A checkout i n t e r f a c e

between t h e stage system and t h e checkout system (can be provided by OSE)

must be incorporated.
These system requirements present a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e necessary added
weight and complexity of a stage t o achieve a t r u e o r b i t assembly and launch
capability.

If p r o p e l l a n t t r a n s f e r were employed, s e v e r a l a d d i t i o n a l systems

and modifications would be required.

It appears f e a s i b l e t o meet each of t h e s e

requirements by modifying and adding systems t o a s u i t a b l e e x i s t i n g ground

launch stage (e .g., the S-IVB) By developing separate orbit support equipment the requirements can be met within acceptable performance penalties to
the orbit launch vehicle.

Orbital Launch S-IVJ3 Description

The orbit launch version of the S-IVB stage is illustrated in figure

6 in the

configuration as launched on the Saturn V Earth Launch Vehicle (ELV).

The

modified S-NB, the CUSS stage, and nose cone comprise the payload to be
injected to rendezvous orbit by a modified Saturn V.
The 5-2 engine is replaced by the ~ ~ o K / J -engine
~ T to increase performance
and ensure adequate first stage thrust-to-weight ratio in multiple tandem
assembled Om-IVB's for the orbital launch vehicle.

The propulsion system

and thrust structure must be modified to accommodate the modified engine.

engine but at
The OLS-IVB can perform orbit launch missions with the ~OOK/J-2
mazginal performance for a manned planetary reconnaissance mission. Three
stages can boost an 86 metric tons (190,000pounds)
tandem OLS-IVB/~~OK/J-~T
spacecraft into the heliocentric trajectory.
The LH;? tank was lengthened 4.75 feet to increase LH2 volume and allow the
vent cycle (with the added external installation and heat blocks) to be
increased from 10 hours to 24 hours. This decreased the settling and venting
operations required during orbit build-up and preparation.

A separate (third) bulkhead was required to isolate the LO2 tank from the LH2
tank to reduce heat transfer and i2-I boiloff.
2
increased to meet J-2T engine requirements.

The LO2 tank pressure was

ELV S-IVB STAGE LAUNCH

S-IVB W I N . MOD.)
S E P A ~ A T ~ O NSEPARATION L ~ ~ , " ~ ~ ~ ~ R E
PLANE
PLANE

SEPARATION
PLANE

FIGURE 6
Docking s t r u c t u r e s a r e added with a male frustrum on t h e s t e r n and a female
frustrum on t h e bow.

External i n s t a l l a t i o n i s added t o the Ll$ tank walls and

a d d i t i o n a l s t r u c t u r a l heat blocks incorporated t o reduce thermal input t o t h e

LH2 tank.
A meteoroid s h i e l d i s added t o l i m i t meteoroid p e n e t r a t i o n t o a

.99 p r o b a b i l i t y

of no more than one penetration of t h e s h i e l d i t s e l f during a 30 day s t a y i n

Earth o r b i t .
Eight a u x i l i a r y propulsion modules a r e added t o each stage t o provide a t t i t u d e
c o n t r o l during rendezvous, docking and launch, and t o provide t r a n s l a t i o n a l
a c c e l e r a t i o n during f i n a l c i r c u l a r i z a t i o n , docking, and o r b i t launch u l l a g e .
A l l b u t t h e four a f t modules on t h e o r b i t a l launch vehicle f i r s t and t h i r d

s t a g e s a r e removed i n t h e o r b i t assembly operations p r i o r t o o r b i t a l launch.

The Instrument Unit (IU) is retained with each S-IVB stage throughout the
orbital operations and launch. It is an integral part of the S-IVB command
and control, environmental control, and orbital checkout systems. During
orbit launch, guidance and control commands are generated by the uppermost
instrument unit with the other systems (first and second stages) slaved to it.
This approach imposes a penalty of the S-IVB inert weight which might be
eliminated if more extensive stage modifications were acceptable. However,
it was deemed easier to provide slightly higher propulsion performance capability to compensate for retaining the instrument unit system intact at
orbit launch.
The rendezvous kick stage (CUSS) consists of an L O ~ / L Hpropellant
~
and pressurization system, two RL-10 engines, and interfaces with the S-IVB stage
instrument unit and power supply (including emergency batteries).

It is

mounted on the bow of the S-IVB (the stage is docked stern first) and removed
by the assembly crew using the orbit tug after the stage is docked.
The system descriptions presented in this paper are primarily intended to
indicate the scope of the impact orbital launch operations imposed on the
S-IVB stage. Further details on these systems modifications to the S-IVB
stage are presented in Douglas Engineering Paper Number 3645, "Application
of ~aturn/s-IVB/~pollo
Systems to Planetary Exploration, by M. W. Root presented to the Post-Apollo Space Exploration Symposium, AAS, May

4-6,1965.

For clarity, the S-IVB modified to the orbital assembly and launch configuration
is hereafter referred to as the OLS-IVB.

PETMMENT OXBITAL LAUNCH FACILITY

- SUPPORT ET;EMENTS

O r b i t a l launch elements, based on t h e "permanent" o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y

concept, a r e i l l u s t r a t e d i n f i g u r e 7.

The supporting elements include t h e

o r b i t a l s t a t i o n , t h e SORD, CUSS and t h e o r b i t tug.

The o r b i t s t a t i o n pro-

vides housing and work a r e a s f o r t h e s t a t i o n crew, assembly, checkout, and

launch crew, and f o r a s h o r t time, t h e mission crew.

The o r b i t a l s t a t i o n i s

t h e command and c o n t r o l center f o r t h e o r b i t operations.

A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o r b i t a l launch vehicle i s shown f o r a manned i n t e r p l a n e t a r y

f l y b y mission.
tandem.

The booster i s comprised of t h r e e OLS-IVB s t a g e s docked i n

While i n o r b i t t h e f i r s t s t a g e s t e r n w i l l be docked t o t h e supporting

o r b i t a l dock (SORD). A cryogenic u t i l i t y space stage (CUSS) i s used f o r

rendezvous of each OLV stage with t h e SORD buildup.

This i s removed by t h e

assembly crew, using t h e tug, a f t e r each s t a g e docks (and p r i o r t o ground

launch of t h e next stage t o rendezvous).
The supporting o r b i t a l dock (SORD)i s used t o build-up t h e o r b i t a l launch
vehicle.

It provides supporting functions (helium supply, a u x i l i w y power,

e t c . ) t o t h e stages while i n o r b i t and contains t h e checkout i n t e r f a c e comp u t e r s and RF l i n k s t o t h e space s t a t i o n .

It may be considered t h e orbital.

equivalent of pad equipment a t t h e ground launch f a c i l i t y .

I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e elements described i n preceding paragraphs, at l e a s t one
o t h e r major element i s o r b i t e d p r i o r t o t h e mission i t s e l f .

This i s t h e pro-

pulsion stage or s t a g e s required p r i o r t o s t a r t of t h e OLV build-up t o a d j u s t

t h e nodal r e g r e s s i o n r a t e of t h e space s t a t i o n so t h a t t h e space s t a t i o n o r b i t
node w i l l d r i f t i n t o t h e proper o r i e n t a t i o n a t t h e nominal o r b i t launch time.

s-we-1s
o

ORBIT LAUNCH VEHICLE AND SUPPORT ELEMENTS

OLS-IVB $1
-0LS-IVB

(2

.PROP. MOD.

SORD CONCEPT
(SUPPORTING
ORBITAL
DOCK)

MISSION
MODULE
(MO RL)
ASSEMBLED OLVAS LAUNCHED

l
ORBITAL TUG

PROP. MOD.
RETRolABoRT
APOLLO CIM (6 MAN)

CUSS

N P I CAL
(MORL CONCEPT)
FIGURE 7
Supporting O r b i t a l Dock ( SORD)
The b a s i c flmctions of t h e Supporting O r b i t a l Dock (SORD)a r e grouped i n t o s i x
c a t e g o r i e s i l l u s t r a t e d i n f i g u r e 8; docking, a t t i t u d e control, Om-TVB system
support, checkout and monitor s t a t u s , a c c e l e r a t i o n of t h e OLV, and launch
countdown and positioning.

The use of t h e SORD r e l a x e s t h e OLV requirements

and provides increased o r b i t a l support and s t a y time f o r t h e OLV.

Without

t h e SORD, most, o r all, of t h e s e f'unctions would have t o be performed by each

OLS-IVB and t h e OLV.
The SORD and OLV a r e not connected d i r e c t l y t o t h e manned s t a t i o n , b u t a r e
slaved t o it some d i s t a n c e i n - t r a i n i n t h e same o r b i t .
t h e o r b i t tugs.

OLO crew access i s v i a

The SORD p r e s e n t s a "spacesuit environment" and does not have

a l i f e support system or module a s p r e s e n t l y conceived.

Emergency space s u i t

I V ORBITAL CHECKOUT
STAGE FUNCTIONAL, OLV VERl FY
AUTOMATIC - SORD SLAVE COMPUTERS
MANNED STATION GP COMPUTER CONTROL
AND DISPLAY
PRE LAUNCH C/O AND CID

R I G I D DOCK FOR OLS-IVB

INTERFACE CONNECTIONS
SEPARATES FUELED OLS- IVB FROM
MANNED STATION
STATION KEEPING

I DOCKING

V ACCELERATE O L V
VENTING ULLAGE
LAUNCH ULLAGE
POSITIONING
PROPELLANT SETTLl NG (MEASURE)

OLV ATTITUDE FOR DOCKING,

EQU l PMENT REMOVAL, ETC.
OLV-SUN RELATION FOR THERMAL
DURING VENTING
LAUNCH ORIENTATION

II A T T I T U D E CONTROL

SORD FUNCTIONS

OR lENTS
SETTLES
COUNTDOWN
SEPARATES 4 M I N PRIOR TO
IGNITION - SORD CAN BE USED AGAIN
FOR OTHER OLS-IVB M I S S I O N
I F OLV MISSES WINDOW AFTER
SEPARATION (TWO TRIES), SORD
CAN REDOCK & REFURBISH

ELECTRICAL POWER - 28V & 56V

HELIUM GAS - 500 PS l
600KC VCOIDDAS LINES
I U COMMAND REC LINES
STAGGERED STACKED ROUT1NG
TO ALL OL-SIVB's & SIC
SYSTEMS STATUS & SAFETY MONITOR
MA1 NTENANCE CYCLE & CONTROL
COMMAND & DATA L I N

Ill OLS-IVB S Y S T E M SUPPORT

support packs and a means at donning such packs might be provided, b u t

normally t h e SORD operates i n an automatic unmanned mode or by remote c o n t r o l
from t h e manned s t a t i o n .

The SORD contains OLV pneumatic supply, e l e c t r i c a l

power supply, a s t a b i l i t y and c o n t r o l system, r e a c t i o n c o n t r o l and t r a n s l a t i o n

propulsion (possibly derived from t h e S - N B APS modules), command, c o n t r o l ,
and d a t a i n t e r f a c e s with t h e OLV systems, communication and c o n t r o l l i n k s with
t h e s t a t i o n , p a r t of t h e system f o r computerized o r b i t a l evaluation (SCORE)f o r
OLV s t a g e s checkout, a female docking cone and OLV o r b i t a l u m b i l i c a l i n t e r f a c e ,
l i m i t e d environment c o n t r o l f o r c e r t a i n SORD systems, and rendezvous, docking,
and s t a t i o n keeping systems.

It a l s o has a docking f a c e f o r t h e o r b i t tug.

Orbit Tug
Two or more o r b i t tugs w i l l be required t o t r a n s p o r t men and equipment from
t h e o r b i t s t a t i o n t o t h e SORD/OLV assembly.

They w i l l be used t o remove all

t h e expended equipment from t h e OLV (spent CUSS stages, expended a u x i l i a r y

propulsion system u n i t s , e t c . ) and t o a i d i n s e r v i c i n g t h e SORD and t h e OLV.
Adaptation of t h e LEM ascent stage would appear t o be a l i k e l y candidate f o r
t h i s function.

O r b i t a l Crew Requirements
I n addition t o t h e major hardware elements, t h r e e crews a r e a s s o c i a t e d with
t h e operations.

This i s over and above t h e mission crew i t s e l f .

These crews

a r e t h e o r b i t a l s t a t i o n crew, assembly crew, and t h e checkout and launch crew.

S t a t i o n Crew
The s t a t i o n crew normally operates and maintains t h e s t a t i o n i t s e l - f , independent of t h e o r b i t launch operations.

They w i l l normally be r o t a t e d i n t o t h e

s t a t i o n q u i t e some time before t h e mission and t h e i r t o u r of duty may extend

p a s t t h e a c t u a l launch operation.

This crew maintains t h e s t a t i o n and t h e

equipment not d i r e c t l y associated with t h e launch operations.

operate t h e communication l i n k s t o t h e ground.

They a l s o

Previous time-line analyses

i n d i c a t e four t o s i x men a r e needed f o r t h e s t a t i o n crew.

Assembly Crew
The assembly crew w i l l checkout, t e s t , v e r i f y , and prepare t h e SORD t o r e c e i v e
OLS-IVBfs.

This crew operates t h e o r b i t tugs and a s s i s t s i n inspection and

assembly of t h e OLS-TVB s t o t h e SORD ( o r t o each o t h e r ) , moves equipment

around, removes t h e CUSS stages, e t c .

The assembly crew i s launched t o t h e

s t a t i o n s e v e r a l months p r i o r t o s t a r t of OLV assembly i n order t o prepare t h e

SORD.
needed.

Time-line a n a l y s i s of t h e assembly operations i n d i c a t e s i x men a r e

The assembly crew i s comprised of two three-man work teams.

Checkout and Launch Crew

This crew prepares t h e o r b i t a l checkout system i n t h e SORD and space s t a t i o n ,
performs t h e o r b i t a l checkout of t h e docked OLS-IVB's, and, together with t h e
mission crew, t h e o r b i t a l checkout of t h e mission spacecraft.

Members of

t h e checkout crew can a l s o double a s a l t e r n a t e s f o r t h e mission crew a f t e r

t h e mission crew i s o r b i t e d t o t h e s t a t i o n .

Teamed with t h e mission crew,

t h e y perform t h e f i n a l countdown and launch of t h e OLV.

The checkout crew,

l i k e t h e assembly crew, i s d i v i s i b l e i n t o two work teams.

The checkout crew

i s o r b i t e d t o t h e s t a t i o n approximately one month p r i o r t o s t a r t of t h e OLV

assembly.

Time-line analyses of checkout and launch operations i n d i c a t e s i x

t o nine men a r e needed f o r t h e checkout and launch crew; i n t h e l a t t e r case,

t h r e e men a r e supplied i n a d u a l r o l e from t h e assembly crew.

ORBITAL LAUNCH OPERATIONS TASKS

O r b i t a l launch operations discussed i n t h i s s e c t i o n a r e a p p l i c a b l e t o any
mission.

Figure 9 p r e s e n t s a sample network of t h e sequence of operations

f o r a s i n g l e OLS-TVB from time of e a r t h launch ( t

0) t o acceptance of t h e

stage f o r t h e OLV buildup and a u t h o r i z a t i o n ( t = 27 hours) t o proceed with

e a r t h launch of t h e next OLV s t a g e .

D e t a i l s of each of t h e s e operations may

be found i n Douglas r e p o r t SM-47371 -- "Applications of Saturn Systems t o

O r b i t a l Launch Operations,

"

September 1965.

Docking
A f t e r t h e CUSS performs t h e rendezvous o r b i t coplaner adjustment (up t o 20.42')
following t h e f i r s t apogee, t h e OLS-IVB i s i n a f a s t p u r s u i t o r b i t with t h e
SORD.

When a 1 . 5 ~ phase l a g occurs, t h e CUSS i n j e c t s t h e OLS-IVB i n t o a slow

c a t c h up o r b i t , and radax from o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y s t a t i o n locks on t h e

OLS-IVB and assumes command of rendezvous.

While an accurate t r a c k i s being

computed, a p r e l i m i n a y checkout i n t e r r o g a t i o n i s telemetered t o t h e OLS-IVB

t o determine i t s s a f e t y s t a t u s .

This i s t h e f i r s t mode of t h e Systems of

Computerized O r b i t a l k r a l u a t i o n (SCORE)
"safe check."

It i s designated a s t h e pre-docking

Measurements a r e made using open loop transmission of t h e PCM/

DDAS t r a i n t o determine t h e vehicle i s i n a s a f e condition t o be brought i n t o

rO

705

14.9

I=

FROM PAD 39A

PL OLSIVB

YES

ORBIT
0.16

0.16

24.0 (48.0) (72 I ETC.

1.36

2.76

CONNECTION

14.36

1
14.36

010

14.61

SORD 6 DOCK

- SEQUENCE OF EVENTS

OLSIVBf2 ONLY

12.76

OLS-IVB ORBITAL ASSEMBLY AND CHECKOUT

DOCKED
MODE

012

NOTES:

SEQUENCE PRESENTED IS FOR FIRST OLSlVB

LAUNCHED; OTHER OLSlVB OPERATIONS WILL BE
SIMILAR (EXCEPTION NOTE EVENTS 121-128)

EVENT TIMES ARE I N HOURS AND

TIME ZERO IS FIRST ELV LAUNCH

14.71

'is~~~~~o
---+

01 1

14.71

CONTACT;
LATCH TO
SORD

t h e dock.

The RF command l i n k t o t h e Instrument Unit i s u t i l i z e d t o disarm

and "safe" various piece of ordnance on board.

The SORD computer e v a l u a t e s

t h e s t a t i c s t a g e condition v i a t h e PCM/DDAS t o determine whether t h e s t a g e

i s i n a dangerous condition, i . e . ,

burning o r leaking hypergolic hl, e t c .

I f t h e OLS-IVB i s accepted a s "safe" t h e rendezvous and docking mode continues.

However, i f t h e v e h i c l e i s deemed unsafe, it w i l l be j e t t i s o n e d out

of t h e "catch up" o r b i t and t h e ground w i l l be n o t i f i e d t h a t t h e "back up"

OLS-ISiB w i l l be required.
Having been accepted a s "safe-to-dock,"

t h e OLS-IVB i s brought i n t o t h e SORD

s t e r n f i r s t and i s docked by remote sensor (TV and docking r a d a r on t h e SORD)

l i n k from t h e manned s t a t i o n .

The f i n a l docking operation includes t h e mating

of docking cones on t h e OLS-IVB with conical apertures on t h e SORD.

These

docking cones contain a low pressure c o n t r o l helium l i n e , a u x i l i a r y power

l i n e s , and closed loop coaxial l i n k s t o t h e 600 kc VCO output of t h e OLS-IVB
and IU DDAS1s and t h e input t o t h e IU command r e c e i v e r .

Then t h e SCORE pro-

gram begins t h e second phase of checkout, t h e "Post-Docking S a f e t y check."

This check i s completed v i a closed loop c o a x i a l cable and w i l l be used t o
h i c l e
can be s a f e l y approached.
determine t h a t t h e ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ecombination

Safety Check
A preliminary v i s u a l checkout of t h e v e h i c l e i s accomplished with t h e SORD

TV

cameras which can be swiveled t o cover any s e c t i o n of t h e surface of t h e

OLS-TVB or t h e SORD.

The SORD w i l l contain a TV t r a n s m i t t e r which w i l l present

t h e multiplexed inputs from f i v e SORD TV cameras t o t h e OLF.

Three of t h e s e

cameras w i l l be permanently emplaced on extended arms on t h e forward periphery

of t h e SORD.

They w i l l be programmable from t h e OLE' through a 360'

lateral

plane and a 180' angle of depression i n conjunction with extendable focus

t r a n s i t i o n o p t i c s (ZOOM l e n s ) t o allow complete v i s u a l monitoring from t h e
s t a t i o n of every point on t h e OLV/SORD combination.

This w i l l a l s o permit

v i s u a l monitoring when t h e o r b i t a l assembly and launch crewmen a r e working

around t h e v e h i c l e s outside t h e space s t a t i o n .

Two more TV cameras designated

"docking cameras" w i l l be l o c a t e d a t t h e docking plane, i n juxtaposition t o

t h e docking cones.

They w i l l be i n quick disconnect mounts and supplied by

t e n s i o n loaded, r e t r a c t i n g and extending cables.

A f t e r each element of t h e

OLV i s brought i n t o t h e dock, t h e docking cameras w i l l be manually removed

from t h e i r present mounting, and "extended" t o t h e equivalent p o s i t i o n s on
t h e newly docked stage t o prepare f o r rendezvous with t h e next incoming
element.
When t h e closed loop s a f e t y check i s complete, t h e S O ~ ~ / ~ e h i combination
cle
w i l l be v i s u a l l y inspected by t h e assembly crew looking f o r obvious mechanical

d e f e c t s , i . e . , t o r n panels, e t c .

The assembly crew w i l l remove and s t o r e such

items a s t h e rendezvous kick stage (CUSS) and any hardware not required a f t e r
t h i s p o i n t ( e .g.,

excess APS modules) using t h e tug.

They w i l l remove t h e

"docking cameras" from t h e i r p o s i t i o n s and advance them t o corresponding posit i o n s a t t h e docking plane from which the kick stage was removed.

The loading

torque on t h e r e t r a c t i n g camera cables w i l l be a balance between t h a t force

which can be e a s i l y manipulated by t h e men i n a zero "gl' condition and t h e
t e n s i o n required t o immobilize "whip" e f f e c t s i n t h e cable.

Snap clamps w i l l

be provided on t h e OLV surface t o p i n t h e cables a t each stage when t h e cameras

a r e f u l l y extended.

The camera w i l l lock i n t o a d o v e t a i l mount which provides

accurate alignment f o r judging p r e c i s e docking maneuvers.

After t h e safety

check i s complete t h e SORD w i l l assume c o n t r o l of an automatic maintenance

cycle of t h e OLS-IVB stage.

O r b i t a l Checkout
NOTE : For o r b i t a l checkout purposes, each OLS-IVB/~nstrument Unit i s considered a s an i n t e g r a l u n i t .
The SORD i s used a s a nucleus f o r o r b i t a l checkout.

After docking and stage

support connections a r e completed, a completely automatic programmed checkout

of t h e stage w i l l be accomplished a s a "Stage OK Functional ~ e s t . " This
checkout w i l l follow t h e philosophy of and be s i m i l a r t o t h e " o r b i t a l Checkout
of S-IVB" a s described i n t h e Douglas Report SM-46696, 27 May 1964, except
t h a t contact with e a r t h s t a t i o n s w i l l not be required.
ground s t a t i o n l i n k w i l l be i n t h e SORD and s t a t i o n .

The equivalent of t h e
The automatic t e s t ' w i l l

be c o n t r o l l e d and can be overridden by i n p u t s from t h e OLF s t a t i o n which w i l l

command t h e SORD computer a s a slave t o i t s computer complex.

A l l display

and record functions w i l l be a p a r t of t h e general purpose computer c a p a b i l i t y

of t h e OLJ? manned s t a t i o n .
The "stage OK Functional ~ e s t "w i l l be divided i n t o four major c a t e g o r i e s ;
Propulsion System, Engine Gimbal System, E l e c t r i c a l System, and Guidance
System.

The prime objective of t h e f u n c t i o n a l t e s t i s t o assure confidence

i n t h e o p e r a t i o n a l readiness of t h e stage subsystems t o perform t h e o r b i t a l

4

start.

Checkout of t h e OLV modules can be accomplished a t varying l e v e l s ;

stage, systems, subsystems, and component and modules.

Any attempt t o d e f i n e

a checkout program must consider t h e value of t h e d a t a obtained versus t h e

penalties of weight, power requirement, and loss of reliability assocfated

with exceeding life cycles. The major checkout modes are:
1. Fully automatic (computer program and comparative analysis

usually with manual monitor and override)

2.

Semi-automatic (basically computer programmed but with manual

operations involved in connect and disconnect, switching, etc )

3. Manual (manual control, switching connect and disconnect,

comparison, etc )
Because of the shorter time involved (schedule), lower manpower requirements,
costs, hazards, etc., a fully automatic programmed checkout of the stages
and OLV is selected. The depth of the checkout will vary with the system,
being on the component level for some and system level for others. Most
checkout will be of a monitor and sample nature with only a few functional
tests called. Some manual testing may be required in fault isolation. Figure
10 presents a schematic of the System for Computerized Orbital Evaluation

(checkout system) and of interfaces with the OLV systems.

Checkouts will be performed as each stage of the OLVrs is delivered to the
OLF, when all three OLS-IVBrsare assembled prior to spacecraft

(s/c) mating,

of the completed OLV after final assembly, and again just prior to initiation
of the launch countdown. Partial or complete checkouts may be performed after
repairs or when monitoring systems indicate problems.

Fault Detection and

sol at ion

When stage checkout data evaluation indicates malfunctions, isolation of the

defective system and/or component is aided by the special purpose computers

onboard t h e SORD.

They a r e commanded by t h e t e s t c o n t r o l operator i n t h e

s t a t i o n t o perform s p e c i f i c t e s t operations.

A f a u l t i s o l a t i o n computer

program may operate down t o t h e system l e v e l , but beyond t h i s point i s

generally becomes impractical t o perform t h e operation automatically due t o
increasing complexity and weight f o r subsystem bypass components on t h e stage.
A t t h e subsystem and component l e v e l , f a u l t i s o l a t i o n must be performed by a

manual t e s t s e t a t appropriate t e s t p o i n t s ( u s u a l l y t h e same a s provided f o r

ground t e s t s ) .

This w i l l not be possible i n a l l cases, obviously, and some

balance must be achieved beyond t h e degree of f a u l t i s o l a t i o n and t h e access

t o any given component.

Unless a component can somehow be corrected, repaired,

or replaced i n o r b i t t h e r e i s l i t t l e point i n providing f a u l t d e t e c t i o n f o r

i t . Thus, a combination of f a u l t d e t e c t i o n and i s o l a t i o n techniques a r e

envisioned, t a i l o r e d t o each s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n and component, ranging from
a W l y automatic computer monitored system ( a s i n s a f e t y s t a t u s ) , manually
d i r e c t e d t e s t i n g by t h e SORD computers through b u i l t - i n detection. and i s o l a t i o n networks, t o manual t e s t i n g on t h e spot with a p o r t a b l e (VTVM) t e s t s e t
and probe.

Figure

9, OLS-IVB

o r b i t a l operations sequence, i n d i c a t e s t h a t up

t o eleven hours a r e a v a i l a b l e t o i s o l a t e and c o r r e c t f a u l t s on each stage

before t h e next e a r t h launch must be delayed.

Launch delays would allow about

a f i f t y hour extension t o t h i s time p e r stage.

Repair
The degree of r e p a i r i n o r b i t i s understandably l i m i t e d i n q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y .
Repair can t a k e t h e form of removal and replacement of f a u l t y components, minor
component r e p a i r (which borders on a f a b r i c a t i o n technique), and removal and
replacement of an e n t i r e modular system or complete stage.

The l a s t technique,

obviously, r e q u i r e s t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of a back-up stage.

Except f o r provisions

f o r a back-up OLS-IVB, t h e r e p a i r techniques have not been determined.

The

removal and replacement c a p a b i l i t y i s l i m i t e d by what man can do wearing a

spacesuit i n f r e e space or i n t h e o r b i t tug (perhaps a s s i s t e d by mechanical
slave arms) and by t h e l o g i s t i c s f o r replacement p a r t s .

In the logistics,

some minor replacement components can be ordered by t h e OLV crew a f t e r each

Larger (and h e a v i e r )

stage C/O and included i n the next stage launch.

replacement components (and systems) can be included i n t h e l o g i s t i c module

o r b i t e d with t h e spacecraft ( l a s t OLV module).

Further consideration of t h e

time allowance, expected techniques, equipment and f a c i l i t y requirements,

e t c . , i s required t o define t h e r e p a i r c a p a b i l i t y which might be employed f o r
o r b i t a l operations.

Maintenance
Maintenance and Support i s an important o r b i t a l operational requirement i n
view of t h e l e n g t h of time the modules of t h e OLV a r e i n o r b i t and t h e requirement f o r a high degree of confidence i n system readiness during t h e s h o r t
d u r a t i o n launch window.

It w i l l be confined t o t h e following o r b i t i n g vehicles

and equipment: t h e support o r b i t a l dock (SORD), OLS-IVB's, t h e assembled OLV,

tug, spacecraft, and the launch f a c i l i t y s t a t i o n .

The o r b i t i n g launch f a c i l i t y

( O W ) s t a t i o n w i l l be t h e command and c o n t r o l c e n t e r f o r t h e performance and

c o n t r o l of a l l o r b i t a l operations and maintenance functions.

It w i l l house

operation and maintenance personnel (from t h e previously noted OLO crews) and
t h e remote c o n t r o l equipment.

Operation and maintenance procedures w i l l be

r e s t r i c t e d t o f u n c t i o n a l v e r i f i c a t i o n f o r SORD readiness, v e h i c u l a r docking

(assembly), functional v e r i f i c a t i o n of OLS-IVB's, minor c o r r e c t i v e maintenance,
venting, abbreviated OLV checkout and a l l up t e s t , and abbreviated countdown

and launch. A large share of procedures will be performed remotely from the
OLF station, but extravehicular activity (EVA) will be required in readying
the SORD, performing manual and checkout operations, and corrective maintenance.
Support of the OLV by the SORD will include electrical power supply, pneumatic
supply, communication links, command links, and status and safety monitoring.
In addition, the SORD provides several support functions, such as attitude
control, propellant settling, checkout interface, station keeping, etc.
Various functions such as venting, valve dither, and hydraulic cycling will be
accomplished on a predetermined schedule which can be varied as DDAS inputs
indicate a requirement to change, i.e., an unpredicted elevation or depression
in tank pressure would modify the interval and period of the venting cycle.

The maintenance program will be divided into the following major operations.

Tank Ventinn
Controlled tank venting of fie1 (L%)

and oxidizer (Lo2) tanks must be per-

formed. (venting of the LO2 tank is not anticipated).

Period and duration of

this operation will be per a predetermined program in the SORD computer that
is continually updated by tank pressure and temperature data. An audible and
visual alarm system will announce prior to each venting cycle in order that
local manned operations can be suspended and the crewmen retrieved before a
vent is performed. Settling acceleration, attitude control, and positioning
is provided by the SORD propulsion systems. The SORD/OLV assembly is temporarily
unslaved from the OLF station and propelled at 0.0005 "gfffor two minutes
during which the propellant is settled and the tanks vented down to prescribed

pressures.
station.

The SORD then n u l l s t h e accrued v e l o c i t y and r e s l a v e s t o t h e

While more exotic venting schemes can be envisioned, t h i s most

conservative approach was employed t o ensure compatibility with t h e operat i o n a l sequence.

F l i g h t Valve Dither Cycle

The valve "dither" cycle w i l l e n t a i l u t i l i z i n g a periodic b u r s t of pneumatic
c o n t r o l He t o each valve i n t h e OLV operational program.
t h e valve and then allow it t o r e s e a t immediately.

This would unseat

The repeated "cracking"

of a l l f l i g h t required valves would, f o r a l l p r a c t i c a l purposes, eliminate

the p o s s i b i l i t y of a catastrophic frozen valve during the f i n a l launch plan.
The pneumatic c o n t r o l helium gas i s supplied by the SORD through t h e S-IVB
helium vent valve.
Figure 11 presents a schematic of t h e e x t e r n a l supply pneumatic helium c o n t r o l
supply system.

It i s desirable t o have only a s i n g l e c o n t r o l helium on the

SORD and t o simplify i t s use a s much a s possible.

The c o n t r o l helium on t h e

stage i s supplied from a 3000 p s i sphere through a blocking r e g u l a t o r where

it i s reduced t o 490 p s i f o r use.

The downstream side of t h e r e g u l a t o r i s

returned t o t h e regulator a s a blocking pressure s e t a t 535 p s i i n p a r a l l e l

with an overboard c o n t r o l helium vent and e l e c t r i c a l l y operated vent valve.
By running a continuous helium l i n e through each stage from s t e r n docking
cone t o t h e forward docking aperature connected t o t h e helium vent dwnp of
t h e stage, a single SORD control helium pressure of 550 p s i could be u t i l i z e d
t o block t h e helium supply by overpressurizing the regulator and t o supply
c o n t r o l helium at 550 p s i f o r operating stage valves.

Since t h e stage

SORD-PNEUMATIC SYSTEM & HELIUM CONTROL

SORD

"
I

f
L

2"

J-21
PLENW

8
REG 5% PSI

OVERPRESS
SHUTOFF

VENT

r0-

rOI

+o-0-0-0-0-0-0-

C<~0-0-0--0-0-0-e-

MALE

FEMALE MALE

FEMALE MALE

S-IVB ( 1
575 PSI

MECHANICAL
OVERPRESS VENT

S-IVB (2

SELF-SEALING DISCONNECTS O N FEMALE

DOCKING CONE ONLY. NORMAL STAGE
CONTROL He VENTS THROUGH MALE
DOCKING CONE

S-IVB 13

,
ADDITIONAL

PNNMATIC
LINES ADDED TO S-IVB

FIGURE 11
pneumatic c o n t r o l loop w i l l operate s a t i s f a c t o r i l y with p r e s s u r e s up t o

750

p s i without damage, an a u x i l i a r y vent a t 575 p s i should be included on the

continuous l i n e through each s t a g e .

Then a s each stage of t h e spacecraft i s

stacked t o t h e next one, t h e SORD w i l l automatically provide c o n t r o l helium

f o r i t s pneumatic system.

S u f f i c i e n t helium w i l l be c a r r i e d t o operate t h e

c o n t r o l pneumatic system of t h e e n t i r e OLV during i t s s t a y i n t h e dock.

The

helium supply w i l l a l s o be capable of recharging t h e OLS-IVB c o n t r o l helium

b o t t l e s by a u x i l i a r y , manually handled, l i n e s so t h a t i f t h e OLV must abort
a launch a f t e r two unsuccessful t r i e s t o meet t h e Mars escape window, it

w i l l be redocked t o t h e SORD and i t s c o n t r o l helium b o t t l e s can be r e p r e s surized f o r a d d i t i o n a l attempts.

Hydraulic Cycling
The v i s c o s i t y of t h e hydraulic f l u i d w i l l be maintained by u t i l i z i n g e l e c t r i c a l l y energized h e a t e r blankets around elements of t h e hydraulic system.
However, p e r i o d i c cycling of t h e hydraulic system i s required t o p r o t e c t
a g a i n s t f r e e z i n g of t h e engine gimbal a c t u a t o r s and hardening of non-metallic
p o r t i o n s of t h e hydraulic s e a l system.

E l e c t r i c a l power (28 v o l t and

56 v o l t )

i s supplied by t h e SORD through t h e forward and a f t b a t t e r y bus on each s t a g e .

Operational Power Replenishment

This i s an i n t e r n a l problem of t h e SORD; however, it i s a f u n c t i o n of t h e
power d r a i n created by t h e OLV and must be p a r t of a programmed maintenance
cycle t o allow updated power depletion information c o n t i n u a l l y f e d t o t h e
SORD computer t o maintain adequate energy l e v e l s i n t h e SORD power source.
The SORD w i l l have a replenishable power source capable of operating i t s
e n t i r e computer and checkout complex, t h e docking and monitoring t e l e v i s i o n
voice, data, and c o n t r o l communication l i n k s , and
systems, t h e SORD/OI;F
supplying a l l required power f o r t h r e e OLS-IVBfs and t h e spacecraft while
t h e s e a r e i n dock.
The e l e c t r i c a l power required by each stage and t h e spacecraft f o r p e r i o d i c
maintenance operations such a s venting, e t c . , must be c o n t i n u a l l y a v a i l a b l e
and power f o r stage checkout must be a v a i l a b l e on command.
t o power requirements of t h e SORD i t s e l f .

This i s i n addition

There a r e s e v e r a l p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n s

t o t h i s problem based on a study progression of b a t t e r y design.

The magnitude

of t h e power required r u l e s out t h e use of s o l a r c e l l s a s we now conceive them.

A v a r i e t y of p u l s a t i n g force generators w i l l be a v a i l a b l e i n t h e near f u t u r e

such a s atomic SNAP r e a c t o r s or S t e r l i n g heat engines d r i v i n g generators.

The output of t h e s e u n i t s when f i l t e r e d and s t o r e d by a highly e f f i c i e n t
secondary b a t t e r y system could conceivably supply a l l power required by t h e
SORD/OLV combination.

s p e c i f i c disadvantages.

Each type of energy replenishing source has unique

SrJAP r e a c t o r s , although small i n s i z e and maintenance

f r e e , w i l l r e q u i r e e x o t i c shielding t o prevent r a d i o a c t i v e contamination of

t h e SORD.

S t e r l i n g heat engines on t h e other hand operate on a sharp tempera-

t u r e d i f f e r e n t i a l and t h e r e f o r e require t h a t t h e SORD be s o l a r o r i e n t e d and

slaved so t h a t t h e dark or shade s i d e remains away from t h e sun and t h e
absorption plane i s always i n t h e s u n ' s rays.

By t h e time a c t u a l implementa-

t i o n of an energy source system i s required, research w i l l have progressed

s u f f i c i e n t l y t o allow a choice based on present design versus requirements.
Considering p r o j e c t e d s t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t f o r t h e l a t e 19601s, it i s v i s u a l i z e d
t h a t t h i s power source w i l l be upgraded secondary b a t t e r i e s i n conjunction with
a charging mechanism containing atomic SNAP r e a c t o r s o r S t e r l i n g heat engines
which can u t i l i z e t h e temperature d i f f e r e n t i a l between t h e exposed and shaded
s i d e of a s o l a r o r i e n t e d SORD ( t h i s may not be f e a s i b l e i f SORD/OLV must
r o t a t e f o r thermal balance of t h e APS hypergolics)

Small replaceable f u e l

c e l l b a t t e r i e s w i l l be c a r r i e d a s emergency power f o r t h e SORD only, while

t h e p r i n c i p a l power system i s being r e p a i r e d o r maintained.

O r b i t a l Umbilicals
A problem e x i s t s i n p ~ o v i d i n ga minimum number of hardwire connections between

s t a g e s and t h e SORD, t o allow closed loop checkout and e x t e r n a l power input

without mating umbilicals, and t o allow complete interchange of s t a g e s without

a l t e r i n g test'program.

Figure 1 2 presents a proposed s o l u t i o n whereby t h e

stages a r e coupled t o each other and t o t h e SORD with docking cones placed
a t t h e f o r e and a f t mating surfaces and u t i l i z e a p r i n c i p a l of "staggeredstackingfr t o continue wiring through stages.

The following hardwire f u n c t i o n

would be required:

600 kc VCO/DDAS l i n e s

2 f o r each S-TVB/IU

combination and 2

6 2
line)
f o r spacecraft ( ~ ~-coaxial

I U Command Receiver Inputs

1 f o r each S-IVB/IU and 1 f o r

- 4Coaxial l i n e )
spacecraft ( ~ ~ 2 1

1-

22

External Power Lines

6 each S-IVB and

600 p s i Control Line

Continuous through each v e h i c l e .

4 f o r spacecraft

With t h e "staggered-stacking" p r i n c i p a l a l l l i n e s appear i n a l l s t a g e s b u t

they a r e clocked one p o s i t i o n between t h e male docking cone ( a f t ' ) and t h e
female docking cone (forward) with t h e number 1 l i n e being used i n t e r n a l i n
t h e s t a g e i n each sequence.
It should be immediately obvious t h a t all of t h e S-IVB/IU s t a g e s a r e wired
i d e n t i c a l l y and t h a t t h e order of stacking makes no d i f f e r e n c e t o t h e f a c t
t h a t Transmitter Number 1 w i l l always be connected t o t h e f i r s t s t a g e and
Transmitter Number 2 w i l l always be connected t o t h e second stage i n t h e
stack, e t c .

It i s a l s o l o g i c a l l y apparent t h a t t h i s w i l l remain t r u e f o r

any number of interconnecting wires t h a t a r e o f f - s e t o r "clocked" by one

p o s i t i o n i n each group.

DOCKING S-IVB/SORD

SORD

I I
I

I
SIVB-IU

SIVB-IU

I
I

I
1

SIVB-IU

FIGURE 12
This w i l l allow interchange of OLS-IVB stages i n case one stage i s deemed
unacceptable f o r launch ( e .g.,

i f OLS-IVB #2 unacceptable, OLS-IVB

#3 w i l l

r e p l a c e it i n t h e OLV configuration order becoming t h e second stage and t h e

backup, OLS-IVB

#4, w i l l

replace #3 a s t h e t h i r d s t a g e ) .

Minor r e p r o g r m i n g

of t h e command computer and stage sequencers may be required, these provisions

can be incorporated i n t h e stage with n e g l i g i b l e penalty.

The b a s i c opera-

t i o n a l concept depends on t h i s i n t e r c h a n g e a b i l i t y and a s i n g l e OLS-IVB backup

s t a g e ready on t h e pad a t Complex 39 f i v e days a f t e r OLS-IVB #3 i s launched.
Analysis of systems and operations i n d i c a t e s t h i s approach i s t h e most
p r a c t i c a l and imposes minor, acceptable p e n a l t i e s on t h e OLV performance.

Data Evaluation
The. processing of t h e input d a t a i s accomplished by t h e use of t h r e e programs
within t h e computers.

These programs a r e t h e Data Compression and Queuing

Program, t h e Operational Program, and t h e Communication and Control Program.

The d a t a received from t h e telemetry r e c e i v e r o r hardwire connection i s
assumed t o be a 72 k i l o b i t r e s t o r e d pulse t r a i n .

This pulse t r a i n i s f e d i n t o

t h e telemetry i n t e r f a c e u n i t where synchronization i s e s t a b l i s h e d and t h e

words of each frame a r e i d e n t i f i e d .

When a d a t a word i s assembled i n t h e

i n t e r f a c e u n i t it i s t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e assigned computer along with t h e

channel i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number and word address.

The Data Compression Program

w i l l t e s t t h e new value of t h e word against t h e l a s t value and t h e p r e d e t e r mined l i m i t s .

If t h e d a t a i s within t h e defined l i m i t s , t h e d a t a r e p l a c e s

t h e l a s t d a t a received and t h e program i s terminated.

I f t h e d a t a received

i s out of l i m i t s , t h e value and i t s address a r e placed i n t o an a c t i v e queue.

The second program, Operational Programs, i s a s e t of d a t a s e n s i t i v e programs
which a r e c a l l e d f o r through t h e address of t h e d a t a being received v i a t h e
input queue from t h e Data Compression program.

The o p e r a t i o n a l programs w i l l

process t h e d a t a t o perform t h e monitoring and alarm function a s w e l l a s f o r

checkout of a v e h i c l e and d a t a 6 i s p l a y .

The information which i s input t o

t h e o p e r a t i o n a l programs can be controlled by varying t h e l i m i t f o r t h e d e s i r e d

word i n t h e Data Compression program.

By s e t t i n g t h e l i m i t s t o zero t h e word

w i l l e n t e r t h e queue every time it i s received.

The Communications Control program w i l l receive a l l requests f o r a c t i o n from t h e

t e s t c o n t r o l operator.

This may be a request t o perform s p e c i f i c t e s t opera-

t i o n s o r r e q u e s t s f o r information t o be monitored on t h e CRT d i s p l a y tube.

This

program w i l l a l s o c o n t r o l requests f o r information from t h e e x t e r n a l bulk memory.

The computer w i l l operate on t h e programs on a p r i o r i t y b a s i s with t h e d a t a

compression program, c o n t r o l program, and operation program having descending
priorities.

When none of t h e other programs a r e a c t i v e t h e s e l f - t e s t program

w i l l run.
Under t y p i c a l operation with a l l e i g h t input channels operating, t h e d a t a comp r e s s i o n program should r e q u i r e 20% of t h e computer time.

Since a l l u n i t s of

t h e system a r e t o be interconnected, i f any one u n i t f a i l s t h e system w i l l

s t i l l operate with t h e l o s s of speed.

Since one of t h e computers can be used

t o check out t h e o t h e r while s t i l l performing t h e monitor operation, f a u l t

i s o l a t i o n should be very f a s t and t h e down time minimized.
A prime question which must be asked i f one of t h e d a t a evaluation programs

indicate trouble i s :

Are t h e evaluation programs working properly?

Often

t h e r e w i l l be s u f f i c i e n t supporting information t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e program

i s giving t h e c o r r e c t answers, e.g.,

i n d i c a t i o n of a c o n t r o l system f a i l u r e

might be accompanied by e r r a t i c maneuvers during docking or p r o p e l l a n t

settling.

However, an off-nominal performance such a s low Isp might not be

immediately obvious except through t h e computer programs.

I n cases where

t h e r e i s a p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e programs a r e not working, a self-check w i l l

be necessary ( t h i s i s p a r t of t h e reason f o r d u a l computers on t h e SORD).
This check can be accomplished q u i t e simply by having a pfe-cut t a p e t o p l a y
through t h e programs.

I f t h i s operation r e v e a l s t h a t t h e program i s working

properly, t h e r e s t i l l e x i s t s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t an instrumentation malfunct i o n o r telemetry p r i n t o u t s could r e v e a l a dropout.

However, an instrumenta-

t i o n malfunction, p a r t i c u l a r l y one where t h e measuring device i s working b u t

i s out of c a l i b r a t i o n , could not be caught v i s u a l l y .

This should be resolved

by redundant d a t a sources and by d a t a c r o s s checks i n t h e s t a t i o n computer.

Command and Control

Command and control of orbital operations is of primary importance in a
complex and potentially hazardous operation. The limitation of data links,
the resources available to the command and control facility, and the shortness
and directness of communication links should be considered in selecting the
command and control facility. The resources required in communications, data
reduction and analysis, program control, etc., must be considered. A ground
based facility, the OLF, or the Mission spacecraft can be considered for the
command and control center during an orbital operation. For the system and
concepts considered in this analysis, command and control for orbital closure,
docking, assembly, checkout, maintenance, countdown and launch are centered
in the OLF space station. During macro-rendezvous, the chaser stage is controlled by the ground based system. Although orbital countdown and launch is
controlled from the OLF station, it is probable that, during the coasting ellipse
between second and third stage, command and control would be switched to the
ground based system (probably the MSC facility supported by the near earth
and deep space tracking and communications networks).

Countdown and Launch

Countdown and launch techniques, like checkout, may proceed on an automatic,
semi-automatic, or manual mode. Because of the severe time constraints of
the launch window (less than five minutes in an orbit), the hazards, and the
rapid sequence of events required as launch is approached, the countdown will
be automatically programmed but will include hold events for crew assessment
and decision points. Figure 13 presents the orbit countdown and launch
operations sequence for an OLV comprised of a manned interplanetary spacecraft

I-

rn

G)

(408.6)

0,3

423.18

DEACTIVATE
C/M AND
PREPARE
FOR STORAGE

697

418.77

689

M/M

0 002

802

SEAL OFF

c/M

PREPARE

41 8.88
699

803

FLIGHT

427.1 8

804

427.28

661

419.58
(17.47 DAYS)
455.58
(18.97DAYS)

100.172

806

662

0.01

414.59

685

100.2

807

41 9.88

414.6

100.5

808

414.61

412.31

0.02

124.5

809

INITIATE
ENGINE
START

RESLAVE
SORD
TO OLF

676

418.61

413.31

REFURBISH
FOR NEXT
ATTEMPT

410.2

664

675

(RETRO)

SHUT D O W N
g REDOCK
TO SORD

~.5,

674

M A I N STAGE 0.01
PLANECHG, -----C
(APOGEE)

Y;LSNcH

6&L

673

410.15

-*
0.01

663

START
OLV APS
0.04 MAINTAIN
CHILLDOWN
--C ULLAGE
FLOW
5-IVB #I 8. X2
TO LAUNCH

[1l:
01(~ azSTART

414.49

O L V APS
SETTLE 8
ULLAGE
PRESSURIZE

683

~~~IP,'[

START

672

SORD
PRESSURIZE
5-IVB X I
TANKS

M I N 1.092 HRS
TYP 100.092 HRS
M A X 336.092 HRS

0.7

805

O.W,

414.43

C/O SYS.,
DETERMINE
TRAJ. A N D
PLANE CHG.

682

411.77

S-IVB
PRESSURIZE
0.02
TANKS,
CHILLDOWNS

410.06
671

0.05

660
SORD
SETTLE 8
MAINTAIN
ULLAGE

ABORT

700
BEGIN
INTERPLANET
FLIGHT
PHASE

418.88

I N T O ELLIPTICAL
SHAPING ORBIT

0.06

4.0,

681

411.71

TO LAUNCH

~~~~~P

INJECT

0.01

670

a s/c t s - 1 ns~ ~
410.43

O L V APS

659

- -

411.7

NEXT
( O N E ORBIT)

409.75
669

658

/ M FOR
3.0, MINTERPLANET
0.1,

698

418.78

410.23

SEPARATE'

ULLAGE

668

657
TRANSFER
TO INTERNAL
POWER

1.0

-o,

410.32

S-IVB~I
MECO

678

409.4
667

0.05

656

ACTIVATE
LAUNCH
SYSTEMS

- -

420.18

SWITCH
S/C TO
INTERPLANET
FLIGHT

6%

41 8.67

PRESSURIZE

688

3.0

-+

409.1
666

D
C
,
TESTS
8 CHECKS

655

OLVCOUNTDOWN ANDLAUNCH-SEQUENCEOF EVENTS

677

650

EVENT

RECYCLE

665

1
6.5

and t h r e e OLS-IVB stages.

Event times a r e noted i n hours.

From proceeding

assembly and checkout operations, countdown i s i n i t i a t e d a t t = 408.6 hours,

i g n i t i o n occurs at t = 410.21, and f i n a l ( t h i r d ) stage i n j e c t i o n i s at t =

418.88.

Except f o r t h e mission crew i n t h e C/M,

of t h e SORD/OLV.

no men w i l l be i n t h e v i c i n i t y

A few minutes p r i o r t o i g n i t i o n , t h e SORD w i l l be r e t r o e d

away from t h e OLV (event

664). The OLV w i l l be a b l e t o hold independently

f o r two o r b i t a l launch windows before it must be redocked t o t h e SORD f o r

replenishment (e.g., p r e s s u r i z a t i o n gases).
down and launch attempt can be repeated.

After s e v e r a l o r b i t s , t h e count-

I n order t o broaden t h e launch

window ( 3 days estimated from nodal regression l i m i t a t i o n s ) , four days of

o p e r a t i o n a l schedule hold c a p a b i l i t y i s provided between OLV readiness and
s t a r t of countdown f o r t h e f i r s t launch opportunity t o accommodate any schedule
slippage.

Crew Accommodations
Crew accommodations a r e required f o r t h e o r b i t assembly and launch crews.
Analysis of operations f o r t h e example mission i n d i c a t e a six-man assembly
crew and a nine-man checkout and launch crew a r e required.

By combining

some c a p a b i l i t i e s , t h i s was r e s t r i c t e d t o twelve men t o t a l by having t h r e e

assembly crewmen a s s i s t i n t h e checkout.
i n t o t h r e e man teams and r o t a t e i n s h i f t s .
t o proceed on a 24-hour b a s i s .

I n general, t h e crews a r e divided

This allows o r b i t a l operations

A t l e a s t one crewman serves a s t h e support

and communications l i n k at t h e s t a t i o n while t h e other two a r e engaged i n

extravehicular operations.

For t h e extravehicular functions, an o r b i t a l tug,

based perhaps on an adaptation of t h e LEM ascent stage, i s used f o r major

t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , l i f e support a t t h e SORD/OLV, and removal of heavy items

(spent APS modules, t h e CUSS, e t c . )

i s provided i n t h e OLF s t a t i o n .

"Permanent" housing f o r t h e OLO crews

This must a l s o accommodate t h e s t a t i o n crew

(who run and maintain t h e s t a t i o n ) and, f o r s e v e r a l days a t l e a s t , t h e mission

crew.

Thus, crew accommodations i n d i c a t e an 18-man (24 temporary) "permanent"

capacity s t a t i o n .

Crew Transfer
The OLV crews a r e t r a n s f e r r e d between t h e s t a t i o n , SORD, OLV, e t c . , by t h e
orbit tug.
time.

Generally, only two OLO crewmen a r e outside t h e s t a t i o n a t any

The operations generally lend themselves t o two tugs with two-man

c a p a c i t y ( f o u r men f o r crew t r a n s f e r ) which can a l s o serve a s a temporary

l i f e support refuge a t t h e SORD, a s well a s perform heavy equipment removal
and t r a n s f e r .

The mission crew, which i s o r b i t e d t o t h e s t a t i o n p r i o r t o

o r b i t i n g t h e spacecraft, t r a n s f e r s from t h e s t a t i o n t o t h e mission module t o

a s s i s t i n conducting t h e spacecraft checkout.

I f t h e spacecraft i s f i r s t

docked t o t h e s t a t i o n p r i o r t o f i n a l assembly, t h e mission crew can have

r e l a t i v e l y d i r e c t access from t h e s t a t i o n t o t h e mission module.

I f the

s p a c e c r a f t i s immediately docked t o t h e OLV assembly a f t e r rendezvous, t h e

mission crew must be t r a n s f e r r e d by t h e o r b i t tug.
t r i p s fr0.m t h e s t a t i o n t o t h e mission module.

This w i l l r e q u i r e t h r e e

A f t e r completion of t h e OLV

f i n a l checkout (spacecraft included), t h e mission crew t r a n s f e r s t o t h e

command module p r i o r t o i n i t i a t i o n of t h e f i n a l countdown.

For t h i s , and

o t h e r reasons, t h e mission module should have a d i r e c t access t o t h e command

module i n the spacecraft launch configuration.

Communications
Communications l i n k s a r e required between t h e OW s t a t i o n and t h e ground,
between t h e SORD and stages, t h e s t a g e s and t h e s t a t i o n , t h e SORD and s t a t i o n ,
t h e o r b i t tug and s t a t i o n , and between extravehicular crewmen and t h e t u g and
station.

During and a f t e r o r b i t launch, of course, communication l i n k s a r e

required between t h e mission spacecraft and t h e ground based DSI network.

The high d e n s i t y d a t a l i n k s would be those employed i n o r b i t checkout ( s t a t i o n ,
ground, stages, and SORD)

It appears q u i t e f e a s i b l e , however, t o markedly

reduce t h e normal s t a t i o n t o ground l i n k by preliminary reduction and condens a t i o n aboard t h e s t a t i o n p r i o r t o transmission t o the ground s t a t i o n s .

The

communication telemetry l i n k s a r e a v i t a l p a r t of t h e o r b i t a l checkout of t h e

OLV.

There i s no simple way t o t e s t t h e stage telemetry l i n k u n l e s s addi-

t i o n a l equipment i s included i n t h e stage t o provide t e s t s i g n a l s .

This i s

impractical, and thus, a method i s employed which w i l l allow a bypass of port i o n s of t h e stage telemetry through t h e o r b i t a l umbilical hardwire l i n k s
between t h e OLV and t h e SORD.

This can allow d u a l telemetry ( s t a g e and SORD)

t o t h e OLF s t a t i o n computer ( o r ground computers) a s w e l l a s d i r e c t i n t e r f a c e

between t h e SORD computers and t h e stage DDAS.
l i n k s and redundancy f o r t h e o r b i t checkout.

This allows s u f f i c i e n t d a t a
During o r b i t launch, of course,

t h i s type of redundancy i s not a v a i l a b l e a f t e r SORD separation.

Another

approach i s employed based on cross check of d a t a .

Launch Window
Launch Window f o r o r b i t launch missions a r e i n t h r e e b a s i c c a t e g o r i e s :
ground t o o r b i t , o r b i t t o t r a j e c t o r y , and t h e a c t u a l i n t e r p l a n e t a r y mission
window; e.g.,

e a r t h t o Mars.

I n general, v e h i c l e performance l i m i t a t i o n s

r e s t r i c t t h e launch windows i n each case.

The assembly o r b i t i n c l i n a t i o n

must be compatible with ETR launch of t h e OLV modules.

With a 28.72'

assembly o r b i t , a 31-minute phasing o r b i t launch window i s a v a i l a b l e once

a day from ETR using t h e Gemini rendezvous p r o f i l e .

The o r b i t a l launch

window i s two-fold, one window i s t h e o r b i t anomoly; i . e . , t h e c e n t r a l angle

between t h e launch point r a d i i and t h e escape t r a j e c t o r y asymtote, t h e second
i s t h e launch o r b i t e q u a t o r i a l nodal o r i e n t a t i o n , i . e . ,

t h e launch o r b i t l i n e

of nodes with r e s p e c t t o t h e e q u a t o r i a l plane, i n which it precesses, should

be coincident with t h e h e l i o c e n t r i c escape t r a j e c t o r y plane e q u a t o r i a l l i n e
of nodes, i n order t o minimize any plane change requirements.

The OLV per-

formance i s s i z e d t o allow a five-minute anomaly window each o r b i t p l u s a

3-day nodal window.

To some extent t h e s e can be traded ( i - e . , decreased

anomaly window f o r increased nodal window).

The nodal window i s achieved

by modifying t h e OLF s t a t i o n o r b i t i n c l i n a t i o n s l i g h t l y (up t o 24')

s i x months before t h e launch d a t e .

a t least

This modifies t h e o r b i t nodal r e g r e s s i o n

r a t e so t h a t , i n time, t h e nodes may be programmed t o coincide on t h e nominal

launch d a t e s e l e c t e d .

This does not exclude f a r t h e r i n c l i n a t i o n change,

e . g . , back t o t h e o r i g i n a l , of t h e OLF o r b i t p r i o r t o s t a r t of t h e OLV b u i l d up i n order t o have a more rendezvous compatible o r launch compatible
inclination.

Properly programmed, t h e nodes w i l l s t i l l coincide on t h e

nominal launch d a t e .

The o r b i t a l launch technique employs an intermediate

parking e l l i p t i c a l o r b i t p r i o r t o t h e f i n a l i n j e c t i o n t o decrease f l i g h t path

angle and t h u s v e l o c i t y l o s s e s .

It pays added dividends i n allowing a g r e a t e r

plane change c a p a b i l i t y at apogee of t h e e l l i p t i c a l o r b i t and i n meeting t h e

i n j e c t i o n anomaly.

The intermediate eight-hour coast time can be used f o r

f i n a l t r a c k i n g and computation of t h e f i n a l i n j e c t i o n .

The i n t e r p l a n e t a r y

launch window i s r e l a t e d t o t h e synodic period between t h e launch p l a n e t

(i.e.,

e a r t h ) and t h e t a r g e t planet (e.g.,

s e l e c t e d (e.g.,

unpowered fly-by).

Mars) and t h e type of t r a j e c t o r y

I n t h e example selected, t h i s i s approxi-

mately a t e n t o f i f t e e n day window occurring every 26 months (exact span

depends on t h e year s e l e c t e d ) .

The infrequency of t h i s window i s a major

f a c t o r i n advocating t h e g r e a t e s t amount of o r b i t a l support deemed p r a c t i c a l

-

t o increase t h e confidence i n a launch-on-time c a p a b i l i t y , since, i f t h e

window i s missed, not only i s t h e mission opportunity delayed f o r over two
years, b u t also, t h e o r b i t e d components of t h e OLV and all t h e Saturn V
b o o s t e r s employed must be w r i t t e n - o f f ( o r t h e OLV employed immediately f o r
an a l t e r n a t e mission).

Emergency and Abort

d

Emergency and Abort modes must be provided f o r all aspects of t h e mission

operations, from e a r t h launch through o r b i t a l operations and launch.

Some

emergency and abort techniques f o r o r b i t a l assembly operations a r e :

a.

OLS-IVB f a i l u r e i n rendezvous:

options; abandon i n rendezvous

o r b i t , rendezvous with t u g and crew and c o r r e c t , provide emergency

o r b i t r e j e c t system

-- probably

t h e l a s t option i s most p r a c t i c a l

and d e s i r a b l e .
b.

OLS-IVB non-safe i n pre-docking s a f e t y check:

options; t u g and

crew c o r r e c t i f p o s s i b l e (probably t o o hazardous), provide emergency o r b i t r e j e c t system (probable technique).

c.

Docked OLS-IVB detected a s progressing t o unsafe condition:

options; t a k e emergency automatic c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n i f p o s s i b l e ,
t u g and crew t a k e c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n t o h a l t unsafe progression
o r remove and r e j e c t t h e stage (dependent on hazard l e v e l ) , r e t r o
SORD (and other OLS-IVB's) away from stage ( p o s s i b l y only i f

end s t a g e ) .

During t h e f i n a l assembly and t h e launch phase-up t o t h e l a s t abort modesystems a r e maintained f o r t h e abort and crew recovery.

Events 800 through

809, i n f i g u r e 13 present a possible sequence of events.

If abort occurs

during a boost phase, t h e OLS-IVB must be shutdown r a p i d l y .

The nature of

abort during o r b i t launch i s somewhat d i f f e r e n t than during e a r t h launch.

The s p a c e c r a f t w i l l already be t r a v e l i n g i n some e a r t h o r b i t , damage from
overpressure w i l l not occur, nor w i l l r e t a r d a t i o n from drag, e t c .

In

general, it appears t h a t abort can proceed a t a more l e i s u r e l y pace than

f o r e a r t h launch.

However, time does remain an important element, a s i n

t h e case of t h e escape t r a j e c t o r y .

The u s e f u l employment of t h e abort

v e l o c i t y i n j e c t i o n t o obtain a quick r e - e n t r y t r a j e c t o r y r e q u i r e s constant

r e v i s i o n of t h e abort i n j e c t i o n .

P a r t l y f o r t h e s e reasons, a s w e l l a s o t h e r s ,

it was s e l e c t e d a s d e s i r a b l e t o abort by r e t r o i n g t h e OLV and Mission Module

(M/M) away and a s i d e from t h e Command Module (c/M) p l u s Service Module

(s/M).

This minimizes t h e v e l o c i t y added t o the C/M and places t h e S/M i n approximately t h e c o r r e c t o r i e n t a t i o n ( r e t r o ) i n t h e mission configuration f o r t h e
earth return injection.

Abort t r a j e c t o r y t r a n s i t times f o r t h e mission and

system considered appear t o be on t h e order of two weeks f o r t h e maximum

cases.
anyway.

Generally, longer t r a n s i t times a r e beyond t h e abort c a p a b i l i t y

Thus, t h e C/M p l u s S/M should have a t l e a s t a two week l i f e support

c a p a b i l i t y f o r t h e s i x man mission crew.

S h o r t l y a f t e r separation of t h e l a s t OLS-IVB, t h e spacecraft and crew aboard
t h e C/M w i l l pass t h e l a s t abort mode i n which t h e s e r v i c e - r e t r o module
(which doubles during launch a s t h e abort propulsion) can i n j e c t t h e C/M
i n t o a s a f e r e t u r n t o e a r t h ( r e - e n t r y ) within a reasonable l i f e support time
(two weeks).

For t h e 1973 mission with t h e e a r t h departure v e l o c i t y of

Vco = 0.22 EMOS, t h e l a s t abort opportunity occurs about f o r t y minutes a f t e r

f i n a l injection.

During t h i s time t h e systems, crew, and t r a j e c t o r y must be

confirmed a s s a t i s f a c t o r y and t h e mission v e r i f i e d GO (event 693).

Numerous other emergency cases and a c t i o n s present themselves, b u t t h e s e w i l l
s u f f i c e t o i n d i c a t e t h e scope of t h e operations.

I n an operation a s complex

a s required f o r t h i s mission, with t h e primary requirement t o minimize o r

negate t h e hazards, occurrence, schedule slippage, and damage t h a t can r e s u l t
from any emergency s i t u a t i o n , an exceedingly thorough emergency and a b o r t
a n a l y s i s i s required.

A thorough procedures program must be r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e

a t a l l times t o t h e command and c o n t r o l computer and crew.

Such an a n a l y s i s ,

with i t s design and o p e r a t i o n a l procedures implications would be d e s i r e d e a r l y

i n t h e development program; however, by i t s very nature it cannot be a v a i l a b l e
i n depth u n t i l w e l l i n t o t h e program d e f i n i t i o n and system design phase of
t h e development.

Tracking and Navigation

Tracking and Navigation i s required during t h e o r b i t a l rendezvous, during
SORD/OLV s t a t i o n keeping and ullaging, a t countdown and launch, during t h e

intermediate e l l i p t i c a l parking o r b i t , and during t h e f i n a l i n j e c t i o n ( i t

continues t o be required during t h e mission b u t t h i s p o r t i o n i s considered
beyond t h e scope of t h i s paper).

During o r b i t a l rendezvous, ground t r a c k i n g

by t h e near Earth s t a t i o n s a r e employed u n t i l t h e stage comes within radar

lock-on from t h e O W .

Basic t r a c k i n g i s then performed by t h e O D .

Attitude

c o n t r o l i s e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e stage and navigation maneuvers commanded t o

t h e stage r e c e i v e r s by t h e r e s p e c t i v e t r a c k i n g f a c i l i t y .

In orbit, direct

tracking of the SORD/OLV is done by the station for ullage maneuvers, etc.
Station keeping and attitude control might be performed by the SORD with
sensors slaved to the station. At launch, SORD/OLV orientation and ullaging
is commanded and updated launch window navigation data transmitted to the
spacecraft. Ground stations (NES) will track the launch with supplemental
data from the OLF station and S/C on-board guidance and navigation systems.
Launch control will be directed from the O W station in this phase.

During

the elliptical shaping orbit and final injection, the DSI network will be
required for tracking. Final injection navigation is commanded by the ground
mission control center, similar to the Apollo mission.

EXAMPLF: MISSION OPEFATIONS

A manned Mars fly-by mission was selected for discussion to demonstrate the
complexity and scope of orbital launch and support functions. It appears to
be a logical early mission, which can utilize Saturn/~~ollo
systems and orbit
launch operation capabilities. The manned Mars fly-by mission shown in figure

14 will

require rendezvous, docking and assembly, checkout, and launch opera-

hardware is to be employed. Certain mission

tions in orbit if ~aturn/~pollo
support elements will be needed to meet these requirements. The elements include added facilities and equipment at both the ground launch base, Kennedy
Space Center (KSC), and in the launch orbit, as well as utilization of presently
planned and projected facilities and equipment. A permanent orbital launch
facility provides launch support for a multi-stage OLV comprised of three
OLS-IVB stages boosting an Apollo spacecraft and a manned mission module
derived from the earth orbital station systems. Figure

14

summarizes pre-

mission support, mission support, and mission execution. The overall mission

ELEMENTS OF THE
MANNED MARS FLYBY PROGRAM

program i s based on e s t a b l i s h i n g a permanent manned o r b i t a l space s t a t i o n

a t l e a s t two years e a r l i e r t o accrue experience and develop operations and
equipment, and a v a i l a b i l i t y of o r b i t a l support equipment slaved t o t h e space
s t a t i o n s e v e r a l months before t h e mission launch d a t e .
A new SORD, s p e c i f i c a l l y assigned t o the fly-by mission i s placed i n O U

o r b i t about t h r e e months p r i o r t o the OLV build-up.

O r b i t a l launch command

and c o n t r o l equipment i s incorporated o r added t o t h e space s t a t i o n f o r use

with t h e SORD/OLV system.
The OLF manned s t a t i o n and o r b i t a l tugs are not e x p l i c i t l y considered a s
d i r e c t mission support since they can be employed f o r numerous other programs
and missions a s well.

Nevertheless, functionally, they a r e required as an

i n t e g r a l p a r t of operations support f o r t h e mission.

The o p e r a t i o n a l plan presented here has evolved from consideration of a basel i n e o r b i t a l iaunch vehicle (OLV) configuration:

t h e o p e r a t i o n a l p l a n and

t h e b a s e l i n e design have been mutually i n t e r a c t i n g i n t h e i r evolution i n t o

t h e preliminary system b a s e l i n e presented.
configuration

wrll

Modification t o t h e b a s e l i n e

g e n e r a l l y l e a d t o modification of t h e o r b i t a l operations.

The mission operations may be broadly categorized i n t o four phases:

ground

launch operations, o r b i t a l operations, space ( o r mission pay-off ) operations,

and recovery operations.
launch operations.

This paper i s r e s t r i c t e d t o t h e ground and o r b i t a l

Considerations of t h e remaining mission phases a r e a v a i l -

able i n Douglas r e p o r t SM-46912, "Plane t a y Reconnaissance,

company, ~ a n u a r y1965.

"

Douglas A i r c r a f t

Ground Launch Operations

The launch operations schedule i s shown on f i g u r e

14. The ground operations

mode i s keyed t o t h e o r b i t a l operations requirements except f o r t h e imposed

l i m i t a t i o n of two days between Saturn V launches ( o r b i t a l operations could
accept one launch each day under t h e most favorable conditions; however,
i n c r e a s i n g t h e d e l i v e r y schedule t o once every two days r e l a x e s t h e c o n s t r a i n t s
on rendezvous and o r b i t a l operations a s w e l l a s on ground operations).

The

OLV modules a r e launched i n t o o r b i t unmanned on Saturn V two-stage b o o s t e r s

(s-IC + S-11).

The S-IVB propulsion system i s not used p r i o r t o o r b i t launch;

rendezvous propulsion i s provided by a separate removable propulsion system

(kick stage).

The launch of each Earth Launch Vehicle (ELV) i s constrained

by a "ready t o receive" acknowledgement from t h e o r b i t a l launch f a c i l i t y

(OW).

This acknowledgement i s normally scheduled t o be t r a n s m i t t e d a f u l l

day before t h e nominal next ELV launch time; and, under most circumstances,
before ELV cryogenic loading.
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e Saturn V launches, s i x Saturn IB launches a r e i n d i c a t e d
( t h e s e might be reduced t o four or f i v e depending upon moderate r e v i s i o n i n
the operational plans).

Two propulsion payloads a r e scheduled f o r t h e OLF

s t a t i o n nodal regression maneuver, one launch i s t h e unmanned supporting

o r b i t a l dock (SORD) f o r t h e OLV, and t h r e e launches a r e s i x man Apollo systems f o r t h e two OLO crews and t h e mission crew.
The mission crew i s launched aboard a Saturn

pol pol lo t o t h e o r b i t s t a t i o n

s e v e r a l days p r i o r t o launch of t h e spacecraft t o t h e o r b i t .

This allows

them g r e a t e r time f o r acclimation and phy siological/psychological i s o l a t i o n

i n t h e space environment p r i o r t o t h e mission o r b i t launch.

It a l s o negates

e a r t h launch abort requirements f o r t h e mission crew from constraining t h e

mission spacecraft configurations.

The mission crew boards t h e spacecraft

mission module while it i s temporarily docked t o t h e o r b i t s t a t i o n f o r

removal of t h e CUSS and l o g i s t i c module and o r b i t a l checkout of t h e spacecraft.

This mode of mission crew operations schedule appears t o be a good

compromise among t h e various spacecraft-crew f i r s t , l a s t , e t c . , modes

considered.
As f i g u r e

14 i n d i c a t e s , t h e l a s t launch ( s p a c e c r a f t payload) i s scheduled

t o occur eleven days a f t e r t h e f i r s t Saturn V launch.

The spacecraft weight

i s about 250,000 pounds, including a d d i t i o n a l systems f o r t h e rendezvous

and o r b i t a l operations.

This leaves about 30,000 pounds a v a i l a b l e f o r

l o g i s t i c supplies t o t h e OLF (moderately uprated Saturn V's a r e employed).

For t h e o p e r a t i o n a l plan considered, a spacecraft backup was not included.
An a d d i t i o n a l Saturn V with a spacecraft backup may be considered a s an
option.

A launch pad could be made a v a i l a b l e within acceptable schedule

limits.

However, a d d i t i o n a l Complex 39 and M I L A support f a c i l i t i e s might

be necessary.
Note t h a t pre-mission preparation launches of OLF nodal v a r i a t i o n propulsion
a r e made a s e a r l y a s e i g h t months p r i o r t o t h e o r b i t a l assembly and launch
of t h e OLV.

This may be considered an extreme case since t h e nodal a d j u s t -

ment requirement may be much l e s s , i n which case t h i s launch can be made

l a t e r i n t h e program.

A f a c t o r not i l l u s t r a t e d i n f i g u r e

14 i s t h e a r r i v a l

a t KSC of Saturn V mission elements a s e a r l y a s seven months p r i o r t o t h e

mission o r b i t launch.

This e a r l y a r r i v a l i s necessary due t o t h e assembly

and checkout requirements of t h e back-up Saturn V (OLS-IVB payload) i n a high

bay which must be used l a t e r f o r another Saturn V (OLS-IVB#3).

out i s complete, the backup i s placed i n a storage high bay.

When check-

I f the number

of low bays are expanded and a f i f t h high bay instrumented f o r Saturn V

assembly and checkout, delivery of the backup vehicle elements may be delayed
a couple of months.
The t e n t a t i v e sequence requires the o r b i t launch operations

(Om) crew

t o be

launched i n (6-man) Apollo/Saturn I B some t h i r t y days before s t a r t i n g the OLV

modules launches
increments

The three OLS-IVB/Saturn V launches follow i n two day

The mission crew i s then launched i n an o r b i t a l Apollo/Saturn IB.

Scheduling then provides f o r launch f i v e days l a t e r of t h e backup OLS-IVB

( a l l are interchangeable) i f required.
a v a i l a b i l i t y of VAB high bay #1 ( t

-t

This i s b a s i c a l l y constrained by

-5)) f o r a repeated checkout of t h e

backup vehicle, and a v a i l a b i l i t y of launch pad 39A ( t =

+4).

The question a s t o whether KSC can launch f i v e Saturn V's i n l e s s than two
weeks cannot be adequately answered a t t h i s time.

Certainly, the present and

projected plans indicate t h a t , given the additional f a c i l i t i e s , equipment, and

crew, such a launch program i s f e a s i b l e by the e a r l y p a r t of the next decade.
Experience with the Saturn I launch vehicles has demonstrated an excellent
launch-on-time c a p a b i l i t y and a l s o indicated many akeas where launch operations
times may be decreased.

I n the Mars Fly-by mission launch program, t h e major

problem may well be simply t h e management and control of the manpower, equipment, supply, and associated l o g i s t i c s t o insure t h a t the r i g h t piece, or the
r i g h t man, get t o the r i g h t job a t the r i g h t time.

The ground launch operations f o r t h i s mission w i l l u t i l i z e t h e f u l l capacity

of t h e Saturn V launch complex p r e s e n t l y planned p l u s some a d d i t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s and equipment f o r a period of over t h r e e months.

E f f o r t s have been made

t o compromise between o p e r a t i o n a l d e s i r a b i l i t y and f a c i l i t y requirements.

U t i l i z a t i o n e f f i c i e n c y i s assumed t o exceed t h a t of t h e i n i t i a l Saturn V/
Apollo missions but t o be somewhat l e s s than a t h e o r e t i c a l maximum e f f i c i e n c y
program.

B u i l t i n t o t h e ground operations and o r b i t a l operations a r e event

times and dispensable hold times which can t o t a l two weeks or more i n t h e
operations schedule.

The OLV design i s based on t h e s e inherent schedule

allowances and upon a s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a t i o n i n t h e mission o r b i t launch window.

Douglas r e p o r t SM-47371 p r e s e n t s t h e d e t a i l o p e r a t i o n a l network f o r KSC ground
launch operations.

From t h i s network a n a l y s i s t h e necessary schedule and KSC

supporting f a c i l i t i e s and equipment f o r t h e Manned Mms Fly-by Program were

determined.

Figure 1 5 i l l u s t r a t e s t h e program support required a t t h e

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) t o support t h e o r b i t a l assembly of t h e Manned Mars

Fly-by Vehicle.

O r b i t a l Launch Operations

Sequence of Events

A composite summary network of t h e pre-mission and mission o r b i t a l operations

i s outlined i n figure

16.

I n t h e pre-mission operations, f i v e Saturn IB

launches t o t h e OLF a r e i n d i c a t e d

v vents

001, 006, 020, 030).

These include

d e l i v e r y of t h e propulsion necessary t o modify t h e o r b i t i n c l i n a t i o n t o v a r y

t h e nodal r e g r e s s i o n r a t e of t h e OLF o r b i t .

For planning purposes t h e node

o r i e n t a t i o n of t h e O D o r b i t should be considered i n c o r r e c t f o r t h e launch

d a t e s s e l e c t e d and t o r e q u i r e adjustment.

Two launches a r e shown with t h e

f i r s t launch occurring 286 days before elements of t h e OLV a r e launched i n t o

MOD1 FICATIONS
A R M I N G TOWERS
l3 TOTAL
2 ADDITIONAL
lMINOR MODIFICATIONS
CRAWLER-TRANSPORTERS
l3 TOTAL
lADDITIONAL

lMODERATE

5 COMPLETE LUTS TOTAL

2 ADDITIONAL LUTS, WITH GSE

LUTS

CREWS
lLCC & HIGH BAYS - 4
lLOW BAYS & PAD - 3
lINCREASED MAINTENANCE
AND REPAIR CREWS

LAUNCH PADS
l3 TOTAL - 39 A, B, C
1 COMPLETE ADDITIONAL (INCLUDES SUPPORT FAC
GENERALSUPPORT
l4 BARGE SETS (2 ADD. )
0- 1W MORE CRAWLERWAY
lINCREASED GAS STORAGE
lINCREASED SHOP AREA

A
-

3 CUSS STG PECULIAR

2 ADDITIONAL I U

COMPLEX 34

COMPLEX 37

3 OLS-IVB STG PECULIAR

l
3 ADDITIONAL S - I l STG

0 ADDITIONAL

HIGH BAYS
l6 TOTAL, 4 EQUIPPED
2 ADDITIONAL BAYS
l
4 OATS, S I S, RACS
3 ADDITIONAL SETS
MODIFICATIONS AND
SPACECRAFT PECULIAR

COMPLEX 39

KSC PROGRAM SUPPORT

AND FUNCTIONAL
LAUNCH PADS
l
3 TOTAL DES l RED
(2 ACCEPTABLE W lTH
RESCHEDULING)
1 ADDITIONAL FOR 3 TOTAL
NO FURTHER MAJOR DIFFERENCES
LAUNCH PADS
0 1 TOTAL- MODIFIED FOR SAT 18-5
l
SAT 16-5 FIRST STG HANDLING
TRANSPORT, AND C/O EQUIPMENT
lPAYLOAD (SORD) PECULIAR
MISSION M O D U L E - M / M
lMODIFIED MORL FACILITIES
AND EQUIPMENT - FLY-BY SIMULATOR
SPACECRAFT OPERATIONS (APOLLO)
lMODIFY AND ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT
lNEW WE1 GHT AND BALANCE FACILITY
S T A T I C T E S T AREA-S/C
lMODIFICATIONS TO BOTH SITES
GENERAL SUPPORT
lPOSS I BLE l NCREASES

Wl

VERl FY

204

LAUNCH S/C
( U N M A N N E D ) TO
OLF
(SAT V ELV)

SlVB "3 TO

030

LAUNCH ORBITAL
SORD'ASSEMBLY
CREW TO OLF
(SAT I B ELV)

(SAT IB ELV)

I1 , 0

-78

-286

LAUNCH NODE CHG.

PROPULSION STAGE
TO OLF
ISAT I B E L V i

002

101

205

206

-284

EVENT 205 WAS

O N SCHEDULE

A N D MODIFY

R ~ TO
D OLF
OSA CREW
UNLOAD SPARES

R&D TO O L V

TO OLF

REPIDEZVOUS 8
DOCK TO OLF
C 0 SYSTEM
COMPUTE INJECT

S/C-M/M

207

BOARD TO

MISSION

VERIFY-SORD

102

IGNITE STAGE
TO CHANGE
ORBIT I N C L I N .
ASSUME-?-ID

11,6

_46

18

208

17,10

0.16

O C O CREW
PLUS MISSION
CREW C / O S/C
VERIFY

UNDOCK FROM
OLF, TRANSFER
S/C &CREW

105

014

5EPARATE
S I VB #2
COAST TO
APOGEE

209

17,26

o,O1

'

17,27

C/O

C/M

0.01

10.18

21 1

12,0

14.43

212

MISS
WINDOW

4W

- ..

NOTE:

+17,7

17,47

16.85

0.15

082

TRANSFER CREW

215

0'03

21 6

204

BEGIN
INTERPLANETARY
PHASE

17.0

-0

203

17.5 ,

0.3

17.47

REPEAT
OLV-S C C / O
REC
TESTS

OPPORTUNITY

202
HOLD FOR
LAUNCH
WINDOW

21 3

081

SEPARATE
SlVB #3,
CONFIRM
SYS & TRAJ

4.84 6.34
VENT OLV
( 5 TIMES)

.12.01

201

OW

..

DRIFT I N T O CENTER
O F LAUNCH WINDOW
O N LAUNCH DATE

TIME ZERO IS FIRST SIVB LAUNCH (EVENT 040)

KINEMATIC LAUNCH WINDOW O F 1.5 DAYS ASSUMED
OPERATIONALSCH PAD OF 4 DAYS PROGRAMMED(EVENT 202)

. .-

ADJUST OLF
ORBIT I N C L I N
FOR LOGISTICS
AND OLO

SIVB #3
INJECT S/C
O N HYPER
ESCAPE TRAJ

OLV -

VEKIFY

-102

'

200

0.14

+ OLV
FUNCTIONAL

COAST TO
PERIGEE

OLV-S/C

COMPLETE

O N E RECYCLE AVAIL

SIVB #3
EXECUTE
PLANECHG
AS NECESSARY

210

090
O C O CREW
ALL UP
O L V C/O

&::%:

7.10

006

- SEQUENCE OF EVENTS

LAUNCH ORBIT
INCLINATION
ADJUST. PROP. STG.
(SAT I B ELV)

005
DIFFERENTIAL
NODE CHANGE
UP TO
61A!!)
, 10O1

I I, 8 7 , TO OLV, DOCK

0,03

-28

18

103

-283

004

013
UNDOCK SORO
FROM O L F 8
SLAVE TO OLF
I N ORBIT

NEW NODE
DRIFT RATE

SHAPING
ORBIT

003

EXAMPLE MISSION ORBITAL LAUNCH OPERATIONS

o r b i t (Ebents 040, 050, 060, e t c . ) .

The reason f o r a long lead time i s t o

permit a small d i f f e r e n t i a l i n nodal regression r a t e t o cumulate i n t o a

large node change capability.

This length of time may not be necessary, a s

node adjustment requirements may be much l e s s .

However, i n examining t h e

operational requirements, the more extreme case i s considered.

launch

ex vent

The second

006) may or m a y not be necessary depending upon the nature of

the propulsion system, the specific nodal angle/inclination change required,

and the e f f e c t s on o r b i t a l l o g i s t i c s .

As shown, the OLF i s considered t o be

re-established i n a rendezvous and l o g i s t i c s compatible o r b i t about 100 days

p r i o r t o s t a r t i n g the OLV build-up.

The node w i l l continue t o d r i f t , of

course, and w i l l now be d r i f t i n g a t the original r a t e .

However, i n selecting

the magnitude of inclination changes and the time periods a t d i f f e r e n t

inclinationslnodal d r i f t r a t e s , some combination w i l l occur t h a t w i l l allow
the 0LF o r b i t node t o d r i f t i n t o the correct orientation within the i n t e r planetary launch window

v vent

008).

After the node adjustment i s provided and the OW returns t o a more l o g i s t i c

compatible o r b i t , the supporting o r b i t a l dock (SORD)which w i l l be used on
t h e mission i s launched t o the OLF

vent

010).

dock the SORD t o the s t a t i o n they inspect i t .

After the space s t a t i o n crew

I f there i s no apparent damage

or problem, they v e r i f y the SORD i s available f o r t e s t and checkout.

damage has occurred it w i l l be assessed and corrected.

If

This may include

ordering spare p a r t s and other supplies from the ground base t o be orbited
p r i o r to, or with the SORD crews.

The SORD has not been sized pending f u r t h e r

d e f i n i t i o n of i t s functions and requirements; however, a review of the f'unctions and requirements presently i d e n t i f i e d indicate t h e Earth Launch Vehicle
(ELV)may be a standard Saturn IB, or possibly an uprated Saturn IB i n the
60,000 pound payload class.

A f t e r t h e SORD i s v e r i f i e d acceptable, t h e f i r s t o r b i t a l operations crew

( a s i x man/two team assembly crew) i s launched
i n a s i x man o r b i t a l Apollo.

v vent

020) t o t h e OLF s t a t i o n

This crew i s a l s o p r o f i c i e n t and responsible

f o r SORD a c t i v a t i o n , t e s t , and checkout

vent

012).

When t h e SORD i s v e r i -

f i e d , it i s undocked from t h e OLF space s t a t i o n , flown some d i s t a n c e from

i t i n t h e same o r b i t and slaved t o t h e s t a t i o n (Event 013).

I n t h e meantime, t h e o r b i t a l checkout crew ( a s i x man/two team crew) i s
o r b i t e d t o t h e OLF (Event 030).

This crew checks out t h e SORD/OLF checkout

system, p o s s i b l y using some simulator packages.

A s s i s t e d by t h e assembly

crew t h e y prepare and v e r i f y t h e SORD ready t o receive t h e OLS-IVB's f o r t h e

OLV

The launches and operations f o r t h e OLS-IVB1s comprising t h e OLV a r e i n d i c a t e d

by Events 040 through 064.
s i m i l a r (see f i g u r e 9).

The o p e r a t i o n a l sequence f o r each OLS-IVB i s

The o r b i t e d OLS-IVB s t a g e s a r e docked t o t h e SORD/

OLV assembly i n tandem a s they a r r i v e .

The CUSS and excess APS modules a r e

removed and t h e stage rigged f o r checkout.

Each i s checked out and v e r i f i e d

a s it a r r i v e s so checkout i s completed before t h e next ground launch.

The

f i r s t OLS-IVB launch, aboard a Saturn V ELV, i s t h e Event (040) s e l e c t e d f o r

time zero i n a l l networks.

I f t h e backup OLS-IVB i s needed, it i s launched

(080) and follows s i m i l a r procedures a s t h e other OLS-IVB1s.

Launch of t h e

backup i s constrained by a v a i l a b i l i t y of a launch pad and a l s o a high bay

checkout.
A f t e r t h e OLV i s assembled, t h e mission crew i s launched
man o r b i t a l Apollo t o t h e OLF o r b i t s t a t i o n .
aboard t h e s t a t i o n f o r s e v e r a l days

v vent

vent

070) i n a s i x

The crew w i l l then remain

073) before t r a n s f e r r i n g t o t h e

spacecraft

vent

102).

During t h i s time they may be i s o l a t e d f o r physiological

and p o s s i b l y psychological purposes i n one of t h e o r b i t s t a t i o n l i f e support

modules.

The o r b i t s t a t i o n crew and mission crew doctors, supported by ground

based personnel, can monitor and a s s e s s t h e crew.

Several days l a t e r , t h e unmanned mission spacecraft i s launched
aboard a Saturn V ELV.

The spacecraft

(s/c)

100)

f i r s t docks t o t h e OLF s t a t i o n .

It c a r r i e s a l o g i s t i c module with spares and supplies

been ordered by t h e OLO crews.

vent

v vent

101) which have

The l o g i s t i c supply c a p a b i l i t y i s r e q u i r e d f o r

spares and replacement modules ordered f o r t h e OLS-IVB1s a s a r e s u l t of t h e

o r b i t a l checkouts or unexpected f a i l u r e and expenditure ( e .g., APS systems),
l i f e support refurbishment f o r t h e o r b i t s t a t i o n , replacements and s e r v i c i n g
f o r t h e SORD, IEM o r b i t tug, and t h e o r b i t a l Apollol s ( t o be used t o r e t u r n
t h e o r b i t assembly and checkout crews), a r e t r o - s t a g e f o r cleaning up t h e
d e b r i s from t h e o r b i t a l operations (spent CUSS stages, APS u n i t s , r e j e c t e d

. , and p o s s i b l y

OLS-IVB, e t c )

some equipment f o r t h e s e r v i c e and checkout of

t h e s p a c e c r a f t i t s e l f while i n o r b i t .

at t h e s t a t i o n

v vent

A f t e r t h e mission crew board t h e

SIC

1 0 2 ) ~t h e spacecraft i s checked out and t r a n s f e r r e d t o

t h e OLV where it i s docked t o t h e t h i r d stage OLS-IVB

v vent

105).

For t h e

S/C configuration shown, two of t h e mission crew then l e a v e t h e mission module

(M/M)

and, a c t i v a t i n g t h e C/M,

t o t h e M/M

v vent

200).

separate and dock t h e C/M nose access hatch

This allows d i r e c t access of t h e mission crew between

M/M and C/M and a l s o completes t h e mission configuration of t h e s p a c e c r a f t .

( o t h e r spacecraft configurations may not r e q u i r e t h i s o p e r a t i o n ) .

After t h e

OLV and S/C a r e checked out and v e r i f i e d i n t h i s configuration, an o p e r a t i o n a l

hold time i s programmed i n t o t h e schedule

v vent

202).

Schedule slippage i n

ground launches, o r b i t a l operations, e t c . , may have u t i l i z e d a l l o r p a r t of

t h i s time.
time.

F i n a l o r b i t a l venting operation should be performed during t h i s

The o r b i t launch window i s assumed t o be 1.5 days, although r e c e n t

a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e s t h r e e t o four days i s more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e .

launch would then occur about

The o r b i t

17 t o 20 days a f t e r s t a r t of OLV assembly

( f i r s t OLS-IVB).
Depending on t h e time a v a i l a b l e and t h e operational hold time, a repeated
f i n a l OLV-S/C checkout i s performed

vent

203).

Pre-countdown t e s t s a r e

performed and system and crew readiness confirmed

v vent

204).

During t h i s

time t h e mission crew e n t e r t h e C/M and prepare f o r t h e countdown, s e a l i n g

o f f t h e C/M from t h e M/M and a c t i v a t i n g t h e separation and abort system.
i s then ready f o r launch and t h e countdown i s i n i t i a t e d

OLV-S/C

J u s t p r i o r t o i g n i t i o n t h e SORD i s r e t r o e d away

v vent

v vent

The

205).

206) and t h e f i r s t and

second stage OLS-IVB's i n j e c t t h e t h i r d stage and spacecraft i n t o t h e high

e l l i p t i c a l 8.5 hour shaping o r b i t .
profile.

Figure 1 7 i l l u s t r a t e s t h e o r b i t launch

This operation not only minimizes g r a v i t y l o s s e s but i n c r e a s e s t h e

plane change

v vent

210) c a p a b i l i t y by an apogee i g n i t i o n p r i o r t o f i n a l

t h i r d stage injection.

I n addition, it allows time f o r a more accurate

t r a c k i n g and assessment f o r t h e plane change operation and the f i n a l i n j e c t i o n

near perigee i n t o t h e i n t e r p l a n e t a r y t r a j e c t o r y
i s separated

v vent

vent

212).

The t h i r d stage

213) and t h e t r a j e c t o r y , systems, and crew confirmed

within t o l e r a n c e s .
After t h e l a s t abort opportunity ( f o r two week e a r t h r e - e n t r y

Event 214)

t h e crew t r a n s f e r s t o t h e mission module t o begin the i n t e r p l a n e t a r y phase

vent

216).

The mission space operations comprise t h e navigational correc-

t i o n s , i n - t r a n s i t deep space experiments, Mars Fly-by and passage, Mars probe

launches, d a t a reduction and t r a n s m i t t a l t o Earth, aphelion observations, and
i n i t i a t i o n of t h e e a r t h recovery phase.

S-IVB-1872

TWO PHASE ORBIT LAUNCH PROFILE

COAST ELLIPSE

>,
/

/'

---

//---

\\

NOTE:
1. IGNITE 1 ST S-IVB

2. IGNITE 2ND S-IVB

/'

3. BURNOUT 2ND S-IVB

START COAST

(4

4. IGNITE 3RD S-IVB

FOR PLANE CHANGE

5. REIGNITE 3RD S-IVB

6. BURNOUT 3RD S-IVB;

TRANS-MARS
INJECTION

I ASSEMBLY ORBIT

FIGURE 17
CONCLUSIONS
O r b i t a l assembly and launch operations developed f o r Saturn
can provide t h e Nation with an e a r l y (1975 t o

po pol lo systems

1980) c a p a b i l i t y t o perform

s e v e r a l new c l a s s e s of missions, p a r t i c u l a r l y manned p l a n e t a r y fly-by

reconnaissance, and can provide t h e a v a i l a b l e operational experience and
technological base important i n t h e development of more advanced systems
(nuclear i n p o s t 1980 decade) f o r manned p l a n e t a r y landing missions.
The o r b i t a l operations requirements a r e considerable, d e s p i t e t h e e l i m i n a t i o n
of o r b i t a l r e f u e l i n g operations (assembly only modes).

The program complexity

w i l l r e q u i r e considerable proficiency and confidence i n t h e ground launch

operations f o r t h e Saturn V system a s w e l l as i n t h e performance of t h e
v a r i o u s o r b i t a l operations of rendezvous, docking and assembly, checkout, e t c .

E f f o r t s were made t o minimize t h e extravehicular manual operations i n o r b i t ,

but it appears such a c t i v i t i e s w i l l remain highly d e s i r a b l e ( e . g . , r e p l a c e ment of f a u l t y modules, some manual l a t c h i n g and connections i n s e r t i o n , e t c . )
i n providing an a l l systems GO s i g n a l a t countdom.

O r b i t a l checkout i s

deemed necessary and d e s i r a b l e due t o t h e long o r b i t "soak" times, e t c . ,

a r i s i n g from m u l t i p l e docking and assembly operations, extraneous equipment
removal, rendezvous times, and a l i m i t e d ground launch r a t e .
The known and a n t i c i p a t e d requirements f o r supporting t h e OLS-IVB i n o r b i t
over a period of days and even weeks l e d e a r l y t o a requirement f o r o r b i t a l
supporting equipment a s exemplified by t h e supporting o r b i t a l dock (SORD).
The d e s i r e t o minimize t h e jeopardy t o the human h a b i t a t i n o r b i t ( t h e o r b i t
s t a t i o n ) l e d t o a s e p a r a t i o n of t h e loaded OLS-IVB boosters assembled on t h e
SORD from t h e o r b i t s t a t i o n .

This a l s o decreased t h e p r o p e l l a n t r e q u i r e d f o r

t h e p e r i o d i c venting u l l a g e and maintained t h e s t a t i o n a s an unperturbed

navigation checkpoint i n o r b i t with an a c c u r a t e l y determined emphemeris from
p r i o r tracking.
The supporting elements a r e complex and c o s t l y and w i l l take time t o develop.
However, it must be pointed out t h a t t h e technologies, c a p a b i l i t i e s , and
hardware developed and e s t a b l i s h e d a r e d i r e c t l y applicable t o numerous missions
which have escape payload requirements considerably i n excess of t h e Saturn V
systems.

An o r b i t launch c a p a b i l i t y based upon m u l t i p l e o r b i t e d payloads

r e q u i r e s many of t h e supporting operations and elements of a ground launch

f a c i l i t y , a l b e i t t o a l e s s e r degree i n most cases.

An increased requirement

i s t h e severe i n t o l e r a n c e t o schedule slippages engendered by o r b i t a l launch.

Because of -the d e t r i m e n t a l environmental e f f e c t on t h e hardware systems and

t h e r e s t r i c t i o n s of i n t e r p l a n e t a r y launch windows, a p r o f i c i e n c y i s r e q u i r e d
of t h e o r b i t launch crews which exceeds t h a t of ground launch crews.

The

f i r s t manned o r b i t launch, a s a r e s u l t , should not be performed i n a vacuum

(no pun intended).

Rather, it should be preceded by s e v e r a l unmanned o r b i t a l

launches ( e .g., l a r g e probes t o t h e p l a n e t s , e t c . ) t o develop t h e techniques,

equipment, and experience required of o r b i t a l launch.

Thus, t h e o r b i t a l launch

system (space s t a t i o n , SORD, OLS-IVB o r b i t a l boosters, e t c . ) must be regarded

not a s an element of a manned Mars Fly-by mission alone, b u t r a t h e r a s a
prime system f o r t h e t o t a l family of programs f o r both unmanned and manned
I

exploration of t h e p l a n e t s and s o l a r system.

Except f o r t h e SORD, t h e e s s e n t i a l elements of t h e o r b i t launch system e x i s t
i n varying degrees of development.

Development of t h e e a r t h o r b i t i n g l a b o r a t o r y

i s a l o g i c a l s t e p i n t h e development of t h e o r b i t launch f a c i l i t y
station.

(om)

A grouping of two expanded l a b o r a t o r y modules o r t h r e e b a s i c l a b o r a -

t o r y modules w i l l provide t h e b a s i c make-up of t h e OLF o r b i t s t a t i o n which can

be launched with a s i n g l e Saturn V system.

The s p a c e c r a f t mission module i s

a l s o based upon a d e r i v a t i v e of t h e l a b o r a t o r y hardware.

Thus, t h e o r b i t a l

laboratory, t h e o r b i t launch f a c i l i t y , and t h e mission module a r e all derived

from t h e same b a s i c family i n a s e q u e n t i a l development culminating i n t h e
i n t e r p l a n e t a r y mission module i t s e l f .
t h e same function, i . e . ,

A l l t h e s e a p p l i c a t i o n s must perform

provide a s u i t a b l e and ample s h i r t sleeve environment

f o r long periods f o r at l e a s t s i x men.

The experience and operation time accumulated with t h e l a b o r a t o r y systems

w i l l be l a r g e l y t r a n s f e r a b l e t o t h e design and development modifications f o r
t h e mission module.

Evolution of t h e mission module, then, would follow t h e

same b a s i c p a t t e r n a s t h e evolution of t h e spacecraft s e r v i c e module and

command module from t h e Apollo systems.

This approach should not only minimize

development c o s t and schedule, b u t should a l s o a s s i s t i n achieving t h e long

l i f e t i m e system r e l i a b i l i t i e s and man/machine i n t e g r a t i o n required f o r t h e
i n t e r p l a n e t a r y mission.

It i s obvious t h a t t h e b a s i c a b i l i t i e s and hardware employed f o r a manned Mars

Fly-by mission are l a r g e l y applicable t o other missions; e.d.,

manned Venus

fly-by, Mars and Venus o r b i t , l u n a r l o g i s t i c s s h u t t l e ( o r b i t a l launch operations), etc.

Much of t h e experience and hardware systems gained through o r b i t

assembly and launch of chemical stages lend themselves t o adaptation t o o r b i t

launch of nuclear s t a g e s i n t h e more d i s t a n t f u t u r e f o r Mars and Venus landing
expeditions.

The manned Mars Fly-by mission w i l l r e q u i r e rendezvous, docking

o
and assembly, checkout, and launch operations i n o r b i t i f ~ a t u r n / ~ p o l lhardware i s t o be employed.
meet t h e s e requirements.
ment.

Certain mission support elements w i l l be needed t o

These elements include added f a c i l i t i e s and equip-

The o p e r a t i o n a l p l a n i s based upon a v a i l a b i l i t y of important supporting

elements a t both t h e ground launch base, KSC, and i n t h e launching o r b i t t o

c o n t r i b u t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of meeting t h e mission schedule
and i n s u r i n g a high confidence of mission launch success.

Provisions a r e

incorporated, however, t o provide f o r schedule slippage i n both t h e ground

and o r b i t a l operations.

The infrequency of launch opportunities (about once

every two y e a r s ) d i c t a t e s a high degree of mission support.

i s made, however, i n an e f f o r t t o l i m i t program c o s t s .

Some compromise

No backup i s provided

f o r t h e spacecraft launch, f o r instance; and t h e ground launch f a c i l i t i e s

a r e l i m i t e d t o t h e minimum which can be reasonably expected t o provide an
adequate ground launch frequency t o support t h e o r b i t operations within t h e
OLS-IVB o r b i t l i f e t i m e design c o n s t r a i n t s .
The o p e r a t i o n a l plan presented i n t h i s paper i s s e l e c t e d p r i m a r i l y a s a basel i n e t o uncover f u n c t i o n a l requirements and t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of t h e hardware
design and operations.

Although t h e present p l a n appears t o be a l o g i c a l and

f e a s i b l e approach based on evaluation of e x i s t i n g and planned systems and

operations, f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s may l e a d t o moderate or major departures and
revisions.

I n addition, a s t h e operational p l a n i s examined i n d e t a i l , t h e

c o n s t r a i n t s and requirements f o r t h e system hardware design may vary; e . g . ,

t h e o r b i t l i f e t i m e c a p a b i l i t y of t h e OLS-IVB may be decreased from t h i r t y
days t o twenty days, providing increased performance f o r t h e OLV.

Similarly

a s system hardware requirements a r e defined i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l o r modified,

t h e o p e r a t i o n a l plans may be revised t o r e f l e c t t h e s e requirements.

Never-

t h e l e s s , it i s concluded t h a t o r b i t a l assembly and launch operations a r e

f e a s i b l e using t h e S-TirB modified a s a pioneer OLV propulsion stage, provided
separate o r b i t support equipment a s exemplified by t h e SORD, i s developed.
It i s a l s o concluded t h a t p r o p e l l a n t t r a n s f e r i n o r b i t i s not r e q u i r e d i f t h e

S-IVB i s employed f o r o r b i t a l launch operations i n combination with a

moderately up-graded Saturn V ELV

Figure 18 swnmarizes t h e conclusions from t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n of OLO with

~ a t u r n / ~ p o l lsystems.
o

00

C1

m
rn

C)

GASES
POWER
CHECKOUT % FUNCTIONS

PROPELLANT TRANSFER I N ORBIT NOT REQUIRED

SAT V S-IVB + I U IS ADAPTABLE AS OLV STAGE

'PERMANENT' OLF MODE DESIRABLE,

TEMPORARY' OSE MODE ACCEPTABLE,
INDEPENDENT OLV MODE INADEQUATE

ADDED FACILITIES & EQUIPMENT A T KSC

HlGH PROFICIENCY FOR OLD CREWS

HlGH DEGREE OF MISSION SUPPORT

PROGRAMMED HOLDS NECESSARY

SEVERE INTOLERANCE T O SCHEDULE SLIP

SEPARATE OSE REQUIRED

ORBITAL C/O NECESSARY

EVA DESIRABLE

HlGH PROFICIENCY & CONF. NEEDED I N SAT V GROUND LAUNCH OPERATIONS

OLO OPS & SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS SIMILAR T O GROUND LAUNCH OPERATIONS

OLO WITH SATURN/APOLLO SYSTEMS

CONCLUSIONS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The Author wishes to acknowledge the contributions of the Planetary Reconnaissance Study Team in defining Saturn systems and particularly of L. J. Pritchett
in the analysis and definition of SORD systems.

BIBLIOGWHY

1. "Planetary Reconnaissance, SM-46912; Douglas Aircraft Co., January, 1965

2.

atu urn/^-IVB/A~O~LO

Root, M. W., "Application of

Systems to Planetay

~econnaissance;"Presented to the Symposium on Post Apollo Space Exploration, American Astronautical Society at Chicago, Illinois, May

4-6, 1965.

Also, Douglas Engineering Paper No. 3645.

3.

"Orbital Checkout of S-IVB",

SM-46695;Douglas Aircraft Co., May, 1964.

4. "Advanced Orbital Operations", Report No. 00.368; Ling-Temco-Vought,

May 1964.
5. "saturn V Improvement Study MS-IVB-1 and MS-IVB-2," SM-47090;Douglas
Aircraft Co., April, 1965.

6. "Application of Saturn Systems to Orbit Launch Operations," Douglas

Aircraft Co., September 1965.