NASA SP-4009

THE APOLLO SPACECRAFT

VOLUME October 1, 1964--January

III 20, 1966

Courtney

G. Brooks

and Ivan D. Ertel

II. s._.

Scientific and Technical Information NATIONAL AERONAUTICS

Offtce AND

1976 SPACE ADMINISTRATION Washington, D.C.

For

sale

by

the

Superintendent Printing NIlmber Catalog

of

Documents, D.C. 69-60008 20402

U.S. Government Price $5.20 Stock Library of Congress

Office, Washington, 033-000-00614-4 Card Number

FOREWORD
This sixteen-month this period the All neering Grumman. fines of these of the third volume period major three major of from spacecraft decisions spacecraft the Apollo of being had for men confining V. the Spacecraft program made was and Chronology 20, the on now and covers 1966. detailed American within built that the the engiand conwould surface agreedallowwithin Module, when Apollo the useful pro-

October

1, 1964,

to January

During

emphasis

manufactured been be and of must designed

by North

decisions

safely provide transportation and back. One of the most upon payload of the Saturn

equipment to the lunar these decisions was the agreed that the design

It was initially

able weight for the Apollo spacecraft this were the Command and Service and the adapter structure. Saturn spacecraft Although V design weight conservatism performance, in the

was 90 000 pounds. Included Module, the Lunar Excursion some was relief converted the into was obtained additional in the into

was a continual true during translated toll in an when

concern

gram. This was volume; concepts of numerous Weights growth. were

particularly were being took were their weekly

period reported upon in this hard design and the solution revision to curtail weight by by of weight and the control elimination elements estimates. weight of to

details Programs

in an upward attempt practical, to reduce

reported

instituted and,

nonessential "niceties" lighter weight. some "Little accelerate the launch California, Downey, over impact on the launch ascent hardware, the the As might an Work on full-scale Joe II," the escape

redesigning

the Command Module testing was initiated. aborts built Command system at White by Convair, Module under Sands, San this

had progressed to the point where The launch escape system was tested New Mexico. was q" A special employed conditions At situation. test for vehicle, to of tests Diego, at WSMR E1 Centro, Back at structure for Little system was of advanced article was sank underway water located Joe and started. design during on II the

for off-the-pad

to "maximum most difficult

the parachute system was undergoing extensive testing. California, North American built a large trapeze-like artificial loads. other area, At side the descent be expected a number impact Module lake yet testing to certify another of the of the in the the site, Command the White Module for failures ruptured and the Mountains Lunar testing were and the test work Module Sands from propulsion Module structure Test Facility, the

(west)

Organ Service stages

and

propulsion of disappointing structure test. analytical

initial

development

experienced.

For instance

Command first water Considerable

experimental
,°. 111

engineering I,anding models matical effort loads

problems and

associated stability were

with studied

landing

the

I,EM

on

tile

Moon. scaled mathetime an charac-

t)y dropping

dynamically

on simulated lunar models of both the was underway

soil and by computer IA:_M and the lunar in engineering

runs which utilized surface. At the same terms the surface

to deduce

teristics and information Surveyor addition cislunar to worry age to the plastic about radio much help and space

soil mechanics from Ranger Orbiter led

of the lunar was available to no of also solar sickness, proposed. events was to and planned assure by the flares

surface. Only the sparse photographic to the engineers, yet later data from change surface, design fully in the progress. understood. was Thick I_EM The design. about intensity dammore and time the regard In the lunar uncertainty

significant handicapped

to lack

of definition flux during radiation were solar detectors expended suits the by same would data the last rate the

environment

of the radiation al)out

was not

In addition possible to learn telescopes transparent

a particular A program a network for this that the

concern was of

eyes (in the form

of cataracts)

of the astronauts. instituted H-alpha

eye shields predicting frequency effort came l)uring was space from orbited this with phase Apollo

purpose. the

At

the In

same nor this

neither Pegasus I launch program

spacecraft

astronauts' satellites tional to the orbital

be damaged two the Saturn (;emini

1)y micrometeors. micrometeor vehicles. entered two

obtained

detection its operaSignificant for effects. Studies to the were sites, Apollo point a and exposure

period were

into

a launch

averaging operation with aspects back of of the in the

once

every

months.

mission days

development only

of operational by the crew incidental had Receiving of Orbiter design Apollo in orbit, were

procedures

rendezvous, Finally,

"shirtsleeve" of weightlessness scientific and features precision instituted return essential

to fourteen of lunar that

physiological defined. Laboratory landing The to the progressed

important sample the Further of activity

of the mission Iamar

contamination lunar with the geological

point With Lunar

established. a goal Science coordinated

definition was

surveys project. progressed generator. an extended also during

was achieved.

better

selection

Experiment

Package

(AI,SEP)

of commitment small automated _peration that NASA In substance mendous clear after summary, and challenge

to a 56-watt radioisotope power science stations would be assured departure during routine in of of the this scope astronauts. of scientist the the depth team hmar of the It was Apollo

Thus these lifetime of this period into The the tre-

recruited

its first group making and

astronauts. program a venture to do settled reality. was the job. landing

period

unmistakably

to the

government-indnstry

mobilized

Maxime Director Development, ]oh,_son Space

A. Faget and Center

o I Engineering

iv

CONTENTS
PAGE FOREWORD .................................................

iii

lAST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

......................................

vJ

THE

KEy

EVENTS

...........................................

ix

PREFACE

...................................................

xiii

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

-1-ESTING

..................

1

APPENDIXES

................................................

249 ............................. Quarter . ....................... Manufacturers ............ 251 253 255 257 ..................... 261 263 265

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Glossary Spacecraft Major Flight Apollo Funding Organization

of Abbreviations Weights by

Spacecraft Summary Program

Component

..................................... Flight Objectives

............................................ Charts ..................................

INDEX

.....................................................

277

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
PAGE

ST-124-M Inertial Platform Ames Research Center wind Capt. Apollo S-IVB LEM Ames LEM S-II Pegasus Ranger LEM Six Ranger Gemini LEM Douglas Space Apollo Pegasus Gemini Service S-IVB Joseph A. Walker Module and

Assembly ........................ tunnel tests ....................... LI,RV ...........................

10 16 25 31 37 42 44 56 68 72 74 81 89 93 96 I03 I07 Ill 131 135 138 144 150 158 159 160 162 164 181 182 182 187 187 190 192 195 200 201

Command

...................................

"Battleship" Firing ................................... ..................................................... Research ascent stage Center stage roll-out installation VIII descent lunar stage wind tunnel tests ........................

........................................... ........................................... ......................................... picture ................................... ............................. .......................................... simulator

degrees IX III mockup

of freedom

lunar photos ..................................... astronauts ....................................... .............................................. simulator ........................................ ..................................... simulator

Honeywell

space

suit ................................................. mission A-003 ....................................... II ................................................. IV space walk ....................................... module ............................................. electrical installation .................................. ground 2 test test vehicle ................................ ............................................ Research at Cape Facility Kennedy ............................. ...............................

First S-IC Pad Abort Imnar S-IVB S-IC S-II S-IVB Mission Gemini Apollo

I_anding arrival stage stage firing firing

............................................ ............................................

static firing .......................................... Control Center, Houston ............................. V crew emblem . ............................................ .............................................

F-1 engines ................................................ Cartoon ................................................... Command I_EM module simulator ................................. simulator .............................................
vi

PAGE

First Saturn

V S-IC stage completed

...........................

2O2 2]4 217 228 23O 236 236 247

"Bubble" type helmet ....................................... Pregnant Guppy ............................................ Gemini VII launch and crew ................................. I,ittle .Joe II ............................................... First manned rendezvous in space ............................. Gemini VI-A returns to earth ................................. Apollo Mission A-004 .......................................

vii

THE KEY EVENTS
1 964

October October

5-8: 12:

NASA U.S.S.R. AC Spark

conducted launched Plug

formal Voskhod reported

review I, world's first

of

LEM first

mockup multi-manned

M-5

at

Grumman and

factory. shipped to

spacecraft. completed

October 14: NAA. October November December December Joe II 27:

Apollo

guidance

system

NASA Program. 23: NASA Apollo

announced gave Mission NAA

appointment a formal Company A-002 was

of go-ahead delivered flown

Maj. on first

Gen. the

Samuel Block with

C.

Phillips

as Director

of

Apollo

II spacecraft. stage to MSFC launched for testing. by a Little BP-23

7: Douglas 8: booster.

Aircraft

S-IVB

at WSMR,

1965

January January

14-21: 21-28:

NAA Space

completed Technology

acceptance

tests

on

the

CSM named

sequential sole

and

systems for

trainers. the LEM

Laboratories

was

contractor

descent February February pictures March fuel March CM. March 18: performed March March and March and April April April April April April 21: surface 23: 2:

engine. 9: NAA 17: MSC cells. Crew U.S.S.R. man's back completed VIII earth in to the was before favor Division Voskb_d first lunar of an ground by impact. "all-battery" LEM rather than the previously be planned retained Leonov in test model of from the S-II Cape stage of the It Saturn V.

Ranger decided

launched

NASA

Kennedy.

transmitted

17:

Systems launched first

recommended I1 cn a

"shirtsleeve" 17-orbit mission.

environment Lt. Col.

Aleksey

"walk-in-space." Ranger launched aboard; the Critical held the the IX, from first Design last of Cape U.S. series. Kennedy multi-manned of the It transmitted with CM 5814 pictures Virgil three crew of lunar

NASA launched to earth. Gemini W. Part 1II Young I of system stage over was

astronauts mission Block lasted II

I. Grissom orbits. compartment

John 23-24." docking

Review

was of Center was

at NAA. IB booster Control in the firing CM crew underwent after Center, structural of Saturn liftoff, its was skeleton V's first and Systems first static firing from Vertical (S-IC). system Critical at MSFC. the Cape

I: The 9: Kennedy

first

Saturn space

Control

manned

flights,

transferred of the

Control

to Mission emplaced first clustered

Houston. Assembly

14: Final beam Building at KSC. 16: MSFC conducted

stage

27-30: Part Design Review

lI of the Block II was held at NAA.

compartment Crew

docking Division

28: ASPO Manager Joseph F. Shea tion to retain "shirtsleeve" environment 19: Apollo mission launch but A--O03 launch Project began Gemini was escape Fire II

approved the in the CM. at WSMR. worked Cape testing Cape

recommenda-

May May June June

flown from

Little perfectly. to

Joe

II

booster test data

disintegrated on heating

25 sec after

system

22: NASA launched during reentry. 3: 3: Northrop-Ventura NASA launched

Kennedy of the on

obtain

qualification IV from

Apollo a Titan

earth II

landing booster.

system. Astronauts

Kennedy

ix

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

James mission. June 7: approved June June June June 7-13: control 14: the 29: 29: A

A. George

McDivitt the E.

and flight of Mueller,

Edward White NASA lunar

H. made surface

White America's

II

were first

crew "space

members walk." for Manned

for

the Space

four-day Flight,

During

Associate

Administrator package.

procurement NAA's system Technical Sample formally launched

experiments began was

Rocketdyne engines. Working Receiving pad

Division Committee Laboratory. abort (PA)-2, the

qualification appointed of of the six at

testing MSC to

on

the

CM's the at for

reaction design WSMR. of

oversee system

Lunar NASA NASA

a test selection

launch

escape

announced

scientist-astronauts

the

Apollo

program. June July July July August August 30: 4-I0: 19: 30: gram burning 9: firing stage. August 12: opment August August 18: Apollo of Program hardware. put "Operation Scrape" into effect in an effort to lighten the LEM. Director Samuel C. Phillips listed six key checkpoints in develApollo of 14 515 Langley NASA MSC kg and 5." The for Two S-II NASA its (32 Research approved 000 lbs). SA-10 V's first from launches. stage 2.5 (2) min made at full (1) Aircraft a "perfect" thrust. NAA Co. conducted static-tested first first full-duration flight model captive S-IVB full-duration firing at MSFC by Cape Kennedy, marking the end of the Saturn I prodirected launched Saturn the Saturn stage; Center put to its Lunar subcontract implement Landing to changes Research Eagle-Picher to limit the Facility for the total into operation. batteries. weight to

a Grumman

LEM LEM

Grumman

10 successful programmed

milestones and

occurred: Douglas

Grumman

21: Gemini V Jr., and Charles which fuel NAA lO: 13: cells NASA ASPO weight. 16-23: 20: for A total mode NASA be used 21: MSC had 1: MSC on 15: Recovery 20:

was launched Conrad, Jr., used

from Cape Kennedy with astronauts L. Gordon Cooper, as crew members. The eight-day flight was the first in electrical of F. service Shea to recruit power additional announced source. system pilot-astronauts. a new plan to control Apollo had been concluded.

were

as primary testing a plan Joseph

August September September

27:

reported

ground Manager

propulsion

announced

spacecraft September September September: simulation October October would October Not,ember opment Not'ember Corp. for Not,ember sion, December was December the December December M. Gemini December to 4:

Grumman MSC development of 13 was

established to and were for the for

final NASA fabrication made first the 009

design Hq of in time. Apollo in the that

parameters International suits space LLRV, spacecraft

for and

the

LEM

landing be equipment.

gear. awarded the lunar

recommended flights flown

Latex associated one specified first

Corp. in which by of

a contract

including were at

requirements accepted lunar missions. that

ASPO. the kind that

spacecraft

ceremonies

NAA,

announced been established

the for

bubble-type use in the Sample to operate would space manufacture No.

helmet Apollo Receiving the

designed extravehicular

by

Crew mobility Office

Systems unit. pending

Division devel-

engineers

adopted

a Lunar organization it and

Laboratory

of a permanent 5: for NASA fabrication

facility. a contract a contract portable by with with life Link International Hamilton system. General Precisupport Group, Latex Standard

announced of the

negotiate suit, of 1 was and the

Apollo

continued 30:

development Apollo Mission

Simulator

shipped

MSC. Gemini from VII, Cape Standard of the lunar II CSM VI-A Thomas six hours reaction manned Kennedy by astronauts on a 14-day tested suit. Design Stafford liftoff. system engine qualification was completed. Review from Cape aboard. was The held at NAA. with astronauts rendezvoused Walter with Frank mission. a life support back pack designed to meet Borman and James A. Lovell, Jr.,

launched

5: Hamilton requirements 6-17: I5-16: Schirra, VII 31: The Jr., less The

successfully surface Critical was P. after

Block and than SM

Gemini

launched

Kennedy spacecraft

control

x

THEKEYEVENTS
1966
January 3: OMSF listed operational operational the general fuel mission test in the system A-004 Apollo test constraints problems. purpose was was for and Apollo plans experimenters for the Lunar in order Sample to prevent

experlment-generated January 7: MSC outlined Laboratory. January 8-1 I: The January final 20: Apollo first

Receiving

successfully successfully

conducted accomplished

at WSTF. at WSMR. It was the

suborbital

program.

xi

PREFACE
Project a twofold John moon eminent that this vast new Apollo, objective. America's "File more before them broader taking premier immediate space effort during tile 1960's, had

goal,

as proclaimed

by President

F. Kennedy and return and nation ocean. far in space,

Congress on May 25, safely to Earth before objective a leading be second served was role to none to

1961, was to land men on the the end of the decade. But make the 17nited and and States preachievement to explore overall ensuring use the program

a second

in space

would

in its ability for

Apollo during the

therefore sixties.

as the the

spearhead lunar

NASA's generally

Although

landing

overshadowed

other important activities--critics as an end in itself--the program space and craft, focus, diverse As technology. Gemini, and the Apollo operational clearly NASA Building produced techniques. and often momentum. upon

of the agency often saw the near-term goal stimulated phenomenal progress in aerothe But pioneering advances the moon target out, of achievements in launch provided to channel all the only this of vehicles, the Mercury spaceessential dramatic attainable pointed

identifiable spokesmen

immensely being

technological

hardware

developed for Apollo only the other components represented essential program In Spacecraft: 1966, this to space per se. essence, volume to secure preeminence, that is the the the

lunar module was narrowly tangible advances in space irrespective of third the formal

conceived. The flight technology moon of The the landing Apollo 20, hmar the

thrust Spanning

of

this

instalhnent 1, 1964, through

A Chronology. traces with

October

January

development Saturn and and in space.

of "Apollo's That testing module in the Apollo in this thus had series

Chariots," ingredient

spacecraft--along campaign detailed engineering mand and service though detailed America's the end I,ike facturing other work of this and the on

V a paramount exhaustive the lunar elsewhere

in America's

preeminence design modules the

period

encompassed

to qualify both the comfor manned flight. Alare focus clearly not directly of this shifted operations. I covers the ignored, to book. the foster By served

significant

events

Apollo chief

spacecraft--which capabilities--fi)rms period. w)lumes

spacefaring flight two

sixteen-month testing, previous

to manu-

steppingstones

to manned

(Volume

origins of the program and conceptual development of (,rumman in November 1962 to t)uild the hmar the period of fundamental ing in the mockup review configurational of the Block xiii

through the selection module; and Vohnne II vehicles, cuhninatthe command and

work on both II version of

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

service works a guide. narrative

modules on Mercury In history

at North and of the addition,

American Gemini, the several Apollo this

on September volume volumes spacecraft for more volumes, and the official reports, cases press serve

30,

1964),

and

like

similar and for NASA a

is intended as the underway

as a reference foundation of the as part

Historical cal study. sections, being Lyndon cluded contractor minutes dition, magazine the As far

Series, providing tools Unlike the first two since its content on records Space and also as possible primary held Center

in-depth interpretive this volume is not related throughout. with primary consulted, renamed These

and analytidivided into chief reliance 1973) inand papers, In adand for

is similar sources at

were recently

placed

(February sources government working participants. accounts, documentation

B. Johnson congressional status of meetings, authors artMes.

in Houston.

documents, progress and Indeed, in some drew upon the

correspondence, memorandums, interviews releases, amount with of newspaper

staggering

Apollo is sufficient to give pause to even the searcher. A principal methodological problem adequately the tactical The among materials editors, valuable Ray, Jr., Lee ultimate relevant aim authors many and and of criterion events throughout Inevitably, or rejection to many contractors, portions Historical Frank NASA of the are its book. indebted supporting on draft of the Eugene and

most dedicated has therefore without evaluation events. both

historical rebeen to cover departing became NASA from the and

the program sul)jective of specific who of the individuals,

for inclusion

within

contributed manuscript. Jr., Loyd and And helped out trivia

additional Historians, gave W. Thomas Sally

commented archivists

Office Likewise,

in _,Vashington

assistance: D. Saegesser,

M. Emme, Carrie

W. Anderson,

Karegeannes. and ,lames

S. Swenson, D. Gates

of the University

of Houston

M. Grimwood suggestions. Institution, weeding

of the Corinne in

JSC Historical ()ffice made useful L. Morris, now at the Smithsonian scattered documentation,

in particular, immeasurably and "engi-

assembling

neeringese," and other informants, and appreciative

editing and typing comment drafts. To these and many readers, and critics, the authors wish to express sincere thanks. C.G.B. I.D.E.

April

1974

xiv

Advanced

Design,

Fabrication,

and

Testing

October

1,

1964,

through

January

20,

1966

Advanced

Design,

Fabrication,

and

Testing

October

1, 1964-January

20, 1966

Ceremonies Aeronautics _Vehb mission be first place tive of nautical threshold Two United program
Astronautics (NASA

in Washington and destiny, and .... greater space Space those then present read

marked Administration

the

sixth unique from

anniversary contrit)ution

of

the

National James E. must first indicaaeroa new future." Webb year, the accelerated

1964
October

(NASA).

Administrator Johnson: said, been, expect have "to

reminded and on in space earth the and days far

of NASA's a message the as our that the to in space ns the White program conting

to America's "We maintain from reached for W. the Va., our
1

President has can We

in aeronautics," Significant advances in opens address efforts

President success years. Sulphur moves in the was
on

it is but

mankind widest

. . . which later, in an

possibilities Springs, into

observed

that "as the national States has reached for the present
aml SP-4005, Aeromlutics, 1965), pp. 335.

its seventh to the moon.

the half-way decade."
1964: 3"_8.

point

broad-based

America
Ck_omdogy

halfway
.Science,

Techm_logy,

amt

Policy

Representatives

from

(;rumman

Aircraft

Engineering

Corporation,

North (M IT) (MSC) experts plan for and

1-2

American Aviation, In(:., and Instrumentation Laboratory, principal from testing landing
MSC, 29,

M assachnsetts Institute of Technology's three of the Manned Spacecraft Center's radar and They guidance formulated and navigation a detailed

contractors, and

met Cape

with

Houston

Kennedy.

and checkout of the radar systems both
"Minutes 1965"; MSC, of Implementation Veeekly

hmar excursion at the factory
Meeting Management #3, Report,

module (I_EM) rendezvous and at the launch site.
Apollo October LEM 1-8, G&D Systems September

"ASPO

1964."

North command
"ASPO

American module
Weekly

switched (CM)
Management

to

a spring-activated recovery
1-8, 1964.'

pop-up radio.

antenna

for

the

1-8

high-frequency
Report, October

On

the

basis

of new and

abort

criteria data 1800

(failure on fuel watt-hour

of one

fuel

cell), battery

extended Grumman for the

operatrecomLEM.

1-8

ing periods, mended

additional kg (45-1b),

(:ell performance, auxiliary

a 20.4

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT_

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
October

MSC late

approved Octot)er and

the

recommendation distribution November.
Activity Report for

and system

(;rumman and resizing

completed of the

the battery

redesign during

of tile electrical

power early

MS(:, Manned

"Consolidated Space Flight, Report, 24-October

the

Office 17.

o1

tile p.

Associate 54; MSC, Report,

Administrator, "ASPO October Weekly Report, 1-8,

September September 1, 1964"; Report

20-October 17-24, "ASPO No. 1964";

1964,"

Management September 1964"; "Monthly

"ASI'O

Weekly

Management

Weekly

Management p. 26.

Progress

21," LPR-10-37,

MSC for million

sulmfitted two additional dollars

a Request spacecraft was the

for Proposals acceptance cost
fin"

to (;eneral checkout of the
the Ottice

Electric ground equipment.
Associate

Company stations.

((;E) Eight

estimated
Report

added
of p. 40. the

MSC, Mamled

"Consolidated Space Flight,

Activity Septemher

Administrator,

20-October

17, 1964,"

MSC's

Apollo

Spacecraft

Program

Office

(ASP())

approved

a plan

(put

forward by the MSC Advanced the CM's radiation shielding. would then Saturn 18 520 tion, Only be made 1)e sul)jected V km using Block flights. (10 000 spacecraft I CM's would during These nm), would 008, manned to a radiation would

Spacecraft Checkout earth environment 501 the be

Technology Division) to verify of the radiation instrumentation flights. during and 502, in and shielding. ground The the with spacecraft apogees probe during tests. of would about 1966. first two unmanned verificaRadiation

orbital

missions, verify would be used

Gamma Houston flight

performed change

in these

shielding

be unaffected

I)y the

to Block
for Space

II status.
Environment, "Apollo

Memorandum, Joseph F. Shea, Radiation Shielding Verification,"

MSC, to Assistant Chief October 5, 196,1.

$-8

NASA man figuration figuratitm. Maynard,

t:tmducted factory. This Members Chief, Project for reflected

a formal inspection all Systems design of the Engineer, and (;rumman: ), Assistant

review was Mockup

of the

LEM and

mockup to affirm

M-5 that

at the the the M-5

(;rumconconE. DiLEM by G. LEM

intended Review Division,

requirements

to definitize were A. Kraft, ASPO; R. W. Faget,

I_EM Owen

Board Maxime MSC; C.

Chairman

Engineering Grumman:

Carbee, Assistant J. Kelly,

Std)system rector Project Sigurd

Engineering

Development, Christopher Director

Thomas

Engineer, A. Sioberg

Jr.

(represented MSC; Owen Williant Assistant

for Flight

Operations,

Morris, Chief. F. Rector III, I)irector The tions

Reliability and Quality Assurance Division, ASP(); I_EM Project Officer, ASP(): and I)onald K. Slayton, Crew Operations, was held getting out MSC. 5 and 6. It included

for Flight

astronauts' of entering

review and

on Octt)t_er of the

demonstraand

I.E.M,

techniques

for climbing

descending inspection attending

the ladder, and crew mobility inside the spacecraft. The general was held on the 7th attd the Review Board met on the 8th. Those the review used request for change (RFC) forms to propose space-

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

craft effect

design by upon

alterations. contractor system design,

Before personnel

submission and weight,

to the NASA and

Board, coordinators

these

requests to assess

were their

1964
Oc#ober

discussed

interfaces,

reliability. controls, displays, and the guidance and navigadescent, and reaction and control fuel cell storage

The inspection categories lighting; the stabilization tion radar; and electrical system, pyrotechnics); environmental

were crew provisions; and control system and propulsion generation control; (ascent, power

power;

(cryogenic

assemblies);

communications

instrumentation;

structures and landing gear; scientific equipment; and reliability and quality control. A total of 148 RFCs were submitted. Most were aimed at enhancing given No the spacecraft's and redesigns of action this on operational reliability of review, those the the RFC's capability; and configuration Board which considerable checkout were attention of various also was

to quality ma.ior

to ground

systenis.

suggested. that (;rumman Further, the take I.EM

As a result imnIediate

recommended it had approved.

contractor and MSC should promptly Board had assigned for further study. configuration, (;rtmmian cotdd proceed fication. This updated nlockup would tion of the initial hardware as well.
MSC, "Lunar oI Excursion M 5 Modt, le, Mockup Project

investigate those On the basis of with be the LEM basis

items which the the revised M-5 and and qualifabrica-

development for tooling

Apollo,

Board Module,

Report October

for 5-8,

NASA 1964,"

Inspection pp. 1-7,

and Review 10-27.

Lunar

Excursion

Radio ceived tion sponse
Space

Corporation a $9 million control to assembly attitude, signals
Dail)',

of America's contract from (A'I'CA). would from
October

(RCA) Aerospace Grumman for the The the ATCA, reaction guidance

Systems Division reLEM attitude translato maintain motors in the re-

a device control system.

spacecraft's

fire

system

the

primary

Business

9, 1964, p. 210.

On

tile basis

of reentry

simulations,

North

American

recommended

several

8-15

CM instrument changes. An needed, tile company reported. tion failure and control would system have before it became

additional Further, must

reaction control the flight attitude lie the modified monitor sample The entry

system display was and the stabilizaof for a systenl Block wholly I system

indicators catastrophic.

to warn g-meter

spacecraft satisfactory.
MSC,

to be replaced

and

was not

"ASPO

Weekl)

Management

Report,

October

8-15,

196,t."

Analysis

by

MSC

of

the

performance

of

the

environmental rejection load of

control

systeni

8-15

radiators for Block I CM's placed their heat Btus per hr, far below the anticipated missiou 5

capability at 4000 7220. Water boiled

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
October

at the rate radiators. which time

of 1.46 kg (3.22 lbs) per hr would be needed to supplement This, in turn, would limit the mission to 45 hrs duration, all of the and that spacecraft's collected water supplies (both from the that fuel in the as a byproduct cells)

the at water

tanks at launch be exhausted.

would

As MSC saw it, potential solutions were to redesign the radiators to increase the size of the tanks to hold another 194 kg (428 lbs) to reduce the operating
Owen duration

themselves, of water, or

power
E. Maynard, capability

level.
MSC for Block to Chief, Operations and Planning Service Division, Modules," "LimOctober

Memorandum, ited mission 21, 1964.

I Command

8-15

MSC for

established both the and control

the service

configuration module a design orbit for
and

of (SM)

the

reaction the LEM, Center heater

control and also that

system informed directed would

engines North North provide The de-

and an during

American American thermal sign would
MSC, 1964,"

Grumman in lunar

accordingly. for and use

The electric

to propose be evaluated
Apollo/E letters,

contingency I spacecraft
Meeting Attn: in R. the

operations. as well.
No. 8, 10/5 and Module

in Block

"Minutes, pp. 4-5;

D Technical III, for MSC the

Management to (;AEC, RCS engines

10/12, and

W. F. Rector control

S. Mullaney, Service

"Contract

NAS 9-1100, Temperature LEM," October 19, 1964.

8-15

RCA

reduced lbs).

the

weight

of the

LEM

rendezvous

radar

from

39.9

to 31.98

kg

(88 to 70.5
Memorandum, "Apollo Radar

Robert Systems Review,"

C.

Duncan

and

Ralph September

S.

Sawyer, 16,

MSC, with

to

Manager,

ASPO, "Apollo

Radar Design

Design undated.

Review,"

1964,

enclosure:

8-15

North sign North
"ASPO

American features and American
Weekly

representatives to inspect intended
Management

visited the to adopt this
8

the

Grumman feature

plant lighting on

to discuss on Block the II

deCMs.

electroluminescent same
15, 1964."

LEM.

Report,

October

NASA gram Both craft

and

Grumman in LEM agreed within
Progress

representatives Changes separation to evaluate to lighten the present
Report No.

discussed at the of from alternatives nine weight. M-5

a weight mockup of either percent,

reduction review resizing thus

pro-

for the LEM. parties or

approved weight the

portended the keeping spacethe

an increase

68 to 453 kg (150 to 1000 lbs).

finding LEM
"Monthly

ways

it about control
21,"

improved
GAEC,

LPR-10-37,

November

10, 1964,

p. 6.

6

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

NASA approved Grumman's selection of Airite tanks, and the two firms started negotiations.
Ibid., pp. 7, 16.

to supply

the

LEM

heliuln

1964
October 9

Grumman Bosch Arma assembly.
Ibid.,

completed

contract for

negotiations the LEM

with caution

Arma and

Division, warning

American electronics

11-November

10

Corporation,

p. 29.

Grumman the Minnesota

lighting Mining

experts and lighting.

evahlated Manufacturing

self-luminous Company

materials and found

produced them

by

11-November

10

feasible

for use in docking
Ibid., p. 4.

The the

U.S.S.R. first

launched

the world's and pilot;

first

multi-manned into space. Feoktistov,

spacecraft, The crew scientist;

Voskhod were and

I, Col.

12

to carry

a scientist

a physician

Vladimir

Komarov,

Konstantin

Boris

Yegorov, physician. were 409 by 177 65 degree were The landed The "space James to conduct mission after flight race" plane. the scientific to prove

According km (254 by Purposes operational and television of the running

to Tass, orbital 110 mi) with flight, compatibility investigations pictures 24 hrs the

parameters of the spacecraft a 90.1 minute period and a to the spacecraft actual from after the NASA that the they during crew 17 min In flag. called Russian and space. space The had left States, source, crew and flight. trio it. the space are and of the

of this medical earth,

according

featured 16 orbits had was again

of the and impact. green

a significant commenting It was, space

worldwide under on the he said,

United

Administrator Russians power

E. Webb,

spectacular, "a clear

it a "significant of national

accomplishment." continuing prestige."
Astronautics and

indication

a large

program

for the

achievement

Aeronautics,

1964,

pp. 348, 350.

At two

a North possible The

American-Grumman relative major system role item alignments blocking engines the

interface for the final upon

meeting CSM-active was the other LEM any

on the design

September were of the effect ASPO that

23-24, agreed SM's of the in-

12

docking

upon. reaction Grumman

selection to analyze

control

antennas. factors

requested would

to investigate

problem,

penalties

two-attitude docking mode, and fluence the final attitude selection.
TWX, SV. F. Rector III, MSC, to GAEC,

to report

Attn:

R.S.

Mullaney,

October

12, 1964.

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
October 12

MSC tion 1)uring capable to put CSM's

notified ground this

Grumman rules portion data an that

of several were applicable flight, to take course and Network
MSC, for to GAEC, LEM

additional to the I+EM and the I+EM the and tile abort

LEM coasting

guidance phase

and of the system

navigamission. must changes. t)e and

of tile attitude required

guidance of the would

of giving it on

information with back
Attu:

of measuring out CSM be

velocity coasting provided and system,

Navigational

phase

intercept radar Flight
lit, Rules

by the through

rendeztms Space

its guidance

navigation

the Manned
Lettcl, Additional ing," October

on earth.
R. and S. Mullaney, Na'dgation "Contract Operation NAS and 9-1100, Monitor-

W. F.

Rector 12, 196t.

Ground

Guidance

13

North control electrical available.
Jerohl tion

American systems p<mer

and in

MIT Block for

Instrunlentation power CMs. the gtfidame II They

I+aboratory requirements had and control for determined

representatives the guidance the (24 w)lts)

met and was

in Hottston

to discuss needed

electrical

additional

system

l'. (;ilmorc, Meeting #8,

MIT./IL, "Apollo

"MIT/(;N&C CSM Block

Saturn 11 (/uidance

Intmfaccs,'+ & Control

prepared Systems,"

for

Implementa13, 1<.t64.

October

14

Eagle-Picher hour of the Block reentry larger authorization

(;ompany batteries from North

completed for the CM. American

qualification Shortly to proceed needed

testing with for design the

on

the and

25-amperereceived I and all development

thereafter,

Eagle-Picher later Bh)ck

40-ampere-hour

batteries

I1 spacecraft.
Weekly [hereafter r I. 196.1, pp. December Management cited as NAA], 15-16; Repm t. Octol)et Monthl? Xpollo 15-22, Quarterly 1964"; North Report," Status American SID-62 Report No. Avia300-31, 10 for

MSC,"ASI'O tion, l'eriod Inc. l)eccmbt,

"Apollo p. 12.

l'rogtess

MSC+ "lh-oictt

Ending

31, 196.t."

14

In

a letter had .MSC

to Apollo Joseph had F.

Program Shea with with

Director
out

(;eneral that covering Technology

Samuel

C. Phillips, under basic (STI,) areas

ASP() to and as the to the

Manager NASA, that

pointed

l+elh:omm, the same

contract

a subcontract a contract

Space STI+

Laboratories

l_elh;omm-STI+ subcontract. use the intortnation on the

Shea told Phillips that STI+ was not allowed MSC contract which had been obtained on that STI+ be permitted to use the

Bellcomm contract, and requested tion on the MSC contract.
1.etter, 'l'echnolog} flora Manager, l.al)oratories ASPO, Contract to NASA with

infi)rma-

Headqualtcrs. l_elh:omnl

Attn:

(;choral October

Phillips, 14, 1<`t64.

"Space

Corpolation,"

14

In a letter that the shippt'd ing day. ftmmt at

t<>NASA first Apollo t1:30

Administratol guidance and that arrived

+James system at

E. "xVebl), AC Spark acceptance (;alifornia, hottrs and

Plug testing the

reported and they was had follow-

cotnpleted 1)owney, than reliable, 2000

p.m.

early simple

AC reported

in more

t)f operation

the system

to be "+remarkably

ac¢nrate

to operate."

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Letter, Operations,

to

NASA October

Administrator 19, 1964.

_Vebl),

from

B.

P.

Blasingame,

Manager,

.Milwaukee

1964
Oclober

A number meeting deleted, priority current tional on

of outstanding I.EM and over it was decided all other VHF (i.e., then
III, MSC,

points

were Most

resolved

at a joint the

MSC-Grumman VHF key mode was have of the opera-

15

c(mmmnications.

significant, rendezwms, Further,

that, during transmissions. voice relayed
to (;AEC, Module with

voice links must the echo feature by the gronnd link)
"Contract Review 2-3. pp.

configuration support
W. of

sent back
Attn:

to

the

I_EM

system,
F. Rector lamar October

via the S-band
R. subject S. Mvllaney, .Subsystem minutes,

was nndesirable.
NAS 9-1100, 15

Letter, Minutes and

Excmsion 2!t, 1964,

Communications enclosure:

October

16, 1964,"

MS(Ts nating

Systems

Engineering and

Division service During be used used module

reported (CSM)

on

the consequences radar:

of elimi-

15

the cotnmand

rendezvous

radar on

• Coasting period: on the (:SM would I.EM through the difficult; was would the could CSM that however, CSM and be

this phase of the mission, the rendezvous to track the I,EM and the rendezvous radar the Flight the radar CSM. Network for guidance that was powered 1)ecause that Also, desirable. of all, radar then summary, CSM to failed, monitoring highly flight, if the the if the \Vith the use of Mission sources become The I)ut not

the

to track Space radar, was not

Control of \Vithout more conclusion absolutely be

Manned 1)e used rendezvous this

(MSFN), system task it was

three would

information

as a vote

monitoring.

to imply

impossible. desirable, the (:SM

rendezvous ascent: was was would problem. rendezvous If the ftmctions the LEM radar LEM most the with be it

necessary. descent the (I.(;C) acquire CSM solutions could descent no possible for and longer LEM. failed, radar lock-on to this the I,EM relieve 1)uring desirable very the doubtful CSM. highly First lf this LGC In would could several through during acquisito during be be This lock-on I.EM astronauts I,EM Control the did CSM appear radar were guidance rendezvous

• Iamar tracking computer manually radar the ahernative MSFN it was powered tion other would ways • Lunar tracked This with could failed,

There

Mission track the there

the problem, as(:ent. the While

did not satisfy

all requirements, tracking

be a problem.

of fulfilling phases. surface: the CSM

of the

rendezvous lunar the phase surface, launch and the LEM for and CSM

the powered

was on the in order tracking critical primary trait

it would conditions. the use

rendezvous This was CSM.

to update

l)e accomplished radar on the inertial

by the If the

MSFN. of the should would however, would

• Rendezvous: rendezvous fail (i.e., the I_(;C, the

LEM

guidance

system

measurement

[IMU],

rendezvous

radar), navigation be provided by could become supply this a problent

information rendezvous information. if the I.EM

for long-range radar on the The terminal rendezvot,

midcourse corrections CSM. The MSFN, rendezvous failed and maneuver there

s radar

was not

a

THE APOLLO SPACECRAFT: A CHRONOLOGY

1964
October

rendezvous radar on the CSM. It had not been established that the MSFN could supply the required terminal rendezvous information. If MSFN could, a restricted mission profile would have to be employed. There were other methods of supplying terminal rendezvous information such as optical tracking. T h e scanning telescope or sextant on the CSM could be used with the IMU and Apollo guidance computer on the CSM to derive navigation information, meaning that the LEM would require flashing lights. There was a AV penalty associated with using angle-only information in place of range/ range rate and angle information, its importance depending on the accuracy of the angle data and the range/range rate data.
Memorandum, Aaron Cohen, MSC, to Chief, Operations Planning Div., “CSM Rendez. vous Radar,” October 15, 1964.

15

T h e Guidance and Control Implementation Sub-Panel of the MSC-MSFC Flight Mechanics Panel defined the guidance and control interfaces for Block I and I1 missions. In Block I1 missions the CSM’s guidance system wouM guide the three stages of the Saturn V vehicle; it would control the S-IVB (third stage) and the CSM while in earth orbit; and it would perform the injection into a lunar trajectory. In all of this, the CSM guidance backed up the Saturn ST-124 platform. Actual sequencing was performed by the Saturn V computer.
Memorandum, Aaron Cohen, MSC, to Chief, Flight Technology Branch, “Flight Mechanics Panel’s Activities,” October 15, 1964.

15

Remote operation of the CSM’s rendezvous radar transponder and its stabilization and control system (SCS) was not necessary, ASP0 told North American. Should the CSM pilot be incapacitated, it was assumed that he could Components of Saturn V’s ST-124 platform.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

perfornl the quired during
Letter, Groundrule

several during LEM
C. L.

tasks and this

before the

becoming SCS. No and
A.tln:

totally maneuvers the

disabled, by the would

im:luding CSM have

turning would be

on re-

1964
October

transponder

period.

However,

vehicle

to be stabilized

ascent,
Ta_lor, and

rendezvous,
MSC, to CSM NAA,

docking.
E. E. Sack, 15, "Contract 1964. NAS 9-15(I, Operations

I)isablcd

Astronaut.'*

Octol)cr

The

Air

Force

Eastern

Test

Coxnmand for the would SM and

concurred the I_EM. from

in

the Costs,

elimination schedules, ASP()

of and thus

15-22

propellant spacecraft notified
MSC,

dispersal designs, the appropriate
"ASPO Weekl',,

systems NASA felt,

all benefit

this action.

module
Management

contractors.
Repot/, October 1,_-__ _" ,_o, 196,t."

Because nesium cent salt poration increase even more

they castings spray were the

were

unable CM

to find data

a satisfactory storage Radio by about flutter when

means (to Company 2.3 would

of plating fulfill and This the

the Leach

magperCorwould

15-22

for the forced

equipment

the one change and,

requirement), of the could These casting

Collins structure produce

to use alt,minnm

as an alternative.

weight

kg (5 Ibs) be

perhaps when a

significant,

the recorder

was subjected

to vibration tests. finished aluminum
Ibid.

potential problems was available.

pursued

(;rumman completed ing a specific directive incorporate include of other the changes cooling operate components

the fuel (:ell assembly to Pratt and "_Vhitney recommended of electrical (water at their higher shutoff by components valves, design the

thermal Aircraft study. with and

study and was preparCompany which would These changes and the valve) would shifting so that

15-22

hydrogen oxygen purge

they would
Ibid.

temperatures.

Representatives neering, nificant Crew decisions

from Systems, on

the crew both

MSC and

Astronaut and

Office, space and suit

and

ASP()'s made

Systems several

Engisig-

15-2

2

Mission

Planning

divisions

transfer

procedures: would The Systems space suit phases would be acCM would would was ease

* Crew complished

transfer, using the

pressurized

unpressurized, system umbilicals. Crew for the

environmental

control

and I_EM umbilicals request the necessary • The be reevah|ated requirement

would be designed engineering changes. for "quick-don" Engineering during might suit. 11 spacecraft capability on the

accordingly. capability people.

by Systems

If the probability mission This

of a rapid

decompression of the negligible, "quick-don" several design constraints

"noncritical" be eliminated.

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
Octo_r

• The open-faceplate and ventilation
Ibid.

question

of a crossover

valve

in the pending

CM, tile

for

ventilation

during study

operation, was postponed tests at Hamilton Standard.

decompression

16

In

a letter

on

August the

25,

1964, could

the be

I.EM CSM provided

Project

()ffice

had and in the

requested rendezvous event the

Grumman radar CSM In

to define

means

hy which

stabilization remotely

transponder operation crewman was disabled. letter on October stabilization

another

16, the and

Project control

Office system.

notified the The

Grttmman rendezvous letter added, be that

that radar howconthe

no requirement transponder

existed or the

for remote

operation

of either

ever, that the possibility of an incapacitated CSM astronaut must sidered and that for design purposes (;rumman should assume astronaut disabled. SCS. CSM I,EM would These perform functions

certain functions prior to becoming completely could include turning on the transponder and the during the period in which the must remain stahilized during phases.
9-1100, Operations Groundrule for

No CSM astronaut ascent
W.

maneuvers would be reqttired was disabled but the CSM and
III

coast

rendezvous
to GAEC,

and
"Contract 16, 1964.

docking
NAS

Letter, Disabled

F. Rector

CSM

Astronaut,"

October

16-November

15

Three vacunm three

Pratt and at North cells were
Monthly

XVhitney American operated
Progress

fuel cells were operated for 19, 20, and 21 hours. as an electrical power
300-31, p. 1.

in a simtdated space This was the first time subsystem.

generating

"Apollo

Report,"

SI1)-62

16-November

15

North proposed minimum
/bid.,

American

and

Honeywell with they and

reviewed the found, would

the

Block and adequate

II CSM control mission

entry reliability

monitor The with

subsystem's

compatibility configttration, size and
p. 13.

stabilization combined provide

system.

maximum

weight

performance.

17

MSC

and

International fixed-price computer.
Activity Flight,

Business contract

Machines for the

Corporation Apollo guidance

(IBM) and

negotiated navigation

a $1 500 000 system
MSC, Matured Management

backup

"Consolidated Space

Report

for

1tic

Office 30,

of

the p.

Associate 39; MSC,

Administrator, "ASPO Weekly

October October

18-November 15-22, 1964."

1964,"

Report,

19

MSC The I,EM

ordered ITFA-10's

Grumman descent 5.
Report

to halt stage would

work

on

the

LEM with

test one

article

(LTA)

10. from

he replaced

cannibalized

test inockup
Progress

"Monthly

No.

21,"

I,PR-10-37,

pp.

12, 18.

12

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

On

October

19, a supplemental

agreement bringing

in the the total

amount funded

of $115 amount

000 000 of the

1964
October

was issued to North Anlerican, CSM contract to $1 136 890 000.
MSC, Manned "Consolidated Space Flight, Activity October Report 18-November

19 for the 30, Office 1964," p. of 39. the Associate Administrator,

In no the

response htnar Ranger,

to inquiries ASP() mapping about

froni

(;eneral Joseph capability

Samuel was For

C. Phillips, declared should necessary. scientific without

Apollo that, Shea give

Program for Apollo, that ina si Rsaid, any ample he

22

I)eputy

Director,

Manager and moon's system Lunar could

F. Shea programs

or survey the

reported

Surveyor,

()rbiter

formation simpler nificant
TWX, Hornbeck,

surface.

purposes, requiring

photographic design
Shea,

1)e included

changes
MSC, to

in the spacecraft.
NASA to S. ('. lleadquarters, Phillips, NASA, Aim: Phillips, Octol)er 5, 1964. '2'2, 1.q64; letter, J. A.

Bellcomm,

No',cmbcr

Heavy (ECS) pinholes severely

black cold

deposits plates

were

discovered were

on

the

environmental from boilerplate

control 14.

system Several

22-29

when

they

renloved

were found pitted. This

in the cold plate surfaces, and the aluminum was, as ASP() admitted, a matter of "extreme at North fl)r only

lines were concern"

to the ECS design been charged with corrosion
MSC,

people coolant

American, because the equipment had three weeks. This evidence of excessive of using
October 22-29,

reemphasized
"ASPO Weekly

the drawbacks
Management Report,

ethylene
1964."

glycol

as a coolant.

ASPO

notified

(;rumman part

and

North

American

that

it

had

canceled

re-

22-29

quirements
Ibid.

for Apollo

task trainers.

MSC's (ECS) indicated perature

Crew Systems Division investigated implications of using (;emini suits that and the carbon ECS was capable partial effect of on dioxide

environmental control in Block I niissions. The maintaining levels; cabin dewpoint nominal however, cabin this

system results temot and nIode

22-29

pressure

operation always water condensation
Ibid.

had an adverse rate.

temperature

ASP()

deleted

the

requirement

for

LEM

checkout

during

the

transhmar

23

phase of the mission. Thus the length of time that the CM Inust be capable of maintaining pressure in the LEM (for normal leakage in the docked configuration) was reduced from 10 hours to three.
Ibid.

Jet

Propulsion

I_ahoratory

proposed 13

a meeting

on

()ctober

'2!) between

23

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
October

representatives present to the centrating environment JPL proposed • LEM ponder the landing

of NASA requirements aid

Headquarters, and needs status The of

Bellcomm, projects Block data Surveyor

MSC, underway II on

MIT,

and

JPL related was

to conand

as they effort hmar

problem.

study the

on determining for Apollo. the following

of obtaining

surface

agenda and

items: on a Surveyor deployed program Surveyor trans-

requirements

specifications

• MSC planned • Landing aids 1. Active 2. 3. only; or visible visible Passive Visual during during

active and passive landing aids study capabilities under consideration by the RF device reflector during and and landing landing Lunar or other terminal as well from Orbiter phase RF device--corner markers--visible terminal phase phase

study:

and lunar

landing orbit; as as well

as from orbit

terminal from

lunar

photographically

the unmanned

• I,anding aids • LEM-Surveyor MSC items four.
TWX Landing

lifetime and checkout problems mission interface problems present would a summary present of resuhs similar to date on on items the first three two and results

personnel and JPL

would personnel

from Aids

JPL for

to

NASA

Hq., signed

MSC, Lou

Bellcomm, Divone, October

Inc., 23,

and

MIT,

"Surveyor

Employed

Apollo,"

1.°,64.

26

The I_EM would It

trajectory Apollo

summary Mission

of the Planning

Design Task that

Reference Force the was

Mission sent

(DRM)

prepared by the

by the

to Grumman

Project ()ffice with a note be forwarded in November. acknowledged that a single

operational

sequence-of-events

was

mission

could

not

serve

to "completely

define all the spacecraft considerable value as Program." Specifically, the DRM

functional a standard

requirements" for various

but "such a mission has purposes on the Apollo

would

be used

for weight

reporting,

electrical

power analyses,

reporting, reliability modeling, mission-related Interface Control
I.etter, Transmittal October 26, MSC, W. of 1964. F. the Rector Apollo III, to Lunar

engineering Documents,
GAEC, Landing Attn: R. Design q.

simulation, crew task and trade-off studies.
Mullaney, Reference "Contract Mission NAS

9-1100,

Trajectory,"

27

ASPO consider
TWX,

requested crew only the
_,V. F. Rector

Grumman during equipment
III, MSC, to

to list all orbit that
GAEC,

single-point rendezvous

failures mission. for.
October

that

would

cause was to

loss of the

a lunar

Grumman

it was responsible
Attn: R. S. Mullaney,

27,

1964.

14

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

NASA

announced of the E. Mueller,

tile Apollo

appoimment Prograln. 1)irector Associate

of

Major thus

(;eneral assumed Phillips of Manned

Salnuel part Space had

C. of the

Phillips duties who Deputy

1964
October 27

as Director of George

Phillips

Administrator as well.

Flight, been

had been serving as Apollo Director since Janttary 15.
NASA News Release October 27, 1964. 64 267.

"(;eneral

Phillips

Appointed

Director

of

Apollo

Program,"

MSC stead, These

ordered the

North CMs

American was to begin in conjunction be used system

to halt with

procurement program the and guidance to

of a CM using and the

simulator. two

In-

27

company

a simulatt)r to verify software,

existing facility. and and tasks

evaluator-type evaluators

the digital-analog analyze

computer navigation crew

would ctmtrol

stat)ilization and failure effects.

Letter. Change

H. P. Yschek, Authorization

MY,C. to NAA, No. 263," October

Space and 27, 1964.

Information

Systems

1)iv.,

"Contract

Because required,

of the MSC

redesign directed for two module's the

t)f the (;rumman

portable and

life North

support American

systeln control from I,EM before

that

would the "bnddy

be

27

to drop

system" concept umhilicals. The attached ventilation to that from

the spacecraft LEM crewmen umhilicals. ECS,

environmental would transfer Hookup with the

system the CM umbilicals,

(ECS) while and with the to for

I,EM

would

be

achieved

disconnecting of

the first set of lifelines. Grumman and Hamilton umhilicals. Also, the determine umbilical such transfer.
TWX, 1V. F. Rector MSC, to GAEC, Report, IlI, to

MSC requested Standard on two spacecraft and I,EM

North American to cooperate the design of the fetal end contractors ECS control were directed locations required

jointly

lengths

MSC, NAA,

to GAEC, Attn:

Attn:

R.

S. Mullaney, 27, 29,

October l!Ri4; 1964; TWX, MSC,

27, 1964; W. "ASPO F.

TWX, Rector VCeekly

C. L. Taylor, III, MSC, Management

E. E. Sack,

October

Attn: October

R. S. Mullaney, October 29-November 5, 1964."

Testing began.

of the Although

first

flight-weight the voltage

15-cell was three

stack percent

of the helow

I,EM

fuel

(:ell assemt)ly the unit had and a

28

design,

980-watt capal)ility. Earlier, the unit single cell life had reached 662 hours.
MSC, "'ASPO Weekly Management Report,

completed

150 hours

of operation,

October

29-November

5, 19642'

ASPO's described ,Joe II flights

Operations in terms development (tmmanned

Planning of its major and Satttrn

Division by MSC. phases: Block 15

defined The overall vehicle I CSM I,ittle

the

current

Apollo flight (unmanned Block

mission was Little IB I CSM

28

programming

as envisioned

Apollo

program Saturn

Joe II flights
development,

launch IB and

escape

development);

THE APOLLO SPACECRAFT: A CHRONOLOGY

1964
October

earth orbital operations, unmanned LEM development, and manned Block I1 CSM/LEM earth orbital operations); and Saturn V flights (unmanned Saturn V and Block I1 CSM development, manned Block I1 CSM/LEM earth orbital operations, and manned lunar missions).
Memorandum, William A. Lee, MSC, to Distr., “Apollo Spacecraft Flight Development Mission Program,” October 28, 1964.

26

At Langley Research Center, representatives from Langley, MSC, Ames Research Center, Avco Corporation, and North American met to discuss their independent conclusions of the data gathered from the Scout test of the Apollo heatshield material and to determine whether a second test was advisable. Langley’s report revealed that: the heatshield materials performed as predicted within the flight condition appropriate to Apollo; the Results of wind tunnel tests at Ames Research Center are shown in the accompanying four pictures. Top left shows a piece of Apollo heatshield material in place for test; top right is a closeup of the material shortly after the test started; bottom left, shows the same material further into the test; and the photo at bottom right shows the material a t the end of the test.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

excessive severe during

recession

rates

occurred

during

flight design of

conditions tile

which or

were

inore

1964
October

than those considered Apollo reentries. represented high surface had

for the

heatshield

expected

Each group excessively

a different The on the material's and

interpretation conclusion

of the was that

reasons a second

for the flight

recession.

of the heatshield the understanding variation in Scout vehicle. reentry

materials of the

Scout would performance flight

not particularly ilnprove because of the limited obtainable with the

trajectory

conditions

Memorandum, ing Paper on

()'0/ell Scout Test

E.

Maynard, of Apollo

MSC, Heat

to Shield

Mgr.,

ASPO,

"Significance December 11,

of

Langley

Work-

Material,"

1964.

North pany, curing
MSC, Weekly

Ainerican Narnico, and
"ASPO

conferred Epoxylite, to the

with and CM.

representatives Ablestick They the
Report, 5-12,

from the and on

Shell improved

Chemical of bonding methods

Comthe of

29

on bond
October 1964."

problems prevent

secondary

structure clainping
Weekly

agreed

to strengthen
Management Report, November

peeling.
5, 1964"; "ASPO

29-November

Management

North escape the minimunx
MSC,

American system mechanism.

conducted canards. Two No more

the

first

operational were tests a constraint
October 29-No'.ember

deployment with to boilerplate
5, 1964."

of the the complete 23.

launch or the

29-November

5

problems operational

encountered remained on

wiring

airworthiness
"ASPO VVeekly

test program,
Management Report,

After antennas Systems
Ibid.

studying for the Division

the

merits

of three II CSM, the the

flush-mounted MSC flush-mounted

versus type.

two

scimitar and

VHF

29-November

5

Block

Instrumentation

Electronics

recommended

MSC

directed

North

American

to halt

development

of a portable

light

as-

29-November

5

seinbly for the CM. It was not required, ship's primary lighting system included on the fingertips of the available if needed.
Ibid.

the Center said, because the extendable floodlights. Small in the survival

spacelights also

space

suit and

a flashlight

kit were

The

MSC

Meteoroid built yet

Technology

Branch

inspected

a hard

shell

meteoroid

29-November

5

garment prototype, Meteoroid necessary

by the Center's Crew it in no way hampered people were of the Apollo

Systems Division. Inot)ility of the satisfied that, extravehicular 17

It was only a crude pressurized suit. The a hard garlnent be mobility unit, this con-

Technology for protection

should

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
October

cept and LEM

was adequate. investigations that would

The were

garment underway

might

present

stowage the

problems,

however, area in the

to determine

Inininnm_

he required.

Ibid.

29-November

5

An

MSC

(;few on

Systems of Manned

Division Energy Space the Dr.

(CSD) Flight etIects Dunham, National

medical (OMSF)

representative participation MSC and

attended in those

a pro-

meeting NASA grams on man. ()[tice Grahn,

[Y.S. Atomic at delineating meeting of the Medicine;

Commission of high

(AEC) doses

()[lice ainled The of Space head

radiobiology

of whole-body Director Biology of the

radiation Director. AEC; Dr. Dr.

was attended Argonne

by NASA's Medical

Dr. W. R. Lovelace,

Laboratory,

Division;

Gould Andrews, Chief, Oak Ridge Institute for Nuclear Studies, Division; and OMSF and NASA Ottice t)[ Advanced Research and ogy. CSD to include being The requested all future that the AEC whole-body radiation cases throughout the country and of clinical a computer, conditions tor MSC was use,

Medicine Technol-

analysis be extended that the low dose rates be included. would accept which

planned ultimate

for a number objective flux and or chronic

particularly

sequential radiation of subsequent acute agreed would support

type information radiati¢,n illness

and predict the occurrence or death. The program was that the AEC of long-term prepared for

by everyone to be highly not undertake it unless from NASA. E. Mueller's A letter

desirable. Dr. Dunham said he had reasonable assurance giving such assurance was being

Dr. George
Ibid.

signature.

29-November

5

MSC storage nickel Dow cided
Ibid.;

conducted structure,

a week-long This which had

salt

spray

test the

on

the

CM of

television that

camera's Leach data 2478, de-

magnesium

housing.

was necessitated disclosed camera, with the ordeal

by similar inadequacy its protective quite well.

tests on the

equipment's

plating. The 17 treatment), that

television withstood

coating (AMS MSC therefore

the magnesium
Weekly Management

housing
Report,

was acceptahle.
November 5-12, 1964."

"ASI'O

29-November

5

Grunnnan

reported

to MSC

the

results aluminum found,

o1 development alloy. was not high

tests

on

the

welding

of the LEM cabin's thin-gauge resistance of the metal, Grumman of pure
MSC,

The stress and corrosion lessened by environments

oxygen,
"ASPO

varying
Weekly

temperatures,
Report,

and
October

humidity.
5, 1964."

Managemeut

29-November

3O

North Calif.

American The test

conducted simulated

the first the worst

drop test of boilerplate conditions that were 18

28 at Downey, anticipated in a

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

three-parachute pected, preceding sounded to the pressures ables. The after of the sustained floor, mented "crewmen" couch, cally which drop hitting that would the a note impact

descent likewise drop, loading on of caution. the

and simulate

water

landing. on Structures

The two and they In this "greatly

second parachutes. Mechanics said,

drop, In

it was the

exhad

1964
October

a landing aft heatshield, loading." would

week

MSC The static

Division not design they

"might

respond allow-

as the

event, exceed"

predicted,

imposed

heatshield

appeared the the

normal, water. heatshield

bnt Inspection had

the

spacecraft of the open had struck crew impact. and North the the

sank vehicle

less than immediately and cabin couch. The dummy that lnight

four that and two in

minntes afterward the the welds also cabin instruoutboard second were

disclosed

broken core and in the at especially

on impact The crew The aft

stainless-steel considerable were

honeycomb damage, upward seated 25 g's stresses each were forced

failed.

interior Three the

bulkhead

manikins sustained however, be called

positions.

suffered

of 50 g's, a condition MSC

euphemisti-

"unacceptable." further.
Weekly 1964"; Management 29-November Monthly "Apollo

Ainerican

personnel

investigating
MSC, agement November "ASPO

Report,

October 5, 1964":

22-29, "ASP()

1964"; Weekly

"ASI'O

Weekly pp. 3-4.

ManReport,

Report, 5-12,

October

Management

Progress

Report,"

SID-62-300-31,

Astronaut Air Force of NASA's jet when did not became moon.

Theodore Base, third it struck have the first near group

C. Freeman Houston. and of spacemen, lost altitude

died Freeman, power. his

in an an Air

aircraft Force

accident captain from open. in the

at and

Ellington a nlenlher training t)ut thus for the

31

was preparing for parachute

to land to

his T-38 Freeman quest

a goose American

He ejected hi'_ life

his aircraft,

sufficient

astronaut

to lose

Astronautics 1964; The

and Houston

Aero_mutics, Post,

1964,

pp.

370,

388;

The

Houstop_

Chropzicle,

November

i,

November

17, 1964.

MSC tem bonded

spelled (ECS) to the

out

additional

details

of the The

LEM hoses

environmental were flow to be reversal,

control permanently was

sys-

umbilical ECS;

arrangements. a crossover valve,

During the Quarter

to permit

manda-

tory; and Grumman umbilicals location
MSC, randum, Program randum, LEM November

a bypass relief would was to coordinate were long enough

be added, if necessary, with North American transfer and

to prevent to ensure

fan surge. that all

for crew ECS

to determine

the optimum

for the spacecraft's
"ASPO Robert Quarterly W. F. Environmental 3, 1964. Weekly E. Rector

switches.
Report, to No. to Chief, 10," Contracting (ECS), Suit October Program January 29-November Control 19, Officer, Supply 1965, LEM, Connector Div., with 5, 1964"; memomemo9-1100, Control,"

Management Smylie, Status llI, Control MSC, Report MSC. System

"Apollo enclosures;

Spacecraft NAS

"Contract and

Flow

19

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November 2

Bellcomm, the atop itored q-ball task.
Letter, closure: Detectiotl

Inc., launch

presented detection escape angle

its evaluation system. tower, of attack, and [The and that measured

of the device, dynamic

requirement enclosed pressures to warn was ideally findings in

for a q-ball the and nose thus that

in

emergency the

cone monof an the to its

the vehicle's breakup was absolutely

was designed the device

the crew suited

impending

of the vehicle.] essential

Bellcomm's

confirmed

1'. R.

Knaff,

Bellcomm, for File,

to

O.

E.

Maynard

MSC, of

November tile Q-Ball

6, to

1964, the

with

en-

Memorandum System,"

"The

Contribution

Emergency

P. R. Knaff

and

M. M. Pm'dy,

No',ember

2, 1964.

International Telephone tories' Astrionics Center the S-band toward
.','pace

and Telegraph received a $125 receivers that

Corporation 000 contract

(ITT) Federal I.aborafrom Collins Radio for dish antennas

acquisition

position

the ground-based

the spacecraft.
Busi,ess Daily, November 3, 1964. p. 11.

NASA Associate Most Force

announced recently, Systems

the .Jones

appointment for Manned had been He in the and

of Brig. Space Deputy would Gemini

Gen. Flight of

David Staff,

M. Jones Systems, the use

as Deputy 15). Air major would other in the with

Administrator Command. problems Missions other NASA

(effective concerned Programs, Further, optimum

December

Chief and

be "primarily Apollo to insure objectives."
Jones Deputy

development for Advanced "work elements
NASA for

planning of

all Mission program program
Names 3, 1964.

Operations."

.Jones

with

offices

of NASA
News Release Space

to accomplish
64-277, Flight," "NASA November

Gen.

Associate

Administrator

Matmed

MSC charger source. device

authorized for the On the

Grumman LEM, following needed
Ill, MSC, No. MSC, to

to day,

proceed the Houston

with portable informed

procurement life support North

of American

a

battery power such a

to replenish

system's

was no longer
W. H. F. P. Rector Yschek,

in the CSM.
to NAA. GAEC, Space Attn: and R. S. Mullanev November Div., 5, 1964;

TWX, letter. Change

Information

Systems

"Contract

Authorization

_°6q.," November

6, 1964.

The more

Apollo descriptive

Space

Suit

Assembly Unit. The

received purpose

a new of the mission.
"Change in

designation, change was

the

Apollo it

Extravehicular

Mobility

to make

of its function
Maxime A. Faget,

in the Apollo
MSC. to l)ist_.,

Memoramtum, Space Suit

Designation

of

the

Apollo

Assembly

(SSA),"

November

5, 1964.

5-12

Engineers Systems

from Division

(,rumman (IESD)

and reviewed

the the

MSC

Instrumentation requirements

and

Electronics LEM's

coverage 2O

for the

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

S-band radio and the incompatibility location of the steerable antenna. boom that was the only IESD verify analyze feasible with the solution. the effects ASPO design

of those requirements Most observers felt The S-band of should two groups coverage such continue

with the present that a deployable recommended and effort on that the the meantime,

1964
November

therefore requirements In its design

Grumman

a boom.

Dalmo-Victor, the basis of the current
MSC, "ASPO $_cekly

antenna location.
Management

vendor,

Report,

November

5-12,

1964."

During heatshield Division had bolt Their

a mechanical failed engineers the that

loading inspected

test the

(simulating They

a 20-g load. quarters data found

reentry) and the way inner the that

the

CM

aft skin the of

at 120 percent damage secured would be

of maximum structure. three with

Structures of the from

Mechanics inner around structure. drop

buckled, circle findings

extending the heatshield along what used

to the

spacecraft's

recent

boilerplate
Ibid.

28 to determine

redesign

was necessary.

MSC had based radar dezwms
Ibid.

informed been on on

North

American was not Block and the

that

a flashing

light

on the for Houston's called vehicle.

CSM,

as an aid device was ren-

5-12

for visual

rendezvous, generated the both using current either

required. II mockup

[A request review.] which of both

some

such position

at the

CSM/LEM its own radar

configuration, ability or that

for rendezvous the

spacecraft

vehicles

to effect

in the target

Engineers discussed all the cabin company Mercury,
Ibid.; tograph board test

from testing

the

MSC

Crew breadboard and

Systems

Division

and

from control

North system. must

American During monitor

5-12

of the manned

environmental

flights--both

unmanned--North

American

atmosphere by gas chromatography should also compare the materials Gemini,
memorandum, o1 Request ill the North facility,"

and mass spectrography. The for the breadboard with those for chambers.
to R. C. Stults, (RECP) control "Transmission to add system a gas (ECS) and chromabread-

and

other
H.

applicable
Samonski, Aviation 18, 1964. Jr.,

space
M_C,

Frank

coordination

fro" Engineering American

Change

Proposal

environmental

November

ASPO

officials

completed of an all-battery those

a preliminary electrical factors that they

evaluation power resulted surveyed system in recent

of the design (EPS) the decision

and (in

weight InMarch

5-12

implications vestigators 1963) ments

fi)r the LEM.

reviewed

to employ fuel cells; also, in silver-zinc batteries. the same of the time,

technological

improve-

At about quirements

Grumman The

was analyzing contractor 21 found

the

attxiliary that, under

battery the

reworst

spacecraft.

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT;

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November

possible watt-hottrs 1700

conditions of auxiliary

(i.e., or two

lunar power.

abort),

the batteries

LEM (23

would and

need 29.5 kg

about [50 and

1700 one 65

Accordingly, ascent and stage. ASPO's

(;rumman

recommended

watt-hour

850

watt-hour

lbsJ, respectively) MSC final would design
MSC, "ASPO

in the spacecraft's both Grumman's EPS.
Report,

use

findings

in determining

the

of the LEM's
Weekly

Management

Nov.

5-12,

1964."

By this date,

all major

LEM
Apollo

subcontracts
Program
Review,

had

been
LEM

let.
Program," November 6, 1964,

"NASA Administrator's item A-10.

NASA coming (l) upon

anticipated },ear: A major

five significant review of the

milestones entire LEM

for the program LEM

LEM (with flight

during especial article)

the

forth-

emphasis

the fiscal picture for 1965 and 1966) (2) Start of production on LEM-1 (the first of LEM Test and Article static systems. testing (LTA)-2

(3) Delivery to Huntsville (4) (5) ment Start

(a dynamic complete

test LEM

article) structure develop-

of vibration propulsion

on the testing

Sea level and

altitude

qualification

in the continuing

of the I,EM's
item C.

Ibid.,

NASA and AC Spark Plug and navigation equipment. on a cost-schedule-performance contract at 5235 000 000.
MSC, Ma,med "Consolidated Space Flight, Activity October

amended the company's contract The change embodied an incentive scheme, and placed the estimated

for guidance clause, based cost of the

Report 18-November

for

the

Office

of p. 39.

the

Associate

Administrator,

30, 1964,"

10

MSC's

Structttres

and

Mechanics the

Division

and

ASPO upon

reviewed Grumman. in by

the The

LTA-10 review a at

test program resulted modified Tulsa, would were descent

to resolve

stop-work to have LTA-10

imposed ETA-10 wottld strttt:ttlre. be

in an agreement ctmfiguration. ()klahoma, consist only for were

remain used and gear,

the program with North American testing propulsion for LTA-10 which

adapter/LEM stage the ascent stage,

modal landing

separation ascent

and and

of descent

Subsystems

eliminated propulsion.

Memorandum, 9-1100, l)eletion

W.

F.

Rector Work

III, Order

MSC, on

to

LEM

Contracting November

Officer, 10, 1964.

"Contract

NAS

of Stop

LTA-10,"

22

ADVANCED

DESIGN

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Joseph an that at the White

(;. Thibodaux, Engineering first .J-2 firing Sands than 400 a single
"Minutes,

Jr.,

MSC

Propulsion propulsion

and

Power systeln fuel and

Division, manageTnent engine cell \Vhitney. endt|rance

reported meeting tests would was condt|cted

at

1964
November

Apollo

and Range were

1)eveloplnent (WSMR). completed during
I) Technical

technical Two at Pratt

of the service

Missile hours

of

10

greater receive
MSC, 1!164."

MSC

cell for testing
Apollo E and

the month.
Management Mccling No. 9, No_cmbcr 10,

"[here whether the CM planning would cated The the

appeared

to

l)e

some

confusion

and/or

disagreement

concerning

12-19

one ov two heatshield. for the t)e required.

successful Saturn V reentry A number of doculnents and :m_ .... flight indicated inission reentry planning The Systems measurement "Fhe preliminary

tests were required to qualify relating to instrumentation that trajectory range activity Engineering two successful document would being and capability Mechanics with its of reentries indisolne 1)y l)ivirecomrequirements

501

that decision Apollo

only

a single and

successful the the mission ()ftice.

1)e necessary. conducted

would Trajectory

inth|ence Support

heatshield sion had mendation.
MSC,

transducers been requested

Structures

to provide

"ASI'O

Weekly

Activity

Report,

Nmcmber

12-1!L

196,t."

More the

careful shear

examination were splices.

of tim boilerplate in the face sheet

28 aft fieatshield which were

indicated not in the

that same

12-19

failures

splices

locations
Ibid.

as the core

In the such

its search was (_M's

for

some face. impact

method The

of reducing

water

impact (6- to was testing, program.

pressures, 12-in) also the

North to heat-

12-19

AInerican

considering

adding

a 15- to 30.5-cm manufactt,rer wind tunnel Apollo

"lump" investigating on

blunt and

spacecraft

conse(luent design,

t_actors as additional upon

effect

shield
Ibid.

the overall

MSC

reviewed

a number

of alternatives a modified fabricating article helmet

to the

current one tiber

design

of the

space

12-19

stilt helmet. Engineers selected feasible dimensions and began product bubt)le-type program
Ibid.

concept, a thin would

with the smallest glass shell. The of an MSC's immobile, in-fiouse

would to find

serve

as the The

test

in a series design.

of tests support

hehnet.

whole possil)le

of this effort

the best

23

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November 12-19

MSC the be

analyzed basis of this

Grumman's information,

report ASP() and device

on their liftoff Studies

program weights should

to resize that of the 14 742

the and the

LEM. 4908

On tanks kg

recommended

propellant

resized

for separation 10 820 lbs), rendezvous

lunar and

('52 500 and of an optical

respectively.

investigate of batteries

feasibility

the substitution

for fuel cells.

And tinally, engineering managers examine a selected list of weight they could
Ibid.:

from both (;rumman and MSC should reduction changes to determine whether

ilnmediately
W. F. Rector

be implemented.
IIl, MSC, to (;AFC, Attn: Bob R. S. Mullaney Button, MSC, "Contract "Apollo NAS Status,"

letter,

!t-1100, LEM Weights November 2(}, 1964.

Meeting,"

November

19, 1964;

12-19

Shorting elnplified
MSC,

had the
"ASt'O

1)ecolne continuing
V_reekly

a significant difficulties
Report,

problem that

in the plagued
5-12, 1964."

LEM the

fuel

cells,

and

ex-

system's

development.

Activity

November

13

Robert ard's

E. Smylie, reliability

of the figures

MSC

Crew

Systenls space system

Division, suit

cited

Hamilton including

Standthe suit

for the Apollo life support

assembly,

per se and

the portable

(PI_SS): Creu, Sa/ety

Item Space PLSS Complete suit (Liquid cooled) assembly
Robert Assembly E. Smylic, Reliability MSC, to

MLv_io_t Sttcces_s .9995 .9995 .999
Crew Integration November Ih'anch, 13, 1964. Attn:

.99991 .99999 .9999
C. Haines.

Memorandunl, "Space Suit

Apportiolmlcnt."

13

MSC

defined

the requirements

for visual

docking

aids

on both

of the Apollo

spacecraft: • At a range passive spacecraft • From tive attitude • And the and pilot of 305 and m (1000 ft) away, ft), the astronaut attitude. be able vehicle. still solely distance to judge through the the target's relamust be able to see the

determine

its gross fie must

61 m (200

and the aligntuent of his own from this latter distanceIand I)e able rate.
Rector Weekly I!I, MSC, to (;AEC, Attn:

visual two

means-spacecraft

must

to calculate

the

between

the closing
TD.'X, MSC, W. "ASPO F.

R. 12-19,

'_. Mullane',. 1964."

No_cmber

13,

1964;

Activity

Report,

No_eml)er

16

NASA

test pilot

Joseph

A. Walker

flew the

I,LRV

for the

second

time.

The

first attempted excessive drift and liftoff was

liftoff, into to the rear. accomplished.

a 9.26-km (5-nm) breeze, was stopped The vehicle was then turned to head While airborne 24 the LLRV drifted

because of downwind with the

ADVANCED DESIGN, FABRICATION, AND TESTING

wind and descent to touchdown was accomplished. Touchdown and resulting rollout (at that time the vehicle was on casters) took the LLRV over an iron-door-covered pit. One door blew off but did not strike the vehicle.
Pilot Report, Joseph A. Walker, November 16,1964.

1 954
November

Crew Systems Division (CSD) was proceeding with procurement of an inflight metabolic simulator in response to a request by Systems Engineering Division. T h e simulator would be used to support the LEM mission for
NASA test pilot Joseph A. Walker walks away from the LLRV after a successful flight (note the casters on the vehicle).

16

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November

SA-206 the Control contract with

and

would had t)een

t)e compatible assigned It was to the

for

use that

in the

the

CM.

Responsibility I.EM Euvironmental of Work by April by April

for would !; the 1, 1966,

project

Manager the proposals prototype by July

of the

System awarded

Office. by January

projected the

Statement evaluated delivered

be completed

15, 1965; 1, 1965: deliveries

by June simulator
Johnston, No_ember

two qualified
l,ettcr, Richard S. m¢.labotic simulator,"

1, 1966.
Sxstems Division, "Inltight

MSC, to Chief, 16, 196,1.

l',gim'ming

16-December

15

After during for

investigating Apollo type earth of some

the nuclear

maximum missions, particle fluxrates,

radiation North detection the

levels American system

that

were

anticipated the Except NPDS need for was

orbit high

confirmed (NPDS). of the North

periods

of extremely

current

design period,

COllsidered adequate. During the same reporting awarded a contract to Philco to build the system.
NAA, "Apollo Monthly Progress Report," S11)-62-300

American

"]2, January

1, 1965,

p. 18.

17-18

The Saturn

Emergency Electri<:al

Detection Systems and and

System Integration

(EDS) Panel

Design held

Sub-Panel its first

of the meeting at

ApolloNorth

American's A. Dennett Personnel the port and meeting. the fl)r both

Systems of MSC trom MSC, Included launch

Information Division facility at Downey, Calif. W. G. Shields of MSFC co-chaired the meeting. KSC, and lights ()MSF, and were along of design North a review with and American of the related checkout attended EDS ground design sup-

MSFC, in the vehicle

discussions spacecraft

equipment; a review
Proceedings, trical Systems

a review of EDS status
Emergency Integration

of the differences

concepts;

in the spacecraft.
System l)esign Sub-Panel and W. (L of the Apollo-Saturn December 2, Elec1964.

Delection Panel,

sgd.

A. i)ennctt

Shields,

17-18

The define

Apollo At

Mission the

Planning were

Task

Force

met

in Bethpage, complex those of

New during

York, most

to inti-

prelaunch

handling meeting with pad Grumman, force arming back only that

procedures

at the

launch

lunar Operalaunch

missions.

representatives

groups

mately concerned tions Directorate, center. The • The would seven task mobile

operations--ASP() North American, on several

and the MSC Flight GE, and the Kennedy fundamental items: just (at MAT to the

agreed tower for had before

(MAT) the to final be that be 26

would launch

be installed preparations with was for the mated simulated

once, T

and

be moved hours). • All operations

minus

performed structure removed

removed launch and

should be accomplished umbilical tower. • Checkout equipment

would

flights

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

would be evaluated. . Total
MSC.

reconnected pad time

only

after

data

from

the

simulation

had

been

1964
November

was set at 12 days.
Report, November 26-1)eceml)el 3, 19(14."

"ASPO

Weekly

Mauagcmc'nt

I,ing-Temco-Vought for unmanned environment
._pace

received of (;emini

a contract and

from

MSC, space suits

valued in the

at

$365

()00, space

18

testing simulator.

Apollo

firm's

Bu_si_w_s Daily,

No_cml)er

18, 1964, p. 84.

MSC's told the (DSKY) existing ing, the craft _Vith clature

Assistant Apollo for the display

Director Program Block panel Slayton

for II CSM

Flight and of both and out

Crew that for the the vehicles mandatory aim

Operations, current I.EM were the from

l)onald display not and

K. Slayton, keyboard with of lightIn his of space-

19

Manager

compatible

design pointed

standpoint philosophy.

nomenclature DSKY display reference and status lighting including to ensure panel

presentation, compatibility design.

caution/warning operational with consistency

menmrandum,

requirements the existing

to lighting, lights white, should off.

he said and be

all

numerics lights

should should the

be green, be aviation entire

nomenyellow. range of

caution

All panel brightness,

dimmable

throughout

In regard to nomenclature, DSKY should confornl to ment North Referring (ICD). The referenced and was

Slayton pointed out the North Anierican ICI) was being

that al)l)reviations Interface Control by (;rumman 1, 1!)64. that

on the I)ocuand

reviewed

American

scheduled warning

to be signed system,

December out

to the caution

and

he pointed

all cantion

lights on the DSKY should be gated into the primary system (PN(;S) caution light on the main instrument and into the CM. Slayton to the proval. the PN(;S caution light on the lower

navigation and guidance panel of both vehicles equipment bay panel of

requested Subsystem

that

preliminary

designs

of the and

DSKY

panel for

be submitted review and ap-

Managers

for Controls

Displays

Memorandum, of DSKY with

Donald K. Slayton, MSC, LEM and CM Controls and

to Apollo Displays,"

Program November

Manager, 19, 1964.

"Incompatibility

MSC the found power

was Apollo

giving lunar

serious surface waste

thought heat, such

to using a device Center 27

radioisotope would asked

generators method lightest be the

to power could source be of the

19

experiments the

packages.

If some

to control available.

Accordingly,

(;rumman

to study

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November

feasibility company methods power and Grumman however, between would

of

incorporating analyze together

it thermal

into the

the and

LEM's radiological

scientific problems, of using the

payload. as well generator

The as for

should of stowage,

with

possibility

heat during was allowed it would 13 and 18 kg about
Rector III,

the flight. To minimize the problem much flexibility in designing the about .07 cum Its (2.5 energy cu ft) (30 and 50 watts
MSC,

of integration, unit. Basically, would current).
NAS 19, 1964; 9-1100, MSC,

measure

and

weigh 238)

40 lbs). of electrit
Attn:

source direct

(plutonium

produce
W. F.

ity (29 volts,
R. S. Mullaney, experiments," 19-26, 1964."

Letter.

to GAEC,

"Contract November

Radioisotope power supply "ASPO Weekl) Management

for lunar scientific Report, November

19-26

The

MSC-Marshall (TLI): the J-2 the S-IVB engine exact

Space Sub-Panel

Flight set forth

Center several

(MSFC) procedural

Guidance rules

and

Control

hnplementation injection

for translunar

• Once not be able the stage's unit (IU),

ignition achieved time roll

sequence (This 90 percent would receive

was would

started, occur

the about from

spacecraft 427 the

would

to halt

the maneuver.

sec before instrument from the

of its thrust no signal must prior

capability.) be relayed to injection.

• Because ground. • The • And not initiate
Memorandum, and MSC, to Implementation enclosures; MSC,

the spacecraft

of sequence attitude would had

initiation be reset

vehicle's when the the ignition

spacecraft sequence.
Guidance Items Meeting" Weekly

control

of the

vehicle,

the

IU

would

Secretaries, Distr., "Action Sub-Panel "ASI'O

and and

Control Agreements

Implementation from 17, 1964), November the November 19-26,

Sub-Panel, Guidance 19, 1964." and 1964;

MSFC Control with

(November Report,

Management

19-26

To

solve

the the

persisting impacts, thickness

problem MSC of the

of the face

integrity (but

of the with no

CM's several change

aft

heatshield approaches: to the core

during increasing

water

engineers

were sheet

investigating

itself); and replacing the stainless-steel shell. Technicians felt that, of these efficient
MSC,

honeycomb with a type of gridwork two possibilities, the first seemed more

structurally.
"ASPO Weekly Management Report, November 19-26, 1964."

North craft aligned
Ibid.

American during

and

Grumman maneuvers: docking

agreed the window

on LEM's

the

alignment overhead

of the window

two

spacebe

docking

would

with right-hand

of the CM.

28

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

MSC

determined

that

the

lights

on

the

fingertips

of

the

space

suits

were

1964
November 19-26

adequate to supplement the CM's interior lighting. Thns North American's efforts to develop a portable light in tile spacecraft were canceled. Tile exact existing
Ibid.; Crewman

reqtfirements preferred Gemini
letter, C.

for red system.
L. Taylor. light,"

those I)ulbs,

fingertip which

lights would

now

had 5.]
Cozad,

to be

defined.

The of the

astronauts

necessitate

a redesign

[See October
MSC, No_ember to NAA, 4, 1964.

29-November
Attn: J. C.

"Contract

NAS

.0-150,

portable

The

MSC

Crew

Systems protection

Division

reviewed It

the extravehicular was estimated for the reliability design
19-26, of

mobility a total weight

unit of for

19-26

micrometeoroid

garment.

13 to 18 kg (30 to 40 lbs) protection garments which the meteoroid
MSC, Robert Apollo "AsPO

would be required had a crew safety rules
Report,

two micrometeoroid goal of 0.9999 were
1964";

hazard.
Vqeekly

Ground
Management

for

their

being

defined.

November "Investigation

memorandum, protection for

E. Smylie, space suit,"

MSC, to Paige B. Burbank, I)ecernber 9, 1964.

meteoroid

MSC Apollo

conducted external

studies thermal

to determine garment

problems (ETG) and

in donning portable life

and

doffing

the

19-26

support

system

(PLSS) by a snbject tile ETG and PLSS assistance (3.7 and psig). chest while the

in a full-pressure suit. The subject unassisted with the suit in a vented suit was pressurized to 25.5

donned condition

and doffed and with per sq m

kilonewtons

Tests showed the necessity area t¢) prevent a gathering visibility.
"ASI'O Weekly Management Chief, Report, Crew

of redesigning the of excess material

ETG in the neck which restricted

downward
MSC, Francis 9-2820,"

November Div.,

19-26, "Trip

1964";

memorandum, NAS

J. DeVos, November

MSC, to 19, 1964.

Systems

ReportICOntract

Officials the in equipment the movable
MSC, MSC, change

from

North design be

American and stowage used stowage in packed

and

MSC

Crew kits [This I vehicle
19-26, 9-150,

Systems in the and method and
1964"; II

Division Block would would
letter,

defined The a reinstalled

19-2 6

container

of survival fabric Block

II CM. be

would spacecraft's hard
"ASPO to NAA,

rucksacks

compartment. in the
Report, "Contract 1, 1964.

eliminated

container
Weekly Attn:

save weight.]
C. L. Taylor, for

Management J. c. Cozad, December

November NAS

Block

mockupIrequest

disposition,"

To ensure consistent design

that with

the redesigned earlier criteria,

landing MSC

gear on the resized LEM sent to Grumman revisions

would be to those

19-2 6

criteria: • Maximum rate of descent--3.05 29 m (10 ft) per sec

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November

• Maximum • Maximum
MSC, "ASP() Weekly

horizontal attitude
Management

velocity--l.22 rates (any axis)--3
Report, No_ember

m (4 ft) per sec degrees
19-26,

per sec
1964."

19-26

In the

flights I,EM.

that

simulated affirmed

the

moon's scientific the

gravity, ease 81.65

MSC with

technicians from the which

evaluated descent large stage containers

the of

astronaut's

ahility They

to remove and

packages

relative

(about .226 cu In [8 cuft] and carried about.
Ibid.

weighing

kg [180 lbs])

could

be extracted

19-26

The To in

current avoid the ascent

tllrust redesigning

buildup the

time engine from

for the

LEM

ascent directed

engine Grumman

was .3 second. the pacing simply item to

valve--which .2 to .3 second. (;enter LEM's to burn thus

was already

engine's

development--MSC value

change At the the either showed of 689.5 of about 1587 with to

the specification sanxe be time, thrust. uprated kilonewtons 7!)2.9 1814 kg or by using

engineers Because

at the of the have "B" (115 and
MSC, to

hegan weight

studying gains,

ways the Preliminary

to increase engine must studies pressure pressure from

engine's that,

it would a phase per

longer. producing could this feed
R.

chamt)er psia)), the psia),

(designed thrust

for a chamber chamber be be increased

sq m (100 lbs).

kilonewtons pressurization
III,

(. :)00 to 4000

Moreover, propellant

could

accomplished

the present
Ibid.:TWX,

systems.
November 27, 1964.

V_7.F.Rector

GAEC,

Attn:

S. Mullaney,

19-26

MSC logics ments on with

and

(;runmlan I,EM entire ground respective with during
W. Hardware Report, I'rogram

representatives and agreed subsystem test program subcontractors revised program and
Ill, at

reviewed and

individual associated Agreement

subsystem hardware was Cost also and by MSC

test

for the for the their

on test logic development. which would during

requirereached effort and

the vehicle

(;rumman be jointly 1965.

proposed reviewed

to implement

December.

associated (;runtman
Memorandum, Logic and

the

January
F. Rector Review No',ember Control

February
MSC, GAEC," 19-26, to I.EM

Subsystem 18,

Managers, 1964; W. Nmember MSC, F.

"Sul)system "ASPO Rector 20 Ill, 1964,

Test Weekly MSC, with

November 1.q64"': Meeting

Management to Chief,

memorandum, Actions,"

l)i_.,

"Staff

elI('IOSlIrCS.

19-26

MSC sample

asked return

(;rumman container. with

to both

design Tltis

and efi:ort

tabricate would Concurrelltly,

a explore

prototype handling the Center's

for

a

hmar

procedures Advanced

and compatihility

spacecraft. 30

)RWARD pRWARD

HEAT SHIELD HATCH COMPARTMENT

_RWARD

EARTH LANDING SEQUENCE CONTROLLERS

MAIN CHUTE (TYP) IN', PANEL LH EQUIPMENTBAY

PITCH-DOWN REACTION CONTROL ENGINES WINDOW EQUIPMENT BAY

COUCH IMPACT ATTENUATION DEVICES ACCESS (DOOR HATCH REMOVED)

ELECTRICAL UMBILICAL FAIRING JP REACTION ENGINES ROLL REACTION CONTROL ENGINES HEAT SHIELD EXTERNAL VENT COMPARTMENT

YAW-LEFT CONTROL

REACTION ENGINES

AFT COMP_

Apollo

Command

Module,

Block

II.

Spacecraft quirements

Technology for such

Division a container.

was

studying

structural

and

packaging

re-

1964
November

MSC, "ASPO

V_reekly Management

Report,

November

19-26, 1964."

NASA guidance
Ibid.

concluded and

contract

negotiations equipment.

with

AC

Spark

Plug

for

Apollo

23

navigation

North Block Ibid.

American II spacecraft.

received

NASA's

formal

go-ahead

on

manufacture

of

the

23

The

CSM

Configuration changes. time display

Control Perhaps for the the clock

Panel, most on

at its

first

meeting, was display the

approved substitution console.

several of an

23

engineering elapsed
lbid.

significant the main

31

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November 23

A "pre-FRR" view cause namic failing. Several hood launch Structures "these
MSC,

laid boost

some

preliminaries 23 (held had was cover follow

for not asked

the been

formal on designed of the

Flight

Readiness 4, 1964). the and

ReBedy-

(FRR) the

of boilerplate protective that North would

at WSMR deployment

December canards the

to sustain possibility

pressures

vehicle of its

"turn-around,"

American

to analyze

other escape

problems to the tower will also and

were the

aired--fluttering compartment cover. Joseph confidently boost Division, prior
23/LJ

of the N.

canards Kotanchik,

and

the chief

likeliof the that of the

of damage and

parachute

during reported

jettisoning to ASPO

Mechanics

items

be resolved
A-O02 1964"; (BP

to the FRR."
II 12-51-1). Preliminary Report, Flight Readiness 26-

"Minutes, November 3, 1964."

Mission 23,

Review. December

MSC,

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

November

23

Grumman and lish requirements development workload delivery
MSC.

MSC representatives for a new hardware test the program. This subcontractors, for flight
Management

met at Bethpage, delivery schedule program WSMR, were also would AEDC, finalized
26-December

New York, to estabfor the LEM ground involve changes and Grumman. at the
3, 1964."

in

at

the New

schedules
"ASPO Weekly

engines
Repoat,

meeting.

No_ember

23-25

MSC ance and area ment,

and and CSM

Grumman navigation qualification radar were

reviewed subsystem would expected deviations this

the be met from that

ground by the fully true overall

test

program All time. parts LEM be all

for major The

the and

LEM both

guidfor LEM

(including to be delivered

radar). revised on for qualified plan

milestones major

hardware

test logic,

problem equipby ASP().

was permissible Since was it

for pre-production electronics

equipment.

was apparently an

recommended

approved

Ibid.

25

ASPO tractors final Shea C. H. Belew, Lewis

Manager that (Space evaluation had asked

Joseph it was and

F. Shea his desire

informed to review Laboratory

Apollo the and

Program progress for the Rocketdyne) LEM

Director of the two prior descent

Samuel subconto the engine. to L. F.

C. Phillips

Technology selection Maxime and

of a subcontractor A. Faget also and King, 32 III, and H.

MSC's W.

to be chairman following J. G. Thibodaux, Grumman; Maj. _V. OMSF;

of a committee individuals I. A. R. Moe, all of MSC;

accomplish

the review,

would

ask the

to serve: Johnsen, Edwards

Lambert, MSFC; Research

F. Rector C.

M. Dandridge Center;

J. A. Gavin,

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Rocket Research The

Research

Laboratory;

and A. O. Tischler,

NASA

Office

of Advanced

1964
November

and Technology. should (1) establish review criteria during a planning

Committee

meeting at MSC during subcontractors' facilities technical a written status, report and

the week of November 30, during the week of December resources, appropriate and NASA

1964; (2) visit the two 7, 1964, for review of and on (3) prepare findings their

manufacturing brief

test facilities; personnel

by December "Both GAEC

18, 1964. and NASA GAEC's will be parties responsibility at our Shea said.
to Maj. Gen.

to the

final

selection but all

and I do

it is not feel we

my intent

to usurp

in this

matter;

should have the intelligence of GAEC's final selection,"
Letter, Joseph F. Shea, MSC,

disposal

to appreciate

ramifications

Samuel

C. Phillips,

Novemher

25, 1964.

The the

Configuration adapter panels impact.

Control on MSC and

Panel North

approved American

a deployment North American were ,jointly

angle

of 45 ° for no the

26-December

3

Block

I flights.

anticipated evaluating important high-gain

schedule acceptability consideration antenna
MSC,

of this angle for Block was the necessity to the
Weekly

II missions communicate docking

as well. A most via the CM's phase of the
3, 1964."

during
"ASPO

transposition
Management Report,

and

flight.

November

26-1)ecember

MSC's nitrogen hydrogen

Flight leak

Operations into on the pad.

Directorate The

accepted spacecraft/LEM

KSC's

proposal upon

for emergency in case of a to the

26-December

3

deluge

the SM and

adapter

(SLA)

proposal

was based area in about inlet conditions

no changes

spacecraft and insertion ever, errors in volume quired reevaluation of complished
Ibid.

to the SM/SLA estimation and the proposal length

three minutes. Howin the spacecraft reinsertion could be acin the spacecraft.

to assure of time without

that

in a reasonable

changes

Because sertion

of into

heat lunar

from orbit),

the

service a serious

propulsion thermal

engine problem

(especially existed

during

inin

26-December

3

for equipment

the rear of the SM. Reviewing the rendezvous radar's installation, ance and Control Division felt that a heatshield might be needed the equipment. able anteima.
Ibid.

the Guidto protect the steer-

Similar

problems

might

also be encountered

with

33

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November

MSC

informed

North

American as a telemetry

that

the

Center for all to

would manned S-band's II Block

fllrnish Block missions.

a

VHF

transmitter This would the
Ibid. 3

to serve permit Manned

dump in testing

I flights.

wide Space

flexibility Flight

the CSM

compatibility

26-December

with

Network

prior

26-December

3

Crew

Systems

I)ivision control of that

(CSD) system item's

engineers in Block

evaluated I CSM's. Block The

the

radiator was have would

for

the

enviromnental that, because shortened. During reported the

division

certain to be

inadequacy,

I missions

same

period,

however, the

the

Systems

Engineering SED

Division stated that

(SED) some predays.

"progress"

in solving

radiator

problem.

"disagreement" dicted a five-day SED ordered
Ibid.

existed on the radiator's capability. capability; CSD placed the mission's testing on the equipment

North American limit at about two this

further

to reconcile

difference.

26-December

3

Crew

Systems

Division

gave

space

suit

manufacturers in

the their

responsibility products.

of

providing
Ibid.

personal

communications

equipment

26-December

3

Bell ascent the

Aerosystems engine. mixture from ratio

Company The .85 to new of the 1.05.

tested design barrier Bell

a high-performance was similar along to the the flow reported

injector current chamber one,

for wall

the had of

LEM that been .8 per-

except

changed

a performance Subsequent wall of the

increase

cent (about 2.5 sec of specific impulse). duced excessive erosion in the ablative by the felt this higher method temperature. of increasing The the MSC ascent

testing, however, prothrust chamber caused Power Division might (PPD) not be

Propulsion engine's

and

performance

practicable. At the same time, PPD reported that Bell had canceled its effort to find a

lighter ablative material (part of the weight reduction of tests had been conducted on such materials; none

program). A number was successful.

Ibid.; W.

"ASPO F. Rector

Weekly III, MSC,

Management to GAEC,

Report" Attn: R.S.

[December Mullaney,

10,

1964-January 27, 1964.

7,

1965];

TWX,

November

26-December

3

Grumman assemblies

selected

the

Leach

Corporation

to supply

data

storage

electronics

for the LEM.

Conclusion

of contract 34

negotiations

was anticipated

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

about February approval to the characteristics, should scheme.
MSC,

1, 1965. selection, beryllium the

The with must feasibility

resident Apollo office at Grumman gave its only two conditions: (1) because of its toxic not be used of the in the proposed assemblies; time-w)ice and (2) Leach multiplexing

1964
November

demonstrate

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report.

November

26-December

3, 1964."

General through

Precision's Link Group received a subcontract with Grumman, other (also and

a $7 million contract from for two I,EM simulators,

NASA, one at

27

Houston and the ment for the CSM as trainers of the spacecraft; of the mission.

at Cape Kennedy. Along being developed by Link), astronauts. The devices displays would

with comparable equipthe machines would serve duplicate simulate the every interior phase

for Apollo

would

visual

realistically

Space

Business

Daily,

November

27,

1964, p. 124.

North using the

American both single position. constant; to keep

tested the canard and dual cartridges. gases the Investigators further, the canards firing deployed.

thrusters These found of that

for the launch escape system, tests were to determine whether to maintain residual cartridge the canards pressures produced in a fully remained ample

3O

pressure

of residual

was sufficient

deployed fairly pressure

a single

"Apollo Monthly l'rogress Report," ment Report, November 26-I)ecember

SI1)-64-300-32, 3, 1964."

pp.

1. 3, 31;

"ASPO

Weekly

Manage-

Acceptance testing was completed at Downey, California, systems trainers for the CSM (the environmental control, control, Houston constructed
"Apollo Report,

on three principal stabilization and then shipped to

3O

and and

electrical installed under the

power

systems).

The

trainers

were

at the site, basic Apollo

arriving there December 8. They were Spacecraft contract at a cost of $953 024.
p. 24; "ASPO 64-191, December Weekly 8, 1964. Management

Monthly December

Progress Report," 3-10, 1964"; MSC

SID-62-300-31, News Release

Six during

flights the and

of

the

Lunar bringing all

Landing the flights total and

Research number

Vehicle to seven. as the

(LLRV) The a rapid flights

were project

made pilot, in the

month, with

During the Month

Joseph ease

Walker, skill

made

demonstrated the craft

increase progressed. duration vertical, and roll.

which

he handled

Altitudes to between three minutes were tude angles in excess

18 and attained.

21 m (60 and 70 ft) and flight With the jet engine remaining demonstrated 35 in both pitch

up to attiI,ift

of 20 ° were

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
November

rockets tentatively
Letter,

were

used

on the

last four

flights.

Six knots wind
Center, to

(6 n mi per hr) for flying.
Headquarters, ending November

had

been

set as the maximum
Office of 1)irector, Flight

permissible
Research

velocity
NASA

"Lunar 30,

Landing Research Vehicle 1964," sgd. De E. Beeler for

progress report No. Paul F. Bikle, l)ecember

17 for period 8, 1964.

December 3-10

After ordered

studying Bell firing

increased Aerosystems duration.
Progress Management

thrust Company

versus

increased the

burn

time,

Grumman engine

to redesign

LEM's

ascent

for a longer
GAEC. "ASP()

"Monthly Weekly

Report Report,

No.

23,"

LPR-10-39, 3-10, 1964."

January

10,

1965,

p.

12;

MSC,

December

3-10

MSC Block using cept would Systems Block

approved II CSM. the metal of all be modified for the

plans For shell crew the

put that tunnel

forth had

by

North

American mockup, been 12, planned the it would the

for

mockups

of

the Extool,

crew

compartment originally lighting, Mockup to the reported interior the and

company

proposed including

as a simulator. Block I lighting

transfer

be complete, II spacecraft. schedule

mockups

equipment.

to conform Division

of Block latest

Engineering II mockups:

review

for

the

March April July August
"ASPO to crew NAA,

15, 1965--crew 30, 1965--interior 15, 1965--Design 6, 1965--lighting
Weekly Attn: Management J. for C. Cozad, Block n

compartment lighting Engineering DEI
Report, "Contract mockup," 1)ecember NAS l)ecember 3-10, 9-150, 1964"; I)elivery letter, of C. L. Taylor, MSC,

Inspection

(DEI)

Government

furnished

equipment

22, 1964.

3-10

MSC month. follow.

froze

the

design

of the was of the

drogue scheduled mortars

mortar for the

for

the

launch the parachute

escape middle would

system. of the then

laboratory

qualification Qualification

to begin pilot

about

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report,

December

3-10.

1964."

3-10

Engineering dumping reentry (9.995 oxygen)

and helium

medical from the abort. [1.45

experts CM's psi] for the Reviewers

of

the

Crew that

Systems into the

Division the cabin resultant

reviewed during psia] recomatmosphere [4.55

gas chromatograph decided and Systems 36 31.349

or in a pad kihmewtons posed

helium crew.

kilonewtons

no hazard

Engineering

Division

ADVANCED DESIGN, FABRICATION, AND TESTING

mended, however, that dump time be reduced from 15 minutes to three, which could readily be done.
MSC, “Consolidated Activity Report for Office of the Associate Administrator, Manned Space Flight, December 1964,” p. 46.

1964
December

At its Sacramento test site, Douglas Aircraft Company static-fired a “battleship’’ S-IVB second stage of the Saturn IB vehicle, for 10 sec. (A battleship rocket stage was roughly the vehicle’s equivalent to a boilerplate spacecraft.) On January 4, 1965, after further testing of the stage’s 5-2 engine, the stage underwent its first full-duration firing, 480 sec.
Space Business Daily, December 4, 1964, p. 159.

4

Douglas Aircraft Company delivered the first S-IVB stage to Marshall Space Flight Center for extensive vibration, bending, and torsional testing. T h e FIRST FIRING MILESTONE-Flame and smoke spew from Saturn S-IVB upper stage in its first full-power “hot” firing at Douglas Sacramento Test Center, marking a major milestone in development of MSFC’s Saturn launch vehicle. With thick, stainless-steel propellant tanks, instead of lightweight aluminum, the S-IVB “battleship” test stage was used by Douglas engineers in an extensive ground test program to prove out the design of the S-IVB.

7

REPRODUC ORIGINAL

HE R

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
December

stage and center

was ()tiler

not

an

actual and

flight hut

stage

and

contained the flight

mockups article

of the in weight,

engine mass,

components,

it duplicated

of gravity,
1)ecember

stitIness.

Ibid.,

7, 1964, p. 167.

MSC ordered at 45 degrees. Also, should On the st) that include same CM.

North (This each such day, [The

American to fix tile rotation angle of the adapter panels angle should give ample clearance during an SM abort.) panel a device the (;enter spacecraft would have two attenuators, location. American Time) time North (See June to put device American 16, 1965.) at each directed Greenwich also had thruster North Mean

a standard equipment on the main

mechanical bay of the display
Letter, Change Space l)ecember

clock

(displaying

in the lower

an elapsed

console.]
H. P. Yschek, Authorization and Information 7, 1964. MSC, to NAA, Space No. 275," December Systems Division, and Information 7, 1964: letter. "Contract Systems Division, "Contract P. Yschek, MSC, to NAA, Authorization No. 277,"

H.

Change

MS(: during pellants

advised

Grumman

that,

normally, would

the

LEM

would reaction

be the active control

vehicle pro-

lunar rendezvous. aboard the CSM.
W. F. Rector llI, MSC,

This

conserve

system

TWX,

to GAEC,

Attn:

R.S.

Mullaney,

December

7, 1964.

Boilerplate a Little launch protective namic subsystem
"Apollo 1964,

23, Joe II

Mission launch and region vehicle

A-002, vehicle. performance to verify with

was The the

successfully test abort was utilizing

launched to

from subsystem

WSMR satisfactory and

by boost dy-

demonstrate in the

escape pressure

the canard capability 5.)
p. 31; Astronautics

cover, limits.
Monthly p. 410.

maximum

conditions

approximating

emergency

detection

(See objectives
Progress Report,"

in Appendix
SID 62-300-32,

and

Aeronautics,

A single ultimate (25 800 disreef the flated force),

main strength. lhs) load and of

parachute The 15 876 deployed after

was

drop-tested factor. The lbs). to the lbs),

at E1 Centro, test conditions Preliminary reefed three shape seconds, the the

Calif., load were

to verify to achieve

the a lbs] in14

parachute kg the (35 000

was designed

for a disreef

of 11 703 kg indicated an

a 1.35 safety

information (78 017 and canopy week achieved failed.

parachute disreefed load of

normally

kg [17 200

programmed

16 193 kg (35 700

after MSC

which during

North

American to discuss
NAA, "ASPO

representatives this and other
"Apollo Weekly Monthly Management

would visit recent tests.
Progress Report, Report," December

of December

SID

62-300-33, 1964."

February

1, 1965,

pp.

3-4;

3-10,

38

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Representatives Flight Operations

of

MSC's Division,

Information Flight Crew

and

Electronic

Systems

Division, and

1964
December 8

Operations

Division,

Guidance

Control Division, Astronaut Office, and Bellcomm, Inc., met to discuss rendezvous.

and ASP(), (;oddard Space Flight Center, (:ommnnications during LEM and CSM

Capability of the Manned Space Flight Network (MSFN) to provide for rendezvons was studied. Aaron Cohen of ASP() stated sufficient could be collected, achieve rendezvous. data ascent ment in the did and little five the processed, and transmitted Dr. F. O. Vonlmn of data stations and No already would of orbit, motion decision available colnmunicate there data was would over made via MSFN to (;nddard showed in the LEM the

data data

the I,EM to that MSFN before I_EM launch. during improvecontained the MSFN's

to ilnprove tracking first

Although

with be only the data concerning

10 minutes position

a slight already

in spacecraft I.EM

computer.

capability. Alternate rendezvous
l)onahl "Meeting

methods
(,.

were

discussed.
MSC, to Chief, Instrumentation l)ecembcr 9, 1964. and Electronic

Memorandum, Systems l)ivision,

_Viseman, on I.EM/CSM

rendezvous,"

The

Space

Science

Board

of the

National

Academy

of Sciences

was

asked

to give NASA an independent handling facility at ttouston. answered: • What upon return types of lunar

evaluation of the need for a lunar sampling NASA asked that the following qnestions be

sample from

analyses

need

to be

done

immediately can be anfor

of the samples

tim moon? until analyses

• What types of research can better be postponed handled at the best available research facility? • What types of scientific research ticipate will be needed for such analyses? • What MSC to handle do you scientific anticipate activities in terms and of handling manpower

facilities

do you

requirements

in such a facility?
Applica-

Letter, Homer E. Newell, NASA Associate Administrator for Space Science and tions, to l)r. Harry H. Hess, Chairman, Space Science Board, I)ecember 8, 196,t.

(;rumman control steerable appeared

received system antenna. feasible

from The

Houston These

criteria

for firing

times

of the SM reaction of the and LEM's the vendor, Electronic produced estimates

(RCS).

served design in

as a basis proposed MSC's

for the

design

thermal

by Dalmo-Victor, wind torque Dalmo-Victor's Grumman

to watchdogs

Instrumentation

Systems Division. On the other hand, the unbalanced by the RCS engines was still a problem. RCA and of the amount of torque varied considerably, and undertook a study of this problem. 39

consequently

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
December

MSC, W. W.F. F.

"ASPO Rector Rector

Weekly IlI, III, MSC, MS(],

Management to to GAEC, Attn:

Report, Attn: R.S. R.

No,eeml)er S. Mullaney,

26-1)eccmber November 1964.

3, 19,

1964"; 1964;

TWX, TWX,

GAEC,

Mullaney,

l)ecember9,

MSC bring

revised it in line

the lbs)
W.

weight for 206A
F. Rector

allocation mission and
111, "Lcm lII,

for

the

I,EM's lbs)

Rg:D

instrumentation established missions.
Electronic Systcms December "Contract NAS 9,

to were

with

current

planning,

l.imitations for all other
and requirements," R. December S. Mul[aney, 14, 1964.

295 kg (650
Mcmoramlum, Division, 1964; 9-1100, letter, LEM

181 kg (400
MSC, 1, 2, to to and ChicL 3

Instrumentation measurement Attn:

Attn: W.

N. F.

Farmer, Rector

MSC,

(;AEC,

1, 2, and

3 Measmcmcnt

Rcquircmvnts,"

MSC I.EM, tions

approved with Yardney
V¢. F.

the

use Electric
IIl,

of

one Corp.
to 23/'LPR

23.68-kg and

(50-1b)

auxiliary

battery began for

for

the

as recommended

by (;rumman,

preparations

negotia-

TWX. "Monthly

Rector

MSC, No.

(;AEC, 10

Attn: 39, p. 23.

R.

S.

Mt, llaney,

l)ecember

9,

1964;

I'rogrcss

Report

Av(:o

(:orporati(m to study and

was the

under

a 10-month of solar of space chaml)er.
9, 1964, p. 185.

contract and Testing

(amounting ultra-high would be

to $124 vacutnn on

578) the

to MSC materials

etfects

radiation suits.

components environment
December

performed

in the Ave() space
S/race Busim,_

Daily,

9-10

Grumman bus panels

and similar

I,EM to those

Project They

()ttice 5.

representatives there All power would

met distribution

to discuss circuit system with

the

split

distribution

system.

decided

be two

breaker controls remote

of Mockup

would 1)e located on the system engineer's controls and valves on the commander's
"Monthly l'rogrcss Report No. 23," I.PR-10-39, p.

center side console center side console.
17.

lO-January

7

Because pulsion

of faults tanks during

in both CSM

design

and

in testing control

procedures, failed

the their

positive verification

ex-

fin" the

reaction

system

tests (begun
"ASPO

the preceding
Report"

month).
(December 10, 1.q64-January 7, 1965).

Weekly

Management

lO-January

7

Crew proposed This

Systems design article

Division of the

received food review

froin

North studies

American in

a mockup the Block II

of

the

stowage

compartment

CSM.

would

be used

for packaging in February.

in preparation

for the lower

equipnwnt
Ibid.

bay mockup

40

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

By improving in the term Whitney far as the
Ibid.

filling electrode, in the

and

preparation Pratt and fuel

procedures Whitney cell single eliminated assembly. (:ells this for settled

and

by both

using shortthen, hours

nickel and Pratt

foil longand

1964
December

oxygen plugging had

I,EM's

Since over the

consistently

operated

400 matter.

and--as

IO--January

7

company

was cont:ernedIfelt

The

resident

Apollo

office

at North

Anterican

discussed

the

contpany's

tool-

lO-January

7

ing concepts for the and Tool Engineering reviewers Though nonetheless preciably devices, from formity
Ibid.,"

Block II spacecraft with the chief Division and the local Marshall the tile suitability that total the costs of initial of North tooling cost

of Marshall's representative. basic be would for the also optical "judgment would would

Planning These approach. high, not be they ap-

agreed they felt

on that

American's

recognized

manufacturing mechanical much of checking

affected. The substitution of it was agreed, would eliminate inspection process: mechanical or subsystems.
Report," Sill

checking factor" assure uni-

the

of major
"Apollo

components
Monthly Progress

62-300-33,

p.

27.

MSC having

directed

(;rumman

to provide

a LEM

ahort

guidance

section

(At;S)

11

• a computer • the provision

memory

of 4096 null

words bias gyro device information navigation updating and such that a future systent from the drift contpensation

for in-flight

• a general purpose input/_output • Bell 3B accelerometers

• inpttt registers for rendezvous radar interface could be mechanized if desired • an (PN(;S) PNGS.
Letter, Al)ort

interface and the A(,S

between

the

primary and

guidance

for position

velocity

of the AGS

Joseph (;uida,lce

F.

Shea, Section

MSC,

to

GAEC,

Attn: 1)ecember

R.

S. 11,

Mullaney, 1964.

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

Conliguration,"

From of the pletely vehMe detail.)

MSC, I,EM's the under

(;rummall landing varying landing

received gear. impact: surface conditions --(The

updated gear also MSC

criteria must provide which be

to be designed adequate were

used to

in tile absorb

design comfor tile

11

it lnust that

stability ()tit touchdown

conditions,

spelled at

ill precise were:

Maximum velocity

anticipated

vertical horizontal

3.05 nt (10 ft) per sec 1.22 m (4 ft') per sec 41

velocity

ASCENT ST_

DESCENT STAGE

The

LEM.

1964 December

spacecraft pitch roll

attitude ----engines MSC also 3 degrees 3 degrees random 3 degrees (descent per se_ and reaction "that on tile control) the flight vertical control "Contract would and be off. horizontal "It

yaw attitude rates At touchdown, be values all

must velocity

ret'ognized,"

emphasized, constraints

. . . are

system." NAS 9-1100,

Letter, W. F. Rector III, MSC, to GAEC, Attn: R. S. Mullanev Landing gear design criteria," December 11, 1964.

14

ASPO's recharges

Operations and

Planning replaceable).

Division

directed system (PI_SS)

(;rumman and three

to

provide

six

of the portable

life support

PLSS

batteries

(rechargeable

Letter, W. F. Rector Ili, MSC, to (;AE(', Attn: R. S. Mullaney, "Contract Resolution of M-5 mockup review chits 1-16 and 1-20/' December 14, 1964. 15

NAS 9-1100,

Associate formed

Administrator MSC Director

for Robert

Manned R. (;ilruth 42

Space that

Flight

George

E.

Mueller

in-

the Integrated

Mission

Control

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Center calling much

at MSC shotfld it the Mission as possible of the Congress
to Gilruth,

be renamed Mission Control Center. Control Center, it has the advantage tile original and name which has become the public."
15, 1964.

He said, of retaining so well

"By as

1964
December

known

to tile press,
Letter.

Mueller

l)eceml)er

1)almo-Victor steerable the sary quired plume merely

studied of the CSM's for the

thermal-demanded Investigators reaction this
No.

weight engines,

increases and 1.18 1.18

for

the

I,EM's that, be

15-16

antenna.

reported control impingement.
23," LPR-10-39, 7, 1965).

to Grnmman another

RCA would

in
re-

kg (2.5 lbs) kg

was neces-

survival during
Report

of the

antenna:

for tracking
Progress (December

"Monthly Report"

p.

5;

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

10, 1964-January

Aboard relief

a KC-135 tube were trait

from first were

Wright-Patterson under zero-g sctieduled
Report," Sll)

AFB,

the

fecal

canister

and manned

urine tests

16

tested

conditions. 1965.
4-6.

Similar

of a complete
"Apollo Monthly

for February
62-300-33, pp.

t'rogress

A mission Shea,

planning Director AS-201, orbit first SM

presentation for Flight

was

given

to ASP()

Manager C.

Joseph Kraft,

F.

16

Assistant

Director

Operations

Christopher

.lr.,

and Assistant ering missions natural capability beacon came on back
Memorandum, of The Apollo

for Flight Crew Operations AS-202, and AS-203. Shea of proper manned post the program
MSC,

Donald K. Slayton covsaid he wanted either a control tracking. system This deorbit a C-band decision not to put

decaying for the the

lifetime missions. CM/SM much
to JSC

or reaction It was decided separation later.
Office,

for the

to haunt
Carl

R. Huss,

Historical June 6, 1973.

"Comments

on

Volume

1II

SpacecraJt:

A Chronology,"

Phase

II service Center

propulsion were first firing

system begun of 30

engine seconds.

tests

at Arnold high of

Engineering altitnde nine firings

Dewere

velopment

under

simulated

conditions

with a successful completed.
"Apollo Monthly

A total

Progress

Report,"

SID 62-300-33,

p. 13.

Ames the CM.

researchers flight The

conducted

23 runs

in the

Center's with

wind the aft

tunnel

to confirm of the

16-January

15

test instrumentation's instrumentation
Monthly Progress

compatibility performed

heatshield

satisfactorily.
62-300-33. pp. 10-11.

"Apollo

Report,"

SID

43

At top is a profile view of an Apollo model in the 0.3-m (1-ft) shock tunnel at Ames Research Center. Bottom, an Apollo in the 4.27-m (14-ft) helium tunnel at Ames.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

NASA ment

announced for the Manned

the

selection Space Inc., NASA Flight

of two Network: and main release

firms

to supply

electronics

equip-

1964
December

(1) tion

Dynatronics, telemetry or as the

to design (Tile news

manufacture function put

pulse

code system be

modulawould an telemetry worth

17

(PCM)

systems.

of tile PCM would data those

be to decode,

it, "decommntate," contract

signals from the spacecraft.) estimated $3.5 million. (2) machines, the PCM Univac as their system. Division name This

Dynatronics' Rand, would then value

of Sperry indicates, information The

to furnish process would of Univac's

processors. signals to the was

(These t)y at Mission placed

received

be transmitted contract

Control Center $4.5 million.
NASA News

at Hotlston.)

Release

6,1-318,

"NASA

Selects

Apollo

Data

Contractor,"

December

17, 1964.

Crew prove to the inserting

Systems the design thermal

Division of the garment arm;

(CSI)) space (for and view).

engineers, suit, example, alterations By the design

in their a larger to the middle changes

continuing a number opening

effort

to im-

18

recommended

of inodifications to facilitate to increase Robert the the E. suit's

sleeve neck of January,

the second downward could report characteristics
Francis

and chest

astronaut's Smylie don/doff

CSD's greatly

several and
J.

nlajor made
MSC,

improved (See January
Support I)ecember

it less bulky.
to Chief, doffing

19, 1965.)
Office, 18, 1964. "Improved

Memorandum, Exlcrnal Thermal

1)eVos, lit aml

Apollo studies,"

Garment

donning,

NASA

Administrator

.James

E. XVebb

thanked

Secretary

of Defense

Robert

18

S. McNamara for providing infi)rmed McNamara ttlat Systems Division of the to initiate the definition gram." inunications Ttle aircraft coverage

aircraft support for the Apollo NASA had transferred $600 000 Air Force, phase of he and "this the (:-135 to phase should Apollo

program. _Nebl) to the Electronic us the ability aircraft proand com-

provide support telemetry

would of the

used

supplement

pre-injection

of the flights.

Webb added that the Bureau four additional C-135's well would program. McNamara has coinpleted meet Apollo had written a study Webh continne planning on

of the Budget had the question of identifying on its way toward resolution; and that NASA the basis of 12 (;-135 aircraft for the Apollo

on November of alternative conclude

27, that

1964, the

that

"The

Air

Force to is to for

of a nunll)er They

comt)inations optimum

of aircraft solution of instrumenting the S600 000

requirements.

equip twelve C-135's to support 12 C-135's was estinlated to cost the definition
Letters, 1964. D;el)b

Apolh) . . 2' Total cost $27.7 lnillion, inchtding

phase.
to McNamara, l)ecember 18, 196,t; McNamara to _Vel)b, November 27,

45

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFF:

A

CItRONOLOGY

1964
December 18

North was

American shipped

delivered days 6, 1965.
Progress

spacecraft later, and shipped

001's would

CM be

to White used for propulsion

Sands. propulsion

The

SM to the

several

engine

development. facility
NAA,

Aerojet-(;eneral

tile service

engine

on January
"Apollo

Mon011y

ReporL"

SlI)

62

300-33,

pp.

1, 12.

21

The status erally, control SMD (either

Structt|res of antennas most reported, its

and for troubles were

Mechanics the Apollo the stemmed from being weigirt

Division spacecraft from servit:e by its or plume

(SMI)) (both

summarized CSM engines. the by weight shielding and by These

the LEM). the

therlnal Genreaction problems, antenna from the

impingement

or radiation structural

propulsion increasing insulati,m): critical

solved

of an it

engines' exhaust: by isolating tion of these inetlmds.

its more

components;

or by a combina-

Memorandum, December l)ivision, antenna

R. G. 9, 1964:

Irvin,

MSC,

to

J.

w.

Craig, plume

MSC,

"LEM

thermal on

design steerable

mission," and high Power gain

memorandum,

Ralph

S. Sawyer,

MFSC, to Chief, impingement

Propulsion

"Reaction control s_stem engine earth tracker." l')e(.eml)er 21, 196.t.

21-22

In response man type and the did foot parts At the Grumman

to MSC's had

new met

criteria Center a concept (SMI))

for the ottk:ials

landing

gear (165-in)

of the

LEM,

(;rum-

representatives configuration. Mechanics same it absorb that pads and t:onclusion: enough ttre

with

in Houston

to revise radius, and

tire design. cantileverStructures had reached nor the other meeting

formulated Division

for a 419-cm working not be

In analyzing namely, of the up the that

its performance, engilleers, it did could struts. impact.

(;rmnman separately, sufficient parties by was provide Both improved

stability

landing gear

to this modifying

agreed

gear's beefing

performance undercarriage advised gravity idea: latest

redesigning

Grumman

of the spacecraft's same time, put weighing were program.
Apollo, December Weekly Abstract 21-22,

accordingly. MSC that it considered program LEM, were the impractical company vehicle. the said, SMD entire a 5.

(;rumman lunar another this

contrivance Grumman but TM-5 one officials

to simulate forth only

in the drop use a full-sized as much

for test Mockup

one-sixth

as a flight-ready they

evaluating

idea,

while

reviewing

"Project Meeting, MSC,

of

Procedures, "Monthly Report"

I,EM

Structures Report 7-14,

and No. 1965].

l.anding 23,"

Gear

Systems p. 15;

1._4";

Progress [January

LPR-10-39,

"ASPO

Management

23

NASA make would

Technical the one-piece be delivered

Services

t:onstructed

tire

molds

that

would

be

used

to

|)ubl)le helmets for the Apollo space to (;eneral Electric and to Texstar, 46

suits. These forms the two firms that

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

would actually mid-January. At tion the same

fal)ricate

the

helmets,

with

the

first

shell

expected

about

1964
December

time,

Crew The items of
S.

Systems (neck

Division engineers feed the
to Curtis

completed also ports, helmet's
Jones, GE,

drop skull

tests caps), and
23,

on and as

the well

new as

helmet exploring
Letter, Weekly

concept. of support methods
Richard Management

division's maintaining
MSC,

began and

designing

fabrica-

rings,

hygiene
December 7, 1965].

habitability.
1964; "ASPO

Johnston, Report"

[December

10, 1964-January

To

strengthen

the within post of

Agency's the Office Deputy

managerial of Manned Associate

organization, Space Flight:

NASA

annottnced

a

24

realignment • The Flight 1964, Mission Each the Also within

Administrator

for

Manned

Space 24, of

Operations was eliminated. when Walter C. Williams Operations positions would organization Support in this scope director • A new Director as mission have overall was • Two

(It had, in fact, been vacant had resigned.) In its stead, created directors and were grotmd Office, filled created for support headed by by E. under

since April the position E. Christensen. Christensen.

responsibility

a particular efforts B. Porter

mission. was created, Brown. at Cape was Operabecame

to coordinate Reqttirements

Operations included aimed the

reorganization assembly,

was a consolidation checking, and MSC's

of activities launch Florida Operations

Kennedy absorbed; tions; and Deltas'
NASA Apollo

at bringing of a single

responsibilities

organization.

Kurt H. Debus assumed G. Merritt Preston, who

the title of Director had headed the local

of Launch MSC group,

deputy.
News Release 64-327, December "NASA 24, 1964. Realigns Manned Space Flight Unit in Gemini,

Programs,"

MSC could

directed be used
James

North from
L. Neal, p. 11.

American either
MSC, No.

to modify window.
Space and 28,

the

CM

so that

the

sight

assembly

28

docking
to NAA, 283,"

Letter, Change SID

Information 1964; "Apollo

Systems Monthly"

Division, Progress

"Contract Report,"

Authorization

December

62-300-32,

The

Lunar

Sample at MSC, area--two

Receiving would important on the samples

Laboratory, support--in activities: to support of lunar

currently addition to

being its

planned vital role

for as a

29

construction quarantine (l) (2) munity.

Research Sorting

succeeding samples to

Apollo the

flights. com-

and

distribution

scientific

47

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1964
December

Technical Environment mittee

requirements Group, estahlished
John Lunar

for various

the

facility Apollo

were science

being teams,

defined and

by an

MSC's ad hoc

Space com-

by NASA
M. Sample

Headquarters.
MSC, to Distr., "MSC 29, 1964. Requirements for Apollo

Memoraqdum, Operational

Eggleston, Measurements,"

December

31

After

conferring

with

the

Space

Medicine

Branch

and

with

the

Gemini

and

Apollo support bioinstrumentation wonld
"ASPO

offices, Crew Systems Division officials in both blocks of Apollo spacecraft. harnesses.
[December 10, 1964-January 7,

opted for Hamilton

identical Standard

also try to use identical
Weekly Management Report"

1965].

During the Manth

(;rtlmman ment for schedules to RCA trol

ordered the LEM (in line to modify

its to with the

major

subcontractors revised

supplying test programs

electronic and

equiphardware went con-

implement

tile new design approach). A similar directive attitude and translation and the descent engine for the new concept of an integrated and control
No. 23," LPR-10-39,

assemblies

as required navigation,

assembly

for gttidance,
"Monthly

of the spacecraft.
p. 24.

t'rogress

Report

During the Quarter

Crew

Systems

Division

approved

the

use

of

modified

Gemini

space

suits

in Block I Apollo their Gemini suit Block I stilt.
Robert Program

spacecraft. MSC contract to cover

and David design and

Clark Company amended fabrication of a prototype

Memorandum, Spacecraft

E. Quarterly

Smylie, Status

MSC. Report

to

Chief, No.

Program 10," January

Control 19,

Division, 1965, and

"Apollo enclosures.

During the Quarter

Ling:Vemco-Votlght for the Bh)ck II mediately
Ibid.

began large-scale CSM environmental was the radiator's

developmental testing of the radiator control system. One problem imperformance under extreme conditions.

apparent

During the Quarter

In September support system tem's batteries. authorized (see factors, charging.) During vision but

1964,

Hamilton

Standard,

manufacturer

of the capacity Grumlnan LEM's and time

portable

life

(PLSS), And

had established on the basis with by the the

a 108-watt-hour of that figure, of the charger battery

for the syshad been charger by several limits for re-

to proceed 5, 1964). primarily

development size of the size of the

battery

November

(The

was determined

November, (CSD) engineers

however, advised

Hamilton tile

Standard

and and

Crew

Systems

Di-

Instrnmentation 48

Electronic

Systems

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Division 200 placed efficient ASPO mented this "How subjected

(IESD)

that (CSD IESD

the was

PLSS's had on

power

requirements over for the pump the the charger.) motor,

had PLSS,

increased including Hamilton proved

to about battery Standard far less comequipment.

1964
December

watt-hours. most than Manager that can "this this is the type of the

jurisdiction the cooling reviewing

requirements;

responsible as well

blame

which

anticipated, Joseph of thing happen,"

as on the

addition

of biosensor is far from enough area

F. Shea,

company's well in an

explanation, a justification--

says what

happened he wondered, and

. . . but understand "... delay?" Hamilton and the by before with

we should

to anticipate." which has been

to so much from was This had

discussion Grumman

Representatives on December Grumman charger. Grumman a schedule
"ASPO Rector

and

Standard, charging development some the sense end

meeting requirements, of of of year the urgem'y,

at MSC and battery since

17, redefined directed episode to have to was firm

PLSS proceed

battery

accompanied requirements

to prevent

slippage.
Weekly III, MSC, Management to GAEC, Report" Attn: (December 10, 1964-January l)ecemher 7, 1965); TWX, W. F.

R. S. Mullancy,

31, 1964.

MSC's Guidance and to determine whether between 4572 and 3048 satisfactorily land the formation was required The attitude, footprint. balling" study and investigated the pilot site 305 If the it from

Control a pilot vehicle. for pilot

Division conducted a pilot simulation could take over manual control of the 10 000 ft) above also the lunar what surface The study control. determined

study LEM and in-

1965
January 5

m (15 000 and

flight

deceleration information was deemed ft), m (1000

techniques, required unsatisfactory the pilot would, for

approach landings for under landing,

velocity, within after normal

flare a given "eyecircmnthen

stances, place the take over manually
MSC, Clarke "MSC Internal Lunar T. Hackler,

coordinates of a new landing site in the computer; and fly while making selection of the landing site.
Note Landings January No. from 5, 1965. 65-EG-3, the Project Transition Apollo, Altitude," Simulation Thomas Study E. of Pilot

Controlled

Moore

and

At

the

fourth members

meeting agreed orbits. the penalties. injection

of on would

the be

Reference performed

Trajectory with over on were the the

Sub-Panel, azimuth Pacific fix the pass

MSC of Ocean

and 108 ° .

MSFC Transhmar the mine first required

a trajectory

a launch would initiated

during time deter-

or second before

First-orbit The

injection

minimum would and

maneuver.

Injection actions and were planning.
Trajectory

second

consequent

by Mission

Planning minimize

and Analysis Division (MPAD) analytical studies and operational
Memorandum, of fourth Secretaries, Reference Reference

required

to solidify

Sub-Panel held

Meeting, January

to Distr., 5, 1965,"

"Meetings January l l,

Trajectory

Suh-Pauel

meeting

49

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
January

1965; III

memorandum, Apollo

Carl

R. Huss,

MSC,

to JSC

Historical 6, 1973.

Office,

"Comments

on

Volume

of The

Spacecra]t:

A Chronolog),,'"

June

5

North the deviations

American launch escape were

and and reported,

Lockheed pitch these North motors

summarized control were motors. minor

the and,

qualification While several the in general,

program performance presentation discrepancies

for

was deemed satisfactory. and, on March 22, the
NAA, "Apollo Monthly

American followed up on the were declared flight-qualified.
S1D 62-300-34, March 1, 1965, p. 17.

Progress

Report,"

William space space suit suits

A. I,ee, design were

chief criteria

of ASPO's

Operations missions

Planning 204 and

Division, 205.

outlined

the

for Apollo

Modified

Gemini

to be used.
William A. on Block Lee, Block 1 CSM MSC, I CSM MSC, Earth to Assistant Earth Orbital to Chief, Director Operations Missions," for Flight Crew 6, Operations, 1965. [See "Space-

Memorandum, "Spacesuit memorandum, suit Utilization

Utilization Donald on

Orbital

Missions," January

January 26,

K. Slayton,

Planning

Division, 1965.]

ASP()

Manager that

Joseph similar reviews, and MIT

F. Shea

informed

Apollo a program

Program review Spark since narrower 1965 control would

Director with Plug, MIT than be for the examine MIT

Samuel during

C. Phillips

he planned

to conduct

January 1965, man program profit critical Block released. that Shea with organization hardware year II,

to the North American, AC but with certain differences, the Shea effort; the guidance scope of its work out that much that year and review at pointed during navigation program

and Grumwas a nonthe the should prime most I, be only

contractors. of the LEM and

all drawings MIT would

Block

programs

Consequently,

one year. said him he would "where for the to MIT board, individual The meet with with During with C. Stark respect the their teams be: and Draper to the week on MIT January work and would agree Quality Management, and and 14 and past would the discuss and our send week work Field Asprogram

we stand future." to meet chaired 14 teams Guidance Optics, MIT-NASA

of the 18, MSC the

concerns 14 teams a review of the for 1965.

of January of MSC,

counterparts, in depth

following go over the

by R. C. Duncan would

upon

Reliability Configuration

Assurance, Systems

Operations,

Documentation

sembly and Test, port Equipment, Training; Integration. Shea part felt in that the the Terms,

and Mission Analysis, Simulation, Ground SupInertial Systems and Sensors, Computer, Radar, Rates and Factors; and Statement of Work

Conditions,

review

would navigation,

give

MIT and 5O

a clearer control

understanding development.

of their He

guidance,

system

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

recommended with George understand Phillips Flight "I think gram.

that ASPO's

Phillips objectives. the letter

discuss and Robert

the

general

natnre Jr.,

of tile program so they wonld

review both

1965
January

E. Mueller

C. Seamans,

forwarded George it is a good I urge your
to

to Associate with that the

Administrator results will

for

Manned to the

Space He said, pro-

E. Mueller plan support

along and should
January 6,

his comments

on the proposal. be beneficial

it become
1965;

necessary."
l'hillips to Mueller, January

Letter, Shea 15, 1965.

Phillips,

memorandum,

ASPO's partial effects (Current systems

Systems donning upon ECS

Engineering of the space of called that, part the

Division suit (sa_s CM with of the

(SED) hehnet

investigated and gloves) fnll-suited based little control

the and

possibility the consequent system

of

operation design wearing against found

environmental and vehicle suit reliability

(ECS). The

for shirtsleeve

operations.) upon toward

engineers

shirtsleeve protecting

environments, the astronaut Most time

contributed

loss of cabin failures in the suit. improbable,

pressure. spacecraft Catastrophic but as to preclude mission suit phase would would failures if one of still this allow (i.e., loss type was the astronaut deeven with

pressure-seal to don the were suit.

complete highly

of windows occurred,

or hatches) pressurization a part the reliability of design SED system, vehicles because therefore, suit wear spacecraft.

wottld

be so rapid Actually,

the astronaut's reliability wear degraded

donning greatest the

of the

overall continuons

shirtsleeve

environment; lunar in the that, I CM's should he direct I and

garment's a nnntber suit wear.

for the changes

exploratitm spacecraft

of the flight. be required in the

Moreover, by partial

concluded Block the suit that

to I)ttild should not

confidence be outfitted during

spacecraft's suit to the concept wear. mission

pressurization In phases Block Manager, for partial Block II II (again

for partial translunar

be worn SED

of mission in Block

reliability). North

recommended to incorporate shirtsleeve the

ASPO for the

American

provisions

to retain

Memorandum, "Evaluation

Owen of space

E. Maynard, suit wear

MSC,

to January

Manager, 6, 1965.

Apollo

Spacecraft

Program

Office,

criteria,"

The

Preliminary Downey,

Design Calif.,

Review plant. numerous and North of

of

the

Block working

II CM groups

was

held

at the

North space-

American's

Ten

evaluated

craft design and resolved review board of NASA Houston working during groups, the and

minor details. They then reported to a American officials. This board met in the month, reviewed to the findings Several of the sig-

middle submitted

recommendations 51

ASP().

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT;

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
January

nificant problems required and at North American: • The lunar this suits

the

attention

of

Apollo

managers

at

Houston

craft

effect of heavyweight adapter and on the problem cycles already. and

LEM (up 1361 kg [3000 lbs]) on the spaceCM's docking system. North American was for donning into specifications the and CSM the suits stowage of with the the

studying space North

• Wearing must American's

requirements and of those

be resolved interpretation

incorporated

specifications. first several without the

conflicted

MSC Crew System Division's current plan that, during missions, all three crewmen should be able to wear their helmets.
"Apollo S&il), 6-8 CSM--Block Jammry 1I 1965," Preliminary pp. 4-40. Design Review (PDR),

NASA-MSC-ASPO,

NAA-

William

A. Lee,

chief

of ASPO's

Operations

Planning

Division,

announced

a revised Apollo launch schedule for 1966 and 1967. In 1968, a week-long earth orbital flight would be a dress rehearsal for the lunar mission. "Then the moon," I.ee predicted. "We have a fighting he said, "and also stay within the $20 billion President Kennedy."
1965: Chronology on Science, Technology, and Policy

chance to make it by 1970," price tag set . . . by former

/lstronautics and Aeronautics, (NASA Si'_t006, 1966), p. 7.

MSC ferences with

Deputy

Director Texas,

George schedule

M. Low as made

issued public cited

a memorandum in an Associated the following

regarding Press statement

difrelease by and

in the Apollo

a Houston,

dateline.

Low

George E. Mueller, said it "represents "'o The • The • Apollo • Manned "We hmar
AP

Associate our official schedule lunar flights earth IB flight

Administrator for and only position for accomplishment landing on Saturn orbital

Manned Space Flight, on Apollo schedules: of major milestones

Apollo first Saturn manned Apollo these

lead-

ing to the first manned

has not changed. in 1966. for 1967. for 1968. our goal of a manned for 1967. IB are scheduled are scheduled be met and

is scheduled

• Unmanned

Saturn

V flights

are schedtded flights will

believe landing
Release,

major

milestones

in this decade
Houston, Texas, January "Apollo

can be accomplished."
January 7, 1965; 7, 1.965; April memorandum, Alfred 7, 1965. P. Low Alibrando, to Distribution, NASA Head-

"Apollo quarters,

schedules," to Distribution,

memorandum,

Schedules,"

7-14

Changing down

the

CM at

back-face parachute

temperature deployment 52

requirement threatened

from

600 ° at the

touchcabin

to 600

to increase

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

air

temperatnre.

Physiologists

at

MSC

had

previously

declared

that

the

1965
January

cabin temperature should not back-face requirement, North interior decided
"ASPO

exceed 100 °. The American reported, Systems Division would
7-14, 1965].

proposed change would raise the reviewed these be acceptable.

in the cabin's and

to 125'-'. the

MSC's

Crew

factors

increased
Management

cabin

temperature
[January

not

Weekly

Report"

MSC

was reviewing constraints. and systems

the control-display North fnnctions American

systems

of the CSM

and

LEM and

to assess elimi-

operational displays, nate

was requested spacecraft

to study to identify

all controls,

for manned

single-point
Letter, Cozad, cess,"

failures.
MSC, NAS 8, 1965. to NAA, Space and Information criteria for Systems crew Division, and Attn: mission J.c. suc-

C. L. Taylor, "Contract January

.'4-150,

Control-display

safety

NASA Titan spacecraft.

announced missile facility, This

that decision

Kennedy would eliminated

Space the

Center's into need

Launch static test for such

Complex stands a facility cost

16,

a

11

be converted

for Apollo originally little more

planned on than a fourth
Astronautics

Merritt Island and, it was predicted, would of the $7 million estimated for the new site.
and Aeronautics, 1965, pp. 11-12.

North tennas 14 816 antenna would

American for Apollo

selected CSM's.

Dalmo-Victor (The deployable

to

supply

S-band would be

high-gain used

an-

11

antenna

beyond

km [8000 nm] from the earth.) Dahno-Victor design and carry out the development work, procure
Monthly

would complete the and North American contract.

production
Progress

units
Report," SII)

under
62-300--33,

a supplemental
p. 8.

"Apollo

(;rumman extravehicular MSC thermal Crew

and

Hamilton mobility

Standard unit. On by (CSD)

were the

exploring of some garment.

various early that

designs conclusions, meteoroid

for

the the and

12

basis

Systems be

Division provided

recommended a single

protection

Preliminary

hyperweigh design. LEM's [See

velocity tests placed the garment's reliability at 0.999. Each would about 7.7 kg (17 lbs), about 2.3 kg (5 lbs) less than the two-garment CSD further recommended that the unit be stored either in the descent November
Memorandum, concept arrangement,"

stage

or

in

a jettisonable

container

in

the

ascent

portion.

19-26,
John

1964.]
F. Rayliel(l, MSC, to Record, Unit "Status (EMU) of Apollo Support Office

of optimum January

Extravehicular 12, 1965.

Mobility

meteoroid/thermal

protection

53

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
January 12

MSC

evaluated

the

VHF

communications for the LEM

requirements to communicate

and

determined

that there over VHF (1)

was no requirement with: the CSM in hmar orbit

simultaneously

(2) an extravehicular

astronaut

on the CSM

lunar

surface. simultaneously

There also was no requirement over VHF with: (1) (2) (;rumman during ment this via the
C. R.S. L.

for the

to communicate

an extravehicular an astronaut and North

astronaut in the LEM. American would Flight
F. 12, Rector 1965.

were

advised

that by the

voice unified

commnnications S-band equip-

mission Manned
Taylor

phase Space
and January

be maintained Network
I11, to

relay.
NAA, Attn: J. c. Cozad, and GAEC,

TWX, Attn:

Vv'.

Mullaney,

12

Donald pointed a xmmber

K. out

Slayton, of units

MSC

Assistant of the ASP() control

Director and and the

for display

Flight

Crew Program

Operations, Office were that needed

to Managers

Gemini

of spacecraft

equipment

to support the Spacecraft Control Office in the cedures development, crew station equipment familiarization, training, merit was needed within facilities abort simulations, to support and simulations, and spacecraft MSC, at other programs, and docking phase mission NASA research simulations.

areas of spacecraft crew prodevelopment, flight crew preparation. Centers, and vehicle Slayton to retrofire support Such equipat contractor launch reentry that proand

centrifuge rendezvous other mission

programs, emphasized

simulations,

tmcoordinated requests for grams were excessively costly Slayton said that a "satisfactory

hardware in terms

procurement of equipment. to reduce

these

method

costs

and

increase

equipto reproof

ment utilization one technically quirement and gram Flight allocating Crew

and effectiveness is to assign responsibility as custodian cognizant organization which will ascertain the total and He be responsible hardware be
ASPO, and cost

for equipment and Support
Slayton and display to

for coordinating assignment that the the required Crew Station

procurement to meet Branch responsibilities.

transferring Division
Manager, utilization

requirements."

recommended given
and

consolidated
Gemini plan," January Program 12,

Memorandum, posed control

Manager,

ONce, i.065.

"Pro-

reduction

13

The with delete

first ASP()

meeting Manager

of the guidance

Configuration F. Shea navigation 54 and

(;ontrol as chairman. systems;

Board and

was

held was

at III

MSC to was

Joseph

Approval

given

10 Apollo

W. F. Rector

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

directed systems tions to and be action

to look integration. to provide kg

into

the

use of computers actions, lbs]) impact heavyweight LEM was to identify

and

prototype on changes until Block them

units increase the

for electronic specifica12 705 must Board meeting; that for from next

1965
January

In other for the

a decision

to CSM

(a proposed deferred all and have

14 515 Owen

[28 000

to 32 000 was directed of

Maynard

II changes ready

implemented by February

regardless 18, 1965.
Control

Minutes, Contiguration CCB, January 13, 1965.

Board

Meeting

No.

1, signed

A.

L.

Brady,

Secretary,

I)evelopnient chute trials mortars the

firings were following

of the completed, month.
Management

latmch and

escape the

system's units were

drogue slated

and

pilot

para-

14-21

for qualification

MSC,

"ASt'O

Weekly

Report,

Januar}

14-21,

1965."

OMSF minimum would flux.

asked

MSC

to provide of

NASA that the

Headquarters environment Apollo could cishmar was also

with

a statement space" This studies

of "the which material being

14-21

definition be necessary "desirable

meteoroid

in cislunar withstand requested. Pegasus

for confidence degree to

the nleteoroid

The

of definition" current

was to be used as inputs conducted by O MSF.
Ibid.

Significant Dynamics, • There rate hold

agreements Guidance and

from

the

Eleventh Panel

MSC-MSFC were: S-IVB

Flight

Mechanics,

14-21

Control

meeting the

was no requiremellt during

to inhibit and

attitude phase.

and

attitude

modes

the transposition propulsion in earth orbit earth at landmark before 0.3

docking

• The S-IVB auxiliary perform 21 roll maneuvers ment 0.3 pitch unit deg/sec and/or alignment for sun yaw and maneuver from

system had sufficient propellant to at 0.5 deg/sec for inertial measuresightings, before one and the yaw final maneuver and CSM/LEM at one transposition docking,

avoidance

deg/sec

separation
Ibid.

maneuver

the S-IVB.

During CM/SM To

testing, umbilical

it was this Block
Progress

found

that caused North

blast

effects

of the damage designed readily

linear to

charge the

for

the

14

cutter problem,

considerable American cutter. MSC

heatshield. improved the new

circumvent for both
Monthly

a vastly approved

pyrotechnic-driven, device

guillotine-type I and

II spacecraft.
SID 62-300-33, p. 4.

"Apollo

Report,"

55

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

i 965
January

North

American

completed

acceptance

tests

for

the

CSM

sequential

and

propulsion to MSC, procurement
Ibid., p.

systems trainers. On January 15 where it was installed the following program
20.

the equipment week. This

was shipped terminated the

14

for the Apollo

systems

trainer.

18

The change

Structures helium permitted

and tanks 45

Mechanics on kg the (99 a substantial

Division I,EM lbs);

approved of 13 kg the

a low-burst by lbs); spacecraft's

factor

for the This control,

gaseous

(as recommended lightening ascent, (29

Grumman). reaction

propulsion

systems: descent 2.3 kg (5 lbs).
Letter, Reduction W. F. of Rector burst

II1, safety

MSC, factor

to for

(;AEC, the

Attn: gaseous

R. helium

S.

Mullaney, bottles,"

"Contract January 18,

NAS 1965.

9-1100,

18

MSC

White

Sands

Missile the

Operations similarity

was to the

renamed Army's

MSC \Vhite

White Sands

Sands Missile

Operations Range.
MSC Release

to eliminate

65--6,

January

18,

1965.

18

After the approved

reviewing I.EM to the additional

the CM,

requirement MSC fuel for the

for CM,

extravehicular its validity. to lengthen The

transfer Center

(EVT) already

from had range, be The de-

reaffirmed

its rendezvousing

and modifications need for a greater

of the vehicle's protection for LEM
INERTIAL MEASURING UNIT

hatch to permit exterior operation. the astronaut during EVT would ascent
/S-BAND /STEERABLE

stage.

/ANTENNA

nND_VOUS

\ \ ""-._/"_./"_

._ ,,/

_VHF ANTENNA (2)

\7

_,0../_ _-_, _

_->_...-'_

"_... /

/ /

/RECESS

.DOCKING TARGET _ELECTRONIC

Rcs .RUSTER T ASSE_,L"_

_

rtS?_-_

I _ _ _._

II,.X]_

O'A------------AFT EOO,,MENT BAY

TANK_

_'_

_\_,X " T_,_'_.._-..'"_L'OO'OOX*_N TANK

,.OR.S_O._.AT_./ --_ /
CREW COMPARTMENT /

\\
_

_
FUEL TANK WATER TANK (2)

"AS_ENT OVER E.G, NE C

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

termined ducted system by

largely NASA

by and

current during EVT
MSC,

thermal normal

tests

of

the While from

pressure the

suit

being

con-

1965
January

Hamilton or lunar
to GAEC,

Standard. transfer surface
Attn: R.S.

emergency

oxygen

was unnecessary during
IIl,

one vehicle

to the other,

it was essential
TWX,

activities.
Mullaney, January 18, 1965.

W. F. Rector

(;eneral propellant
"Apollo

Motors'

Allison

Division

completed system.
p. 8.

qualification

testing

of

the

18

tanks for the service
Monthly Progress Report,"

propulsion
SID-62-300-34,

The Apollo

MSC

Mission F. Shea,

Planning Christopher

and C. 206,

Analysis Kraft, 207,501,503,

Division Jr., and and

made Donald 504.

a presentation K. Slayton and on that 204D It was stated

18

to Joseph

Missions

201,202,204,

204B was to be a repeat of 202; was to be the same as 204A but
Memorandum, of The Apollo Carl R. Huss, JSC,

204C would
to JSC

was to be a repeat of 201; be flown unmanned.
Historical Office, "Comments on

Volume

lII

Spacecra/t:

A Chronology,"

June

6, 1973.

MSC control antenna had own.

was studying and while During the an

several CSM have extended

approaches circled the of the

to the of the moon. LEM to perform

problems earth (The these on the by Block

of automatic the S-band II spacecraft, wholly surface,

thermal high-gain MSC on its the was the the

18

automatic mttst needed essential for attitude

reacquisition the ability stay

stated,

functions lunar

when

CSM pilot absolutely requirements spacecraft's Robert sented

uninterrupted for telemetering passive must chief thermal likewise of the

sleep periods, antenna data back to earth. control were not yet be automatically

reacquisition And although well defined,

controlled.) and Control these Division, problems, prewhich

C. Duncan, his section's

MSC

Guidance for

recommendations

solving

ultimately won ASPO's concurrence. said, should be maintained by the position the angle then would of the S-band antenna for should required reacquisition

Precise spacecraft body stabilization and control be telemetered would sent
"Block

rates, Duncan system. The ground, The updata where antenna link.
antenna

to the the

be

computed. through
11 Apollo

be repositioned
Robert orbit," C. I)nncan, January

t)y commands
MSC, 18, 1965. to I)istr.,

Memorandum, pointing in lunar

High-gain

In

simulated

zero-g clearly

conditions devices the securely need

aboard

KC-135s, the floor. LEM and In

technicians crewmen. mid-February

evaluated These trials force

a to

19-20

number hold the

of different astronaut

for restraining to the cabin 57

dentonstrated

for a hip restraint

for a downward

a second

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
January

series shoes floor through ward panel man

of flights that of the would

tested be

the used

combination together of cables with that

that

seemed the

most

promising: on the chest

Velcro cabin and, downlighting Grum-

Velcropile pulleys,

carpeting astronaut's exerted

spacecraft;

a harness system

enveloped and secured These

an intricate

a constant

pressure; and a waist strap that immediately facing the crewman. to complete the design of the restraint

the harness to the evaluations permitted

system.
A.SPO, "LEM Zero Gravity Support

Memorandum, and Restraint

l)onald K. Slayton, Evaluation," February

MSC, to Manager, 1, 1965.

2O

The

test altitude to 64 000

for mission ft) to ensure abort.
E. Abort "Post Mueller, Test

A-004

was decreased

from

22 860 on

to 19 507 the CM

m

(75 000

the attainment

of limit

loads

dur-

ing a tumbling
Memoramh,m, hltermediate 26, 1966, with

power-on
George Altitude enclosure,

NASA Mission Repor!

Hq., A-004, No.

to 1."

Administrator, Launch Report

"Apollo No.

Spacecraft 1," January

Post

Launch

2O

The ards

new Board,

tnembership established

of the

MSC

Manned 4, 1963,

Spacecraft was: F. John

Criteria Bailey,

and Jr.,

StandChairS.

September Secretary; William
2_t-11),

man; James Kleinkne{ht,
MSC Board," Circular January

x,v. Donnell, W. R. Durrett,
No. 146 (Ref.

James A. Chamberlin, M. Bland, and Norman
Mamled Spacecraft Criteria

Kenneth F. Smith.
and Standards

",MSC

20, 1_5.

21-28

The firings the design

persistent at that Bell

problem to several

of combustion major in injector Following the on the

instability redesigns, reviews program of the

in the was by injector. still was

LEM present

ascent and

engine, test to developestimated forecast burn a dea of

unyielding

during Grumman, because

Aerosystems. effort" baffles

MSC

"mainstream included

injector face

"reoriented" Largely

this troublesome ment cost, which at $20 15.4-kg sign and
(,AEC, "ASPO

factor, it now appeared only four months earlier would weight probably increase nozzle
Report Report,

that the ascent engine's Bell and Grumman had $34 million. because Bell also of a longer

million, (34-1b)

approach for the extension.
No. 24," LI'R 21-28,

engine

a strengthened
"Monthly Weekly Progress Management

10-40, 1965."

February

10,

196.5,

p. 20;

MSC,

January

21

Nortt_rop-Ventura verified the strength of the dual drop test at El Centro, Calif. This was also the first mortar risers, ment by which made sequence the drogues cables. were All and deployed and objectives of steel planned there

drogue airborne new were

parachutes test of the pilot met. The of the reefing

in a new

of the

parachute deployrisers. lines cutter

was perfect, of this drop,

was no apparent 12 cutters, failure, 58 which together

kinking sever with the

In the course on the main

six of the failed. This

parachutes,

another

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION_

AND

TESTING

malfunction at Or&o, thereby On

during tile cutter delayed.

the

previous

month,

signaled

an intensive of the severing

investigation device was

1965
January

manufactnrer.

Qualification

January

22, Northrop, system

North and

American, found

and

MSC

conducted

a design

review

for the drogue
Monthly Report,

no discrepancies.
pp. 3-t; "ASPO Weekly Manage-

"Apollo merit

Progress 21-28,

Report," 1965."

811)-62-300-33,

January

At the ASPO launch able earth. total

request with Based

of Maj. the IBs. Saturn

Gen. MSC

Samuel currently lbs) control

C. Phillips, requirements assessed a circular exceed weights, would

Apollo for that however, orbit

Progxam spacecraft 105 nm

Director, slated vehicle above that for was the the 395

21

reexamined to put injected

perfornaance

the launch it appeared

16 102 kg (35 500 on the spacecraft weight

into

of the modules

this amonnt

lay some

kg (870 lbs). A 454-kg solution, ing one ducing launch safety. would On load set. figure (1000-1b) ASPO tile increase in the Joseph tanks supply, other Saturn F. Shea and the without alternative IB's payload wrote Phillips. tank could froln still was the most However, SM and be kept objectives desirable 1)y removslightly within or rethe crew they

Manager

set of propellant propellant several impair 23, While Phillips end vehit:le's While seriously capability

a helium spacecraft affecting

mission

approaches

appeared

feasible,

spacecraft informed

performance. Shea goal that he foresaw Saturn the requisite remain lbs) would this paynnbe last

February boost. At the

Phillips the said,

control a new it would

payload design

for the

IB woitld (36 500 or not

changed,

of 16 556 kg whether

of July

be decided

to make

a new control
Joseph William 12, to profile 1965; Mission for

capability.
MSC, Lee, letter, CSM-LEM to Maj. MSC, Phillips, and flight on to Gen. Distr., NASA, Analysis Saturn Samuel "Mission to Shea, Division, I-B," March C. Phillips, assignments February Attn: 23, J. January for !'. 1965; 21, Block Bryant, 1965; I1 memoCSM's,"

Letter, randum, February Lee, mission

F. Shea, A.

memorandum, "Modified

MSC,

l'launing

3, 1965.

Space

Ordnance two
Weekly

Systems stages

was selected

to develop

the explosive

bolts

that

held

21-28

the LEM's
"ASPO

together.
Report, Ja,mary 21-28, 1965."

Managemeut

Two underwater disconnects.
I bid.

firings

verified

the

design

concept

of the

main

parachute

21-28

59

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
January 21-28

Parallel

development

of the

LEM

descent the sole estimated

engine

was

halted. the cost

Space

Tech-

nology Laboratories tract was canceled. program
Ibid.;

was named Grumman

contractor; that the

Rocketdyne conof Rocketdyne's

would
"Monthly

be about
Progress

$25 million
Report No. 24,"

at termination.
LPR-10-40, pp. 1, 30, 35.

22

The

MSC-MSFC

Mechanical

Integration

Panel

discussed

the possibility

that,

when deployed, the munications via the the panel found, that phase alternative of the mended vestigate docking panel could available intormed MSC's

LEM adapter panels might S-band high-gain antenna. antenna would and hmar Instrumentation modes flight. During

interfere with On earth-orbital useless. Systems on the other

radio commissions, They recominand the Division hand,

the S-band

be rendered Electronic during missions,

for communications

the transposition

found that, with 1)e used as early communications and that manual the

panels deployed as 15 minutes during tracking panel antenna would

at a 45 angle, after translunar and be used angle not would be needed.

the high-gain antenna iniection. Spacecraftdocking North during Block could this thus be was American

to-ground

transposition

high-gain to fix the

maneuver, II spacecraft

and was directed at 45 _
Memorandum. to the

deployment

for all

Lyle

M. Jenkins, of the

MSC,

to SI.A

l)istr., panels January"

**Abstract with 21-28,

of

MSC

meeting

on

solutions 25,

interference "ASPO Weekly

deployed

communications," 1965."

January

1965;

Management

Report,

22

Two Ala., joint the be

construction and Lewis used Chicago contract

companies, Bridge Center's and and (worth

Blount Iron for

Brothers Company, construction Station. system

Corporation, Oak The testing, Park, facility, would of a vacuum

Montgomery, Ill., received chamber which be one would of the a at

$5 178 000) Plum

Research for spacecraft

Brook

propulsion

largest

sttch simulators
amt

in the world.
1965, p. 26.

Astronautics

Aeronautics,

22

Apollo pletion

Program during of testing

Director 1965. on the

Samuel The first

C. Phillips months, spacecraft of the

forecast

"heavy

ground for manned

testing" comspace of

for Apollo

coming Apollo

he said, intended IB

should and initial

see the testing

flight, as well as flight qualification the Saturn V launch vehicles.
Ibid., p. 27.

Saturn

23

ASPO missions,

approved a method

the

technique recommended

for LEM jointly 6O

S-IVB by

separation North

during and

manned Grum-

American

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

man.

After

the

CSM

docked

with

the

LEM,

the

necessary

electrical

circuit charges

1965
January

between the two spacecraft would then free the LEM
Memorandum, S-IVB Stage Joseph Separation F. Shea,

would from the
MSC, to

be closed manually. Explosive adapter on the S-IVB.
Distr., "Lunar 23, 1965. Excursion Module

(LEM)/Saturn

Technique,"

January

Dalmo-Victor, ments antenna
"MSC

vendor tracking and

of the

LEM

S-band thus

antenna, the

was

given

firm

requirethe

25

for

coverage,

enabling

company

to freeze

design.
Weekly Management Report, January 28-February 4, 1965."

The

optimism for freezes vehMe [lunar 1970." ago." early

that the

permeated

the Apollo year.

program "greatly

was reflected .Jr., encouraged"

in statements during budget by recent

25

t)y NASA's briefings design launch off the year "in

Associate

Administrator,

Rot)ert He was

C. Seamans,

forthcoming

and "very reassured" by testing stages. "We really feel," Seamans landing] flight on an earlier mission that it was "conceivat)le"

of propulsion systems and said, " . . that we can get than I would landing have cotdd said come a the moon

Certainly

Astronautics

and

Aeronautics,

1965,

pp.

29-30.

To CM. were

determine Researchers deployed position.

flotation began found

characteristics a testing that program the

of the using sequence in both caused

spacecraft, one-tenth in the which vehicle that

the the

Stevens models uprighting

Institute of the bags wave apexwould an

25

of Technology

scale

was equally improper These trials from the

critical

a calm

sea and

in various action

conditions; down upright Further because North of the program, center

deployment this

to assume wave

disproved attitude.

predictions

the spacecraft testing sequential during

following would

month

reinforced

these

findings. of the

But system,

deployment

degrade

reliability

American held that the order of their inflation. examining of gravity
Monthly SID

bags must upright the spacecraft irrespective Stevens' investigators would continue their characteristics under a variety of weight and

the

CM's

conditions.
l'rogress April Report," SID 62-300-34, 7-8. p. 7; "Apollo Monthly Progress

"Apollo Report,"

62-300-35,

1, 1965, pp.

MSC

negotiated

a backup

Block

II

space

suit

development

program

with

25

David Clark Company, which paralleled the Hamilton Standard program, at a cost of $176 000. Criteria for selecting the suit for ultimate development for Block II would be taken from the Extravehicular Mobility Unit Design and Performance Specification. A selection 61 test program would be conducted

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
January

at MSC mockup.

using

the

CM

mockup,

the

lunar

simulation

facility,

and

the

LEM

Memorandum, gram," January

Richard S. Johnston, 25, 1965.

MSC,

to

Joseph

Shea,

"Block

II

Apollo

suit

pro-

25

ASP() 1,EM

established descent stage,

an operational the exact

requirement details

for of one

propellant out percent

gauges when less

in the The than

to be worked

by Grumman.

gauges must be accurate to within one-half one-fourth of the propellants remained.
Memorandum, William A. budget," January 25, 1965;

Lee, MSC, to Manager, ASPO, "Status "ASPO Weekly Management Report,

of LEM descent ..XV January 21-28, 1965."

26

Warren I,LRV times

J. North, had by Joe been

Chairman reported and flown

of the Lunar to MSC by by Don the 10 times twice

I,anding Director

Research Robert

Vehicle

(LLRV) that the

Coordination

Panel, Walker

R. Gilruth Center altitude undergoing and

Flight Mallick.

Research Maximum was been had velocity system

pilots--eight achieved sec. detailed minor

was 91 m (300 Subsequent x-ray changes North for two would spring prior said weeks basic inspection,

ft) and lunar to extending

maximum 14, 1964, simulation

forward control envelope

12 m (40 ft) per checkout,

to December

vehicle

the flight with the

in February. that test and checkout proficiency stand flight activity. by vehicles procured prerequisites plus at least and the Prototypes MSC during

discussions LLRV LEM pilots of intensive

pilots include and displays

indicated helicopter vehicle were

future

should simulator and LLRV the

of the

controls

being

be phased into and summer.

simulator

Memorandum, North to Gilruth, Program," January 26, 1965.

"Status

of

Lunar

Landing

Research

Vehicle

(LLRV)

26

At a meeting for from a fixed the CSM

held

at Grumman, radar propulsion
24,"

RCA antenna

presented assembly

its study which

on thermal would shield.
Weekly Management

effects protected

rendezvous service

be

system
LPR-10-40,

by a thermal
p. 17; "ASPO

"Monthly Progress Report No. Report, January 21-28, 1965."

27

MSC

evaluated mobility
of the

Grumman's unit
Lunar pp. 2-4.

proposal

to

stage

components reduction.
Systems

of

the

extra-

vehicular
"Minutes January

to achieve
Excursion

a substantial
Module Crew

weight
Integration

Meeting

No.

3,

27, 1965/'

62

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

The kg 6672

first (60 000

major lb)

Saturn corrugated

V flight tail

component, section thrust which

a 10-m would The engines,

(33-ft) support arrived section

diameter, the at MSFC was one

27 215 booster's from of five

1965
January 28

kiionewtons Michoud structural
and

(1.5-million-lb) Operations units comprising
1965,

NASA's major

near

New Saturn

Orleans.

V's first stage.

Astronautics

Aeronautics,

p. 39.

After Systems not design.

examining Division be used

the

CM's

potable that the spacecraft

water Gemini

system,

engineers water changes

in the in the

MSC

Crew could

28

found Apollo

pistol-type some

dispenser

in the

without

dispenser

"ASPO Merritt Water

Weekly Preston, Program,"

Management MSC-Florida January

Report, January Operations, to

14-21, 1965" [see Chief. Crew Systems

memorandum, Division,

G. "Flight

28, 1965].

Initial zero-g essential.

development conditions, While that him
Weekly

testing investigators the system the secured

of LEM found, must

restraint positive hips be further

systems refined, (thus

was completed. for the crew it consisted providing

Under were point) essentially

28-February

4

restraints

of a harness and held
"ASPO

astronaut's floor.
January

a pivot

firmly

on the cabin
Report,

Management

28-February

4, 1965."

MSC This crew posed

canceled failures done but was could device. system

plans partly also This

(originally reaction because

proposed control of an way RCS

by North system faihire safely the

American) (RCS) for cost, even effort however.

for Block and earth

a device I CSMs. schedule orbit, the such the proa

28-February

4

to detect penalties,

in the

impending to earth affected or the

weight, during

because, it in time action Block

given in no

detect

to return II CSM

without to devise

detection
Ibid.

for the

LEM,

ASPO capability grams

concurred aboard Office. The

with the

the LEM

requirement as established

to provide by

an emergency Center glove

defecation Medical appeared Proto

29

MSC's defecation

addition

of a Gemini-type

present a satisfactory solution. ceed with their recommendation crew provisions.
Memorandum, agement Oweu E. Maynard, aboard the LEM,"

Crew Systems Division and add the Gemini

was directed to progloves to the LEM

MSC,

to

Chief,

Crew

Systems

Division,

"Waste

man-

provisions

January

29, 1965.

Apollo

boilerplate aft

28 underwent structure, in this

its second and 63

water

impact drop

test. on

Despite February

its 9

29

strengthened

a subsequent

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
January

the

vehicle

again than

suffered

damage

to the aft heatshield in its initial test.

and The

bulkhead, impact

though problem,

far less severe it was obvious,
"Apollo Monthly

that experienced

was not yet solved.
Progress Report," SID 62-300-33, pp. 1, 8, 16.

During the Month

ASP() the

Manager

Joseph

F. Shea He was

reiterated well pleased

the

space with the

agency's pace of

phasic the

view program

of

Apollo

program.

and reported that Reflecting on the Apollo optimistic: there would objectives about

ground testing year just past, were achieved progress Apollo

of all CSM subsystems was "well along." Shea observed that it was one in which "milestone during by milestone." the coming in continuous months, He ground was equally that by testing" predicting

Apollo's

be "three

spacecraft

the end of the year.
Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1965, p. 43.

During the Month

Dr.

William on the

H.

Pickering,

Director of Ranger

of .Jet VII

Propulsion

Laboratory, possible lunar

comlanding

mented sites.
Ibid.,

importance

in locating

pp.

43-44.

During the Month

Nine NASA. report on the

areas

of scientific had been sciences and lunar

experiments summarized project

for the and group by

first

manned were to

Apollo defining the

lunar them

landfor

ing mission

experimenters expected requests packages. minimum

Space by March

publish

complete industry was under best to use

1, to be followed producing task force stay-tiine making

for proposals A major study for the

from effort

designing limited
Ibid., p. 45.

instrument of two hours'

way by a NASA

a time-motion

of how

first flight.

During the Month

To the cular

make LEM's hatch,
"Monthly

it easier forward

to get hatch.

in and During door design

out had

of the proved

spacecraft, tests on the superior

Grumman company's to the

modified mockup, original cir-

mobility

a hinged,

trapezoidal-shaped so the earlier
Progress Report

was dropped.
LPR-10-40, p. 13.

No.

24,"

February 1

Pacific million, facility,

Crane

and

Rigging ground Complex

Company equipment 59. On

received at the 64

a NASA Space day,

contract, Center's the Army

worth Saturn Corps

$8.3 V of

to install I_aunch

Kennedy following

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Engineers Petersburg,
Astronautics

awarded Fla.,
and

a $2 179 000 to modify
,4eronautics,

contract

to R.

E. Carlson 34 to handle

Corporation, the Saturn

St. IB.

1965
February

Launch
1965, pp.

Complex
48, 52.

The

Apollo-Saturn system

Crew (EDS)

Safety and abort

Panel

decided

on for

a number the early circuits and from

of emergency Apollo flights:

2---3

detection

procedures

• If any of the three redundant automatic the launch vehicle would not be released. • The EDS would be flight-tested should on the

abort SA-201

so indicated, missions. only

SA-202 the

• Unmanned Apollo flights under the most severe conditions.

be aborted

ground

• I,iftoff permitted automatic abort without • To ensure a successful abort, a redundant engine After agreed roll and flight; automatic
"Summary February,

manual mode

backup. of EDS-commanded

shutdown hearing that the Saturn

was mandatory. results 20 per of several would second; have Panel the stated supporting be automatically if two same that if even
Crew

studies, should for the the Saturn shut

the fail first down.

Panel if the during

further vehicle's the first of

IB flights the Saturn the

aborted of aborting

rate the

reached Saturn and, abort
of 1965,"

engines be capable capability during

30 seconds

of flight, finally,

IB must

automatically, 60 seconds V's initial stages,

V must might
Proceedings, February

be required
Apollo-Saturn 4, 1965.

one engine
Safety Panel

Meeting

No.

11,

2-3

ASPO be used and goal injury form ment, sibility goal, not These 8.3-day They nor

established to coordinate to determine (defined or worse, his duties) it was that felt, of acute

radiation the as the nor was effect

reliability of radiation

goals progxam,

for Apollo. to define not thus hazard doses.

These the The

figures crew able

would dosages, safety to perenvironthe pos-

the radiation probability his being not of the the

allowable

on mission and major

success.

of a crewman's incapacitated The during (the chance of fatal

suffering no longer of a radiation

permanent

was set at 0.99999. radiation because ASPO sickness mission of radiation Manager and Joseph on

It was, The that the

rather, second mission at 0.98. based the

the mission. probability

reliability would

for success

be aborted values, reference were were not they

environment), F. Shea

was placed were

emphasized, dose limits goals

on the

mission to be met
Joseph F. Goals,"

emergency increases
to Assistant

previously for relocations.
E. and D.,

set forth. spacecraft,

to be included

in overall

reliability

by weight
Shea, MSC,

or equipment
I)irector for

Memorandum, Radiation

"Apollo

Reliability

February

3, 1965.

65

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT_

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
February 4

A device LEM's some vehicle pilot, attention the pilot's of moving Simulation

to maintain primary attitude long. final task,

the handling

spacecraft control

in a constant (ACS). overshoot operationally, attitude after all,

attitude The feature it be

was added brottght would corrected require hardly cause

to the with by it the tile closer eased Instead

system this The was,

undesirable to land and therefore during control

characteristics,

however: could hold,

Although approach. whic'h

was not dangerous

it would therefore,

its primary

function.

the device to the 1)ackup ACS (the abort section), the Engineering Branch of MSC's Guidance and Control Division recommended be modified so that, if desired, the pilot could disengage the

that the system hold mechanism.
Memorandum, "Evaluation mode," of

Clarke LEM

T.

Hackler, (zero

MSC,

to

Chief, rate

Guidance

and

Control hold

Division, control

modified

overshoot)

command-attitude

February

4, 1965.

4-11

After

considering

possible

impacts, to the

MSC

directed link

North

American on

to implecommand

ment real-time commands modules 01_ and 014.
MY;C, "ASPO VCeekly Management

up-data

equipment

Report,

February

4-11,

1965."

4-11

MSC testing

questioned oxygen of the of aviation
memorandum,

the

necessity The effect

of using the cabin on crew Center,

highly therefore,

purified

(and during

expensive) manned a study

fuelground of the

cell-type resultant grade

to maintain spacecraft. and oxygen.
Robert for E.

atmosphere habitability

undertook of using

impurities

a commercial

Ibid.;

Smylie,

MSC, Command

to

Chief, Module

Environmental ground testing in

Physiology Airframe

Branch, "Breathing oxygen 008," March 15, 1965.

Apollo

SM

001's The

service firing flight

propulsion was the tests of the

engine module.

was (SM

static-fired to verify was the 001

for the

10

sec major

at

White profiles piece of

Sands. for later

first in a program

mission

first

flight-weight
MSC News

Apollo
Release MSC,

hardware.)
65-18, MSFC, February and ASPO 6, 1965. 5, 1965; Field TWX, Test M. L. Cape Raines, Kennedy, WSMR, Fla., to NASA

Headquarters, 001 First Firing,"

Office,

"Airframe

February

MSC

deleted
"Minutes,

the

requirement

for a rendezvous
Control Board Meeting No.

radar

in the

CSM.

MSC,

Configuration

5," February

8, 1965.

MSC, Research

North

American,

and

Grumman docking 66

reviewed simulation.

the

results While the

of

Langley overhead

Center's

LEM-active

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

mode some angular two also

of docking concern: rates (1)

had

been had

found

to be

acceptable, could exceeded

two exceed

items

still

caused and Phase in about a (2) B

1965
February

propellant

consumption occasionally simulations, these aids in lines 9, MSC the design

supply; to begin

at ctmtact portion) further several collimated

specifications. Langley and

(Grtlmman's weeks, had

of the docking investigate sighting (parallel on device March into

scheduled LEM

wottld evaluated image

problems.

researchers as most

for the

recommended reticle to incorpo-

projected practicable.

of direction) directed of their

Accordingly,

Grumman spacecraft.
"Contract Center,"

rate this type of sighting
Letter, Results

W. F. Rector III, MSC, of LEM active docking

to GAEC, simulation

Attn: R. S. Mullaney, at Langley Researcb

NAS March

9-1100, 9, 1965.

Development tor control becanse North the system. sirable Block glycol

tests system

recently for the response scheme proposed

completed space suit time. used To

by AiResearch heat exchanger solve control this

on

the

water

evaporaand to control

disclosed problem, system

its inadequacy AiResearch similar

of its slow American evaporator

an alternate

approach appeared 008 and

elsewhere

in the

environmental

This alternate approach, would II spacecraft.
Weekly Jr., February

design, which be incorporated impact

was tested and on airframes was anticipated.
4-11. "A14-033 1%5";

a more de012 through

No schedule
Management Report, Test

"ASPO Samonski, testing,"

February l)ivision,

memorandum, for

Frank Airframe

E. 008

MSC,

to

Chief,

requirements

8, 1965.

NASA ference sult of

invited at MSC the

113

scientists them NASA

and on

23 national the Gemini to and
Invited

space and Apollo
to

organizations Apollo proposals spacecraft. missions. for

to a conAs a rebiomedical

to brief

conference,

hoped

receive

experiments
MSC ments," News

to be performed
Release 6.5-21, 8, 1965.

in Gemini
Scientists

"Foreign

Conference

on

Apollo

Experi-

February

North American the Saturn V.
Space Business

completed

the

first

ground

test

model

of the

S-II

stage

of

Daily,

February

9, 1965, p. 195.

ASPO aboard craft ber.

and the

the

MSC and which tests,

Instrumentation LEM. would The then

and

Electronic compatibility would in the the

Systems be Center's

Division in

(IESD) spacechamwas

I0

formulated

a program CSM

for electromagnetic equipment be placed about

testing mounted

of hardware

mockups, In these the

anechoic and

scheduled

to begin of the

first of September, in docked

IESD

to evaluate

compatibility

spacecraft 67

near-docked

A night roll-out of the S-I1 stage at North American’s Downey, Calif., facility.
965
February

configurations, and of Block I spacecraft with the launch vehicle. T h e division was also to recommend testing procedures for the launch complex.
Memorandum, R. S. Sawyer, MSC, to Chief, Systems Engineering Division, “Test Philosophy for CSM/LEM Electromagnetic Compatibility Test to be performed in the Anechoic Chamber Test Facility a t MSC,” February 10, 1965.

10

ASP0 evaluated Grumman’s proposal for an “all battery” system for the LEM descent stage. ASP0 was aiming at a 35-hour lunar stay for the least weight; savings were realized by lessening battery capacities, by making the water tanks smaller, and by reducing some of the spacecraft’s structural requirements.
Letter, Thomas J. Kelly, GAEC, to MSC, Attn: W. F. Rector 111, “Submittal of Additional Information Relative to the Lem ‘All-Battery’ Study,” February 10, 1965, with enclosures.

11

A drop test at El Centro, Calif., demonstrated the ability of the drogue parachutes to sustain the ultimate disreefed load that would be imposed upon them during reentry. (For the current CM weight, that maximum load would be 7711 kg [17 000 lbs] per parachute.) Preliminary data indicated that the two drogues had withstood loads of 8803 and 8165 kg (19 600 and
68
i
I .

F,3?TIC2 :I”,ILIW
?~~T3JWT, PAGE

OF TBh T POW. S

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

18 000 minor

lbs). damage

One

of the

drogues

emerged of the reefing
Sll) 62-300-35,

unscathed; cutter.
pp. 3_t;

the

()tiler

suffered

only

1965
February

near

tile pocket
Report," 11-18,

"Apollo agement

Monthly Report,

Progress February

MSC,

"ASPO

Weekly

Man-

1965."

MSC tests. Further

modified Mean tests

its

bubble suit. time 26).

helmet was

design 4.2 when sec;

to fit on ()f the helmet doff

an time

International was used averaged !.47

I,atex sec.

11-18

"state-of-the-art"

space donning would

A mockup

in don/doff completed

be performed

a prototype

helmet

was

(expected
"ASPO

I)y February
Weekly Management

Report,

February

11-18,

1965."

Hamihon a two-week gators without
Ibid.

Standard, wearing that found the

the

extravehicular Apollo could be

mobility liquid-cooled worn

unit for the

contractor, undergarment. entire

completed Investimission hmar

11-18

test of the garment discomfort.

any serious

To

make

room

for a rendezvous of employing the the I,EM problems

study, LEM

MSC

was forced in both changes steering

to end, manual

prematurely, propulsion automatic investior dynamic and

11-18

its simttlations systeni. operation. gators stability.
Ibid.

as a backup

for the service were required,

Nonetheless, Although tound

was evaluated attitude with either

some

sizable

no serious

accuracy

North Group
Ibid.

American to supply

selected the panel

the

Ordnance

Division for the

of General hmar

Precision adapter.

Link

11-18

thrusters

spacecraft

Evaluations the task ditfi(:ttlt landings, titan

of the of shntting abont

three-foot of[ the the

probes engine of the vehicle's

on the prior time rate the

LEM of

landing touchdown descent. was

gear During less

showed

that more 0.3 m

11-18

to actual

was even than

controlling 70 percent shutdown touchdown. appeared cutoff

simulated

spacecraft

(1 ft) high when still burning at procedure, light and
Ibid.

came: on 20 percent ot: the runs, Some change, either in switch necessary to shorten of 0.7 see). the delay

the engine was location or in 1)etween contact

thus engine

(an average

69

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
February 12

MSC airlocks

relayed

to NASA

Headquarters CM:

North

American's

cost

estimates

for

on the Apollo

Spacecra[t Block Block Blocks I II I 8c II

Developmem $ 840 000 960 000 1 050 000

Unit

Cost

$185 000 112 000 111 000

(The

unit

costs

presumed

two

flight

items

for

Block

I and

12 for

Block

II

spacecraft.)

During ceptual that stitute outer interfere such

late February design study a device would cover hatch with for the

and early March, of an airlock for be incorporated hatch and to be developed, design inner

North American the Block I CMs. into the these side to replace

completed Designers hatch. window the

a confound A subon the not

could have

access

a panel but

modifications

would

the basic

of the spacecraft.

TVCX, February

Joseph F. Shea, 12, 1965; "Apollo

MSC, to NASA Monthly Progress

Headquarters, Report," SID

Attn: 62-300-35,

Samuel C. pp. 17-18.

Phillips,

12

MSC's Structures

Systems and

Engineering Mechanics coolant

Division Division loops of the

(SED)

requested the subsystems Informal Mechanics and to the extent power

support existence

from or

the (EPS)

in determining SM electrical

extent

of corrosion

in the

subsystem

and the CM and LEM environmental control from the use of water/glycol as coolant fluid. made with W. R. Downs of the Structures and had MSC, been North given conflicting copies of contractor and MIT regarding reports pertaining the

(ECS), resulting contact had been Division and he between The contracof glycol

correspondence problem. and seriousness

American,

tors had corrosion.

positions

SED

requested

that

a study

be initiated

to:

(1) determine

the

existence

or

extent of corrosion in the EPS mendations regarding alternate tests or remedial actions

and ECS coolant loops; materials, inhibitors, determined that

and (2) make recomor fluids, and other existed.

if it were

a problem

Memorandum, "Water/glycol

Owe0 Corrosion,"

E, Maynard, signed

MSC, Harry

to

Chief,

Structures February

and

Mechanics

Division,

W. Byington,

12, 1965.

15

A study antenna distances.

by General

Electric

affirmed between margins

the the were 7O

necessity spacecraft so small

for and that,

the the at

steerable ground those

S-band at lunar distances,

for communications Communications

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

any degradation with earth.
Letter, menu tions E. Antenna J.

of equipment

would

seriously

affect

the

spacecraft's

contact

1965
February

Merrick, February Relationship

GE, 15,

to 1965,

William with

A. enclosure:

Lee,

"S-Baud "CSM-LEM and

Communications Directional Mission Requirements."

RequireCommunica-

Study,"

to Communications

Margins

Crew

Systems

Division submitted

(CSD) by

informed program

the Michael

Astronaut Collins plans. Those

()ffice on

that

the

refor

16

quirements

Astronaut

February requirements

5 had

been included in the Block II suit astronaut training suits were: Suit Quantity 1 6 6 14 CSD training tion these will of suit requested programs interface programs."
Richard D. K. S. Johnston, Slayton, "Apollo MSC,

Type A-5H A-5H A-6H A-6H2 the Astronaut in which information suit Office suit 1 June 1965

Date

Available

December 1965 (or sooner March 1966 August to provide support from 1966 the type stating: astronaut and

if possible)

schedule informathe and

of type in

use was anticipated,

"This

be of value

in assessing

requirements

to be gained

participation

Memorandum, tions, February Attn:

to Assistant II

Director suits,"

for

Flight signed

Crew E. L.

OperaHays,

Block

training

16, 1965.

In it

the was

first

of a series that by

of manufacturing Grumman's engineering tooling

review changes).

meetings was Tool

at

Bethpage, behind

N.Y., schedule might

16

learned primarily

program

(caused

manufacturing

recoup much of the ther design changes. was now
Letter, Review facturing

lost time, but this process was highly vulnerable to furCompletion of tooling for the ascent stage of LTA-3 a production
MSC, February to GAEC, 3, 16, 1965."

set for late April,
W. F. Rector III,

delay
Attn: with R.

of about
S. Mullaney,

two

months.
Manufacture LEM Manu-

"LEM "Minutes,

Meetings Review

Minutes," Meeting,

March

1965,

enclosure:

In a memorandum inquired livery liveries succeeding 1969.
Memorandum, "Apollo Delivery

to ASPO, realigning timetables he outlined the

Samuel for eight

C. Phillips, Phillips during

Apollo

Program to meet set also,

Director, revised forth starting during dedeeach in

16

about and launch year;

schedules Apollo. manned

of contractors 1967 and

tentatively eight per year

of six spacecraft

(CSM/LEMs)

launches

Samuel and

C. Launch

Phillips,

NASA,

to February

MSFC,

MSC,

and

KSC, enclosures.

Attn:

Directors,

Schedules,"

16, 1965, with

71

The CM is being mated to the SA-9 launch vehicle SM. The Pegasus satellite (part of an expanding meteoroid detection program directed by NASA’s Office of Advanced Research and Technology) can be seen inside the SM. A Saturn I vehicle (SA-9) launched a multiple payload into a high 744 by 496 km (462 by 308 mi) earth orbit. T h e rocket carried a boilerplate (BP) GSM (BP-16) and, fitted inside the SM, the Pegasus I meteoroid detection satellite. This was the eighth successful Saturn flight in a row, and the first to carry an active payload. BP-16’s launch escape tower was jettisoned following second-stage (S-IV) ignition. After attaining orbit, the spacecraft

February

16

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

were ployed impact

separated and and

from were

the

S-IV. to

Thereupon their

the task,

Pegasus i.e.,

I's

panels

were meteoroid

de-

1965
February

ready

perform

registering

relaying
Release E. R.

the information
65-38, Mathews, Sacramento, "Saturn KSC, to I

to the gronnd.
to Launch subject: Aeronautics, Pegasus "CLN Meteoroid," MSFC, SA-9 71-72. MSC, Apollo February and Flash 15, MSFC Report

NASA 1965; Resident No. 2/'

News TWX, February

NASA and

Headquarters,

Manager,

California,

18, 1965;

Astronautics

1965, pp.

NASA Sperry Univac Apollo
NASA

awarded Rand also

an $8 879 832 Corporation assist

fixed-price data

contract processors extant

to the computer

Univac programs

Division project.

of

16

for digital in modifying

for the

Apollo

would

to meet

requirements.
News Release 65-50, "NASA Buys Univac Data t'roce_ing for Moon Project,"

February

16, 1965.

MSC assigned

announced

a realignment (;emini positions:

of specialty missions

areas (GT

for

the

13 astronauts 5) or

not

16

to forthcoming

3 through

to strictly

administrative Operations Edwin Charles Alan David Clifton crew Project Richard Michael and

Training branch chief_mission handbooks, suits planning and systems extravehicular and guidance deep and space activity navigation instrumentation, and planning training, and simulators

E. Aldrin,

A. Bassett--operations L. Bean--recovery Collins--pressure R. Scott--niission C. Williams--range safety. Apollo F. Gordon, branch

operations,

chief--overall

astronaut

activities

in

Apollo

area and liaison for CSM development Donn F. Eisele--CSM and LEM William Eugene Roger R. Walter A. Anders--environmental A. Cernan--boosters, B. Chaffee----communications, Cunlaingham--electrical control spacecraft flight and system and and and radiation the Agena and programs. and ther-

mal systems propulsion, controls, sequential and stage non-flight docking

systems future

experilnents Russell I,. Schweickart--in-flight
MSC News Release 65-27, February

experiments
16, 1965.

The zero-g

CM's

waste

manageinent during flights

system from

demonstrated

its Air

feasibility Force Base.

under The

16-Ma rch 15

conditions

Wright-Patterson 73

This is one of the 7000 television pictures transmitted to earth by Ranger VIII, about 7 min prior to its impact on the moon on February 20, 1965. The spacecraft altitude was approximately 756.4 km (470 mi) at the time this picture was taken. Delambre, 51.5 km (32 mi) in diameter, is featured in the lower center with its flat floor at left and highlands at right. system successfully contained both solid and liquid wastes and did not leak even when filled to capacity.
“Apollo Monthly Progress Report,” SID 62-300-35, p. 7.

February

17

T h e U.S. Navy Air Crew Equipment Laboratory began testing the Gemini/ Block I Apollo space suit in a wide range of environmental temperatures to determine the comfort and physiological responses of the wearer. T h e program, delayed because of difficulties with humidity control, was to be completed in three to four weeks.
“ASP0 Weekly Management Report, February 11-18,1965.’’

17

Ranger V U I , a lunar probe carrying six television cameras, was launched from Cape Kennedy by an Atlas-Agena B vehicle. T h e spacecraft’s trajectory
74

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

was nearly the craft

perfect; squarely

only

minor

midcourse area,

corrections

were

required

to place

1965
February

in the target

in the Sea of Tranquility.

Cameras spacecraft

in Ra_ger transmitted

VIII

were

turned back

on 23 minutes to earth until

before it struck

impact, the

and

the and

pictures

surface

was destroyed. of noted lunar Whitaker of the of California.

The flight's scientists, University

product among

would be intensively studied 1)y a panel them Gerard P. Kuiper and Ewen A. and Harold C. Urey of the University

of Arizona

Astronautics

and

Aeronautics,

1965,

pp.

73-74,

84-'85.

MSC

directed On the

North those CSM efforts.

American spacecraft

to delete North radar time, the on

the

rendezvous instead and

radar would

from install

Block LEM its as to tele-

17

II CSMs. rendezvous work on all support incorporate

American (both LEM

radar

transponders. rendezvous At the same light

Grumlnan, however,

in turn, in-house the (compatible

was ordered at RCA) with the company

to halt as well CSbl to

was directed permit

a tracking

scope/sextant) range extraction

and to modify the spacecraft's VHF equipment in the CSM. (See February 8 and Marcia 15.)

Letter, NAS tion MS(;, 150-508)/' No. to Change

H. _.b-150,

P.

Yschek, to

MSC, Cover 16, 1965; 17, No. R.

to

NAA, of letter, Revision Mullaney,

Space

and to NAA,

Information Radar S&I1), II,

Systems Installation "Contract letter, 8, to NAA, Item 1965,

Div., on

"Contract CSbl (MSN At, thoriza"Contract Ill, Contractor enclosure.

CCA

Removal letter, 1965; 303, S.

Rendezvous J. B. AIldredge, l," March "Contract Transponder,"

February 303," Authorization GAEC,

Yschek,

Change Sg:ID, W. 3, with

February Attn:

MSC, 1965; March NAS

F. Rector

9-1100,

Responsibilities,

Rendezvous

Radar

and

North

American

proposed

an

idea

for

increasing

the

CM's

land

landing the the water shock within even apin which probably on land

17

capability. This could be done, the company asserted, impact limits (thus exceeding normal tolerances) and struts. established proximate the CM between Presently, figures could 19 and the were 28 km would spacecraft (i.e., not (10 was incapable [25-nm] maximum crew per hr. after the of requirements land--without and in a 46-km exceeding 15 nm) until

by raising stiffening landing While velocity data

a land wind). wind

available,

tolerances--was (No precise the drop

and water landings 28 late in the year.)

be available

tests of boilerplate

Personnel about the could tolerances. constraints

of the North

ASPO Crew Integration Branch, however, were pessimistic American scheme. They doubted that shock attenuation increased, the conditions nor did at the they see as likely site. any relaxation introduced viewed of crew tighter it, the only probability of a land launch 75 landing As they

he readily

Further, on wind

THE 1965 February

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A CHRONOLOGY

feasible some

way mechanism

to

improve that would

the

spacecraft's further ahsort)

ground tile

capability landing impact. Engineering

was

through

Memorandum, Joseph P. Loftus, Jr., MSC, to Chief, Systems "Command Module land impact capahility," February 17, 1965.

Division,

17

ASPO required

Manager of Block

Joseph

F. Shea

clarified to

the

manned/unmanned that end-item

capabilities specifications

] CSM those

spacecraft capabilities.

ensure

appropriately

reflect

CSMs need delivered

t)17 u_)t

and he to

020

would of t:or

fly manned

unmanned missions. orbital

entry CSMs

tests 012 the

on and

the

Saturn 014 IB were but

V to

and be

capable KSC

manned

missions

on missions.

Saturn

must

1)e capable

of heing

modified

to fly unmanned

The selected not

planning 5½ the

for months launch.

CSM prior

012 to

should the

be

such

that launch

the

mission of the 204

type

could

be yet

scheduled

mission,

delay

Mrmorandum, Shea, MSC, t() ('hief, Systems Mission Capabilities," February 17, 196,5.

Engineering

Division,

"Block

I

CSM

18

I,EM a series

Test

Article

'2 was booster

shipped vihration

to

Marshall tests.

Space

Flight

Center

to

undergo

of Satttrn

"Monthly

Ihogrcss

Report

No. 25," LPR-10-41,

ixlarch 10, 1965, p. 1.

18

MSC's (EMIr) protection. had newer, garment and

(:rew would

Systems employ By an lowered etticient

Division a single

decreed garment the ..(){)9.

that

the for

extravehicular both thermal prol)ahility along

mobility and

unit

meteoroid requirement

earlier from

decision, .9{)9{) materials, to

penetration This a kg the glare [17 change,

1)een

with lightening

the

use of

of the

more

promised about deleted and by 7.7

suhstantial lbs], excluding for

(hopefully The because

down division the as well. over

to also thermal

visors, a separate ample

gloves, mete-

hoots).

requirement visors provided

oroid
against for hy

visor,

protection the need

lneteortfids protection crewmen.

Tests the

Ifing-Temco-Vtmght suit dtuing

confirmed extravehicular

thermal the I.EM

pressure

transfer

Memorandum, Rol)crt E. Smvlie MSC, to Chief, S_stcms Engineering vehiculal Mobility Unit (EMU) thermal and mrtroroid protection,"

Division, "ExtraFebruary 18, 1965.

18-25

Because was the

of

the

CM's of lifting The

recent the

weight spacecraft

growth, the

the

launch

escape distance was being

system away studied

(LES) from fur-

incapable 1)ooster.

"specification" ()f the LES

performance

required 76

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

ther; investigators of an exploding
MSC, "ASPO

were booster,

especially concerned with the and possible deleterious effects
Report, February 18-25, 1965."

heat and blast effects upon the parachutes.

1965
February

Weekly

Management

NASA possible would

selected use measm'e in

Philco's the the an

Aeronutronic program. and spacecraft, moon would

Division Impacting bearing that

to design on the could of the

a penetrometer moon, snrface. provide by the the Used

for device in

19

Apollo firmness orbiting areas

strength the system were

conjunction information

with about

scientific any other contract,

of the

inaccessible and manage

means. Langley Research Center estimated to be worth SI million.
NASA News Release Februal-y 65-59, "NASA

negotiate

to

Negotiate and

With

Philco

for 1965,

Study p. 82.

of

Moon

Penetrometer,"

19, 1965;

Astronautics

,4eronautics,

To MSC

eliminate directed panels.

interference North ()riginally

between American designed

the S-IVB to modify to rotate were

stage the

and

the instrument angle should the while of panels

unit, the open CSM

19

deployment

adapter

170 ', the

but 45 ° (60 during abort), where they docked with and extracted the I,EM. But at this smaller angle, the panels

to be secured

now

1)locked

the

CM's

four

flushof the had to For to within

mounted mission. communicate Block broaden 4630

omnidirectional While turning with S-band nm) the II spacecraft, the

antennas, used during near-earth around and docking, the astronauts ground via MSC the steerable high ordered to permit gain North concurrently capability

phases thus antenna.

therefore, equipment's of earth.
MSC, No. to 304," No.

American

it to operate

km (2500
Letter, Change tract H. Change

P. Yschek,

NAA, 305,"

Space February

and

Ilfformation letter, 19, 1965.

Systems Yschek to

Division, NAA,

"Contract S&ID, "Con-

Authorization Authorization

February

19, 1965;

NASA a backup
MSC, Space

awarded guidance
"Quarterly Flight, for

a fixed-price and
Activity the t'eriod

contract

(worth

$1.5

million)

to IBM CM.

to design

23

navigation
Report Ending for

computer
the Office of

for the Apollo
the Associate

Administrator,

Maimed

April

30, 1_}5,"

p, 24.

William Manager's ascent April because could

F. Rector Staff rig (HAl) l_. not

III,

MSC's that

LEM the had

Project slipped

Officer, firing date from said

reported for the March the it was slip not

at 18, was

an 1965, on

ASP() until tire rig for

23

Meeting

expected been

heavyweight necessary

&3 at WSTF personnel loading in the

(;rumman (1) a propellant be used

at White control location 77

Sands assemt)ly because

to be mounted

planned

accessible

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
February

checkout and would and further checkout;

require two weeks for refabrication (2) checkout of various wiring

of certain between the

pipelines HA-3 rig

and the facilities did not occur on schedule and two weeks would be required to complete tile task; and (3) adequate interfacing between the fluid and gaseous maintained facility' pipes ground with support many design
Rector

equipment pieces

(GSE)

and

various out

facility

pipes

was not than the

of GSE

putting

higher

pressure

allowed.
to Distr., "First Firing of HA-3," February 23, 1965.

Memorandum,

23-26

MSC CM's

and

North

American compartment 14-15. for

conducted and This lower

Part staged

2 of the procedure

mockup bay. was

review (Part in line

of the acthe the with

forward

equipment review 19-23.) program

1 was up to

complished contractor's Critical the design
'*Apollo meut

January proposal Design Review

a progressive for July

leading for minor

scheduled

Except

changes,

was acceptable.
Monthly Progress Report," SID 4, 1965." 62-300-33, p. 24; MSC, "ASPO Weekly Manage-

Report,

February

2:%March

24

NASA pany stone, at three

awarded for S-hand antenna Calif.;
News

a $2 740 000 telemetry facilities

fixed-price supported and
to Make

contract Collins Madrid,
S-Band Daily,

to the would Spain).
Systems for

Collins install the missions

Radio (at

ComGold-

equipment. that Australia;

equipment

Apollo

lunar

Canberra,
Release February

NASA

65-63, 24, 1965;

"Collins Space

Three

85-Foot

Apollo

Antennas,"

Business

February

26, 1965, p. 286.

24

MSC's Alldredge 9-150

Procurement had been (the North
C. Contract

and American
L. Taylor, NAS 9-150,"

Contracts as the contract),
MSC, sgd. to

Division Contracting replacing
Distr.,

notified Officer Henry
of

ASPO for P. Yschek.
new

that Contract

John

B. NAS

assigned

Memorandum, for CgcSM

"Notification February

Contracting

Officer

W. R. Kelly,

24, 1965.

25

MSC

and

the

David

Clark

Company suits. The

reached first suits,

an

agreement

on by July

a contract I, would

for Apollo go to North
Memorandum, ment, pany," Attn:

Block

I space

expected

American
Matthew Arc F. Lee,

for testing.
I. Radnofsky, NAS MSC, 9-3642, to Gemini Apollo and Block Flight I Suit, Support David ProcureClark Com-

"Contract

February

25, 1965.

25

KSC the

supplemented Saturn I and would
and

Chrysler IB launch cost NASA

Corporation's programs. $41
p. 94.

contract Effective plus an

for award

support June fee.

services 30, 1968,

for the

through

agreement
Astronautics

million

Aeronautics,

1965,

78

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Using sembly

a mockup while at

Apollo various

CM, could stations

MSC don and

Crew doff

Systems the Block the

Division The

tested two

tim

time astimes

1965
February 25

in which

an astronaut

I pressure mean

garment subjects' doffing

inside

spacecraft. 10 rain;

average donning times were nine min 33 sec and were four min five sec and five min 23 sec.
MSC, "ASPO Weekly Management Report, February

25-1Vlarch

4, 1965."

To

determine and

thermal Mechanics the

and conditions. samples

vacuum After

effects tested two

on weeks

the

CM's

parachutes, in a vacuum to this loss

MSC under space-

25-March

4

Structures varying like (as against
Ibid.

Division

nylon only

samples

temperatttre a design

of exposure

environment,

exhibited of 25 percent).

a 16 percent

of strength

allowable

DeHavilland antenna.
Ibid.

completed

deployment

tests

of

the

CM's

pop-up

recovery

25-March

4

On the lighting the lights,
Ibid.;

basis on

of in-house the I,EM. both green,

tests, The

Gruminan design and aft;

recommended copied standard underside).

a scheme aeronautical White between

for exterior practice marked white two lights

25-March

4

(i.e., red, port; spacecraft,

starboard; fore and

amber, to

distinguish

the

the aft one contained
"Monthly Progress Report

a flasher.
No. 25," LPR-10-41, p. 22.

ASP() gram

Manager manager.

Joseph Lee,

F. Shea who

named

William headed the

A. Lee Operations

as an assistant Planning

proDivi-

26

previously

sion (which had been absorbed into ()wen E. Maynard's Systems Division), now assumed responsibility for Apollo Operations flight-test olds, ment. also program an Deputy and the lunar mission). who O. was Piland overall Lee thus joined to the assistant Manager and,
Release

Engineering (both the L. Reyndevelopthe CSM's

Harry LEM's

manager, Robert with
February

assigned continued program

overseeing management.

development
MSC News

along
65-34,

Shea,

26, 1965.

Louis research

Walter, with

Goddard tektites

Space indicated

Flight the

Center lunar

geochemist, may believed the lunar of silicon

reported be sandlike.

that

his

26

surface

Vqalter

had discovered the moon sent also found constituent

the presence of coesite in tektites, into space when meteorites impact meteorite craters, under is a form high 79 pressure.

to be particles of surface. Coesite, dioxide--a the major hmar

at known

of sand--produced

"If we accept

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
February

origin

of tektites,"

Walter

said,

"this

would

prove the and sand.

or indicate

that

the parent

material on Yellowstone said to have
Astronautics

the moon is something like Park, Iceland, New Zealand, some
and

welded tuft elsewhere."

that we find in Welded tuft was

of the qualities
ileronautics, 1965, p.

of beach
96.

During the Month

Because nicians for ment injection.

of a change sought They remain
Monthly

in the size of the determine of the not. whether

entry they

corridor, might and control

North relax the the

American

tech-

to

requirements at transearth require-

pointing must

accuracy could

stabilization To ensure

system

a ±V reserve,

accuracy

unchanged.
Progress Report," SID 62-300-35, p. 8.

"Apollo

During the Month

(;rtmnnan (1) equipment would (2) injector (3) one that
"Monthly

reported "l'o he enable hay, supported Space (the The would
Progress

three the NASA by

major

prot)lems to the adapter

with

the LEM: the support with the design of the aft that engine engine,

manufacturer must the define LEM

complete ground platforms.

equipment descent descent

Technology combustion need still meet
Report

Laboratories' instability the new
No. 25,"

difficulties thrust chaml)er

in the variable-thrust duty cycle.
p. 3.

engine). for the

for a lightweight

Li'R-10-,tl,

March

ASP()

organized

a new management for engineering the navigation, unit).
Program 19, 1(.)65. ()ffice

grottp, changes. three

the Configuration The board modules, checkout and

Control comprised critical

Board, groups Apollo and the

1

to oversee representing systems extravehicular
MSC, 1965."

proposals (guidance

management, and mobility
Spacecraft A, March

Apollo

spacecraft

equipment,

"Apollo Revision

Contiguratioll

Management

Plan,

March

1,

MSC fuel Pratt 1; also, by an

decided cells and

in

favor stages would

of an t)f the

"all-battery" vehicle) for fuel parenthood and

LEM notified

(i.e.,

batteries (;rumman be terminated contract

rather

than

in I)oth Whitney's

accordingly. on April let (originally

sul)contract assume

(:ells would ot: GE's

Grumman

Pratt and immediate

\Vhimey) cessation

for the electrical control assembly. of all other efforts involved in the several weeks, tor (;rttmman for issued an

MSC ordered fuel-celled constudy On April contracts 1, the LEM;

figuration. to Yardney

Dm'ing Electric

the next and

Eagle-Picher

(:()st proposals.

spacecraft manufacturer presented its proposal MSC's concurrence followed two weeks later. 8O

all-battery

FUEL

TANK

THERMA.L _

SHIELD //

DESCENT OIMeAL

ENOINE RING OXIDIZER TANK

/

I

II

_

_aL£.

_I/]r_

_

j

,2"

_

i

_

EQUIPMENT

POINT

(4

PLACES)

A,rTACHMENT

7
_

/
O SCE,,,'rENO, NE K,,T
LEM descent

\
OXYOEN TANK _k._ 1__ _._

stage.

A portable required, provide total On for

life but

support three

system

(PLSS)

battery This

charger PI,SSs change

would would would

no now

longer require

be to a

1965
March

additional

nonrechargeable activities. batteries.

be carried

extravehicular

of six nonrechargeable this same helium mode should approach be date, MSC for

ordered the

(;runlman LEM's ascent All work Grumman while stage,

to end stage, should continuing incorporation components

its and

work to

on system the

a superan for the super-

critical ambient stage critical

system halted.

incorporate

for pressurization. However, for the descent

on a supercritical maintain parallel

development

on the ambient system. To permit the into the final design of the descent stage, able.
Letter, V_ F. _. Rector liI, MSC, to GAEC, Attn:

of either approach must be interchange-

R.

S. Mullaney,

"Contract

NAS

9-1100, to s}s-

Implementation Configuration Chief, tern," March

of Electrical Power Changes," March 2, aml 1965; Electronic 15, GAEC,

Subsystem and Supercritical 1965; memorandum, Owen Systems Division, of LEM "LEM

Helium Pressurization E. Maynard, MSC, Power generation Contiguration,"

Instrumentation

"Implementation

All-Battery

April 1, 1965; letter, Rector to tion of All-Battery Configuration," LPR-10-41, 10, 1965, 11, 1965. pp. pp. 1, 20; GAEC, James

GAEC, Mullaney, "Contract April 15, 1965; "Monthly "Monthly L. Neal, Progress MSC, Report

NAS 9-1100, ImplementaProgress Report No. 25," No. Attn: 26, R. "LPR-10-42, S. Mullaney, April March

1, 31; TWX,

to GAEC,

MSC

Structures

and

Mechanics

Division

presented

their

findings

on

the

possibility of qualifying sion. l,Vhile one flight

the spacecraft's was adequate 81

thermal to prove

protection in a single misthe ablator's performance,

THE

APOLLO

St'ACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
March

the

division

asserted,

it would

not

satisfy

tile requirements

as defined

in the

specification.
Memorandum, Joseph N. Kotanchik, to MSC, Qnalify to the Chief. Apollo S)stems Thermal Engineering Protection Division, System,"

"Adequacy of the SA 501 Mission March 3, 1965. with enclosures.

NASA contract

and

General

Motors'

AC

Spark type) for

Plug

Division

signed

the and

definitive navigation

(cost-plus-incentive-fee

primary

guidance

systems for the Apollo spacecraft (both CMs extending through December 1969, covered the systems.
NASA News Release 65-33, March 3, 1965.

and LEMs). manufacturing

The agreement, and testing of

To

prevent Block

radiator

freezing--and control

consequent system,

performance MSC kg ordered (100 lbs)

degradation-North American would of water

in the

I environmental

to supplement the system's coolant. Forty-five be stored in the SMs of airframes 012 and 014.
Letter, tract J. Change B. Alldredge, Authorization MSC, No. to NAA, Space and 3, 1965.

Information

S_stems

Division,

"Con-

309/'

March

North pact,

American the spacecraft

gave

boilerplate suffered

28 some

its

third structural

water

drop

test. to the

Upon

im-

again

damage

heatshield

and the core, though much less than Conditions in this test were at least vehicle
MSC,

it had experienced on its initial drop. as severe as in previous ones, yet the

remained
"ASPO Weekly

watertight.
Management Report, March 4-11, 1965."

Newton Apollo

W. Program

Cunningham, Manager Laboratory of targets windows IV: Crater Day VII: of Manned Flammarion
Newton March

NASA's Samuel

Ranger C. Phillips

Program that the

Manager, Ranger

notified

investigators

and Jet Propulsion unanimous choice days Crater NASA's ommended Day II, and
Memorandum, Target Selection,"

Ranger Project for the Ranger were near omitted Crater Flight area highland for from Day Grimaldi. agreed Day I, basin
NASA, I) Target to

()ffice had IX mission. the V: plan; Crater

submitted their The first two Day Kepler; III: Crater Day VI:

of the

launch Day

Alphonsus;

Copernicus;

Aristarchus; Office the

Space

with for Day

Days III.
C. March

IV-VII, basin

but area

recfor

a smooth

highland

a highland

W. Cunningham, 5, 1965; "Ranger

Gen.

Samuel

Phillips, 8, 1965.

"Ranger

9

Selection,"

Researchers Block II CM

at

Ames

Research tower

Center (with

began canards)

testing in the

the Center's

stability wind

of

the

and

escape

tunnel.

82

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Tests tower.

would

be

conducted

on

the

CM

itself

and

whilc

mated

with

the 1965
March

NAA,

"Apollo

Monthly

l'rogress

Report,"

SID 62-300-36,

May

1, 1965, p. 3.

Preliminary LEM, analysis its MSC

investigation

by

Grnmman of tile scientific Division

indicated

that,

with

an

all-battery

passive thermal control did not include the generator, and Structures Mechanics

spacecraft was doubtful. experiments package, tile engineers problem.) were to the

(And this which, with and alterof

radioisotope

only

increased

Grumman investigating surface coatings

nate locations the spacecraft
Memorandum, generator,"

for the batteries and as possible solutions.
Lee N. McMiltion, March 5, 1963. MSC,

modifications

to

Owen

E.

Maynard

"Radioisotope

power

Northrop-Ventura sequence controller.
MSC, "ASPO Weekly

began

qualification

testing

of

the

CM's

earth

landing

Management

Report,

March

4-11,

1965."

Missiles that current

and

Rockets no

reported serious

a statement problems

by Joseph with lbs) the under

F. Shea, Apollo

ASP()

manager, The lb)

MSC

had

weight

spacecraft.

weight,

he said,

was 454 kg (1000

the 40 823 kg (90 000

goal. Moreover, lbs) permitted was growing; the module's
Astronautics

the increased payload of the Saturn V to 43 091 further increases. Shea admitted, however, that recent weight decisions from in favor of safety and redundancy lbs 13 381
1965,

kg (!)5 000 the LEM could raise lbs).

kg to 14 575

kg (29 500

to 32 000

and

Aeronautics,

p. 113.

Avco found that cracking of the ablator during complete filling, leaving small voids in the material. several changes in the manufacturing of the "filling gun" to facilitate filling manual rather than automatic Using corner The equally "It ablator prior to curing. heatshield and toroidal No cracking came through two to about was visible. its cure percent. the problem

cure was caused The company

by inordered

process: a different those cells that were of the gun; and

shape for the tip slightly distorted; x-raying of the

retraction these new of airframe well. Voids

methods, Avco repaired the aft 006, which was then re-cured. heatshield ablator and solved for airframe had been Division 009 rein the reduced manu-

crew

compartment Structures

appears," of cracking

Mechanics

ported, "that facturing."
MSC, "ASPO Management and Leo

. . . has been

by better

Weekly Report,

Management March 11-18, draft

Report, March 4-11, 1965"; MSC, 1965"; memorandum, C. H. Perrine, of letter to NASA Headquarters on

"ASPO Weekly MSC, to B. Erb use of Block I

Chauvin,

"Attached

83

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
March 9

Command attachment.

Modules

for

Block

II

Heat

Shield

Qualification,"

March

9,

1965,

with

Initial because istics items

flights they

of the

LI,RV

interested first flight

MSC's tests

Guidance

and with the

Control control following

Division characterspecific

represented

of a vehicle

similar to the LEM. The for inchlsion in the LLRV • The handling using The rotational ability during qualities

Division recommended flight test program: of the LEM attitude

control during should

system

should

be verified maneuver. axis I,I:.M • The altitudes the pilot to the pilot

the control powers attitude controller controller. of this pilots procedure LEM. to

available to the pilot used in these tests

the landing be a three-

manually should

zero

the

horizontal The to the

velocities view view afforded available

at

of !10.48 m (100 in the actual

ft) or less should

be investigated. be equivalent control control

• The I,EM determine proper landing maneuver. • Data approach limits. related maneuvers

descent engine throttle relationship between to attitude were and

should be investigated and thrust output for encountered control used in system for the

to the

attitude to verify

rates LEM displays

landing design landing

desirable

• Adequacy manenver should (;uidance system a member coordinate and of the such

of LEM flight be determined. Control and Lunar support.
Robert C. Duncan, items for LI.RV Flight

instrument

Division desired Lander

would trajectory Research

provide Vehicle

information Coordination

as

to control would

characteristics

characteristics.

D. C. Cheatham, Panel,

Mcmoramlum, "Recommended

MSC, Test

to Chief, Program,"

Flight March

Crew 9, 1965.

Support

Division,

10

NASA Company would formation decisions
NASA ment,"

announced for digital be installed

that at

it had control the

awarded Apollo and

a $'_ 713 400 program. and thus tracking stations,

contract The would would

to

Raytheon which inmission display

systems

for the

equipment, support

telemetered from on the gronnd.
Nmvs Release 65-79, March 10, 1965.

spacecraft,

"NASA

Names

Raxtheon

for

Apollo

Digital

I)isplay

Equip-

I1

MSC kit-type The certain

directed mapping SMs actual

North and hardware, (designated
Alldredge, Authorizatioll

American survey which by

to incorporate system would into would the 1)e installed weigh

the basic in up

capability Block the

for storing II configuration. bay (1500
"Con-

a of

equipment kg
Division,

MSC),

to 680
S_stems

lbs).

Letter, .l.B. tract Change

MSC, to NAA, Space and Information No. 317," March 11, 1965.

84

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

MSC system's

notified (PLSS)

Grumman batteries would batteries
Neal, MSC,

that be

a device stored

to recharge required in the

the in the

portable LEM. (bringing

life Instead,

support three total the

1965
March

was no longer to six).
to GAEC, Attn: R.

additional number
TWX,

batteries of PLSS
James L.

spacecraft

11

S. Mullaney,

March

11,

1965.

MSC's landing surface, gear these

Structures conditions. I,EM engine data,

and descent skirt

Mechanics In one were images study, velocity,

Division and

was conducting data properties was allowing

studies of LEM

of lunar the hmar with to review landing

mathematical physical screen, A computer

concerning programmed engineers

and

compiled. on a video

producing landings study, from data, lunar

hypothetical In another

in slow motion. a oue-sixth feet gross surface scale model which platform as the of the could and landing the LEM landing of the could studies gear was

dropped slopes. gear duplicate were

several

to a platform stability, the as well

be adjusted stroke drop surface of these

to different lauding not verify would could

Impact the

acceleration,

recorded.

Although

computer,

data developed in the computer aid in establishing ground rules
MSC News Release 65-42, March 11,

program. for hmar
1965.

The results landings.

MSC hang scale

concurred angle models during of the

in

North

American's

recommendation be retained. at the higher of the for Block the face (Tests impact vehicle.)

that with angles,

the

27_.§

11-18

parachute descent CM indicated that, on the

one-tenth excessive for

pressures

would

be exerted

sidewalls

Provisions

a "dual hang angle" frame 017. Beginning shield would
Weekly

were still in effect with that numl)er, to conform
Report, 3,larch

I spacecraft up to airsheets on the aft heatangle.

be modified
Management

to the
11-18,

27 _/z impact
1965."

"ASt'O

Crew though Apollo

Systems intended as well:

Division

(CSD)

engineers for the

were Gemini

studying program,

several were

items applicable

that, to

i1-18

specifically

• During had into before been very found low shifts

recent in the in the

tests of the sample. had microbial

urine This failed pattern,

nozzle indicated CSD

by McDonnell, that was explosive the urine. examining

microorganisms decompression To determine both of were to two samples examinations tablets up

temperatures dumping. researchers They effective,

to sterilize

possible

and after • Division food completely

completed found storage that, of even the 85

microbiological though containers for

Gemini not

bags.

disinfectant periods

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
Ma rc h

weeks

was

nonetheless growth

feasible. in the

(These bags.)

studies

thus

reinforced

earlier

find-

ings of bacterial

CSD engineers also evaluated it suitable for the Apollo CM
Ibid.

the Gemini-type as well.

water

dispenser

and

found

11-18

During had *ISC against

the any asked

flight with North

of boilerplate the first lateral of this American

(BP) problem to submit

23, the on the

Little

Joe

II's

control To the flight on

system ensure stiffness

coupled

bending

mode their

of the forthcoming

vehicle.

recurrence

of BP-22, to compute

latest

figures

of the spacecraft the first bending
Ibid.

and its escape tower. These data would mode of BP-22 and its laun(h vehicle.

be used

12

During (RCS) (SMD) effects and engineers number exposure and month.

a pad would therefore on the would

abort, be

propellants overboard. a test

from program landing This

the

CM's

reaction and nylon series time

control

system Division

dumped established expose the air

Structures system's fuel the testing

Mechanics possible components. would period near

to evaluate

deleterious SMD a that rate the of hydrazine) encompass between and the

strength (nitrogen the

of the earth tetroxide). length test; flow. that "no

test specimens

to RCS

(monomethyl

oxidizer and SMD

of variables: of the reported

of exposure; the concentration Testing significant

strength

of propellant; the

direction

was completed degradation

end

was produced

by any

of the test exposure
Memorandum, minimum Management March 18-25, ELS Robert

conditions."
B. West, in MSC, the pad 1965"; to I'anl abort MSC, E. mode," "ASPO Fitzgerald, March Weekly "Preliminary 12, 1965; "ASPO report _,geekly Report, on

requirements Report, 1965." March

11-18,

Management

15

MSC defined on the LEM:

the

functional

and

design

requirements

for

the

tracking

light

• The optics

light

must mode

be compatible during darkside

for use with lunar and

CSM earth

scan

telescope/sextant nm) time 99 percent and operafor at

in visual

operations.

• The light must provide range capability of 324.1 km (175 darkside hmar operations when viewed with the CSM sextant. • The maximum for worst tracking tion • The probability range lunar light when background. must flash at the optimum rate for ease of detection with within CSM three-minute sextant must search exceed viewed

of detection phase

(60 flashes

per minute

_+5 fpm).

• Brightness attenuation must be available for terminal and for minimizing spacecraft electrical energy drain. 86

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

• Tile of one hour • The put with • Tile • The ference
Letter,

light light light total

must must

be capable over four have

of inflight cycles. operating

operation life

for continttous of 30 hours

periods outlevel. inter-

1965
March

duration

a total

at rated

a shelf

life of two years. was not required system weight if required,
F. Shea, I.EM MSC, tracking to

to be maintainable including should not
Attu: March R.

at the component and 5.44 electromagnetic kg (12 lbs).
"Functional aud

cooling exceed

shielding,
Joseph

(;AEC,

S. Mnllaney,

design

re(luiremcnts

for

light,"

15, 1965.

In November ity of carrying

1964, MSC asked Grununan to condttct a radioisotope power supply as part decision heat load power on descent supply--in stage; and

a study on the feasil)ilof the LEM's scientific power MSC ground purpose impassive would supply supply to

15

equipment. The subsequent system caused an additional requested rules: pact the contractor the design radioisotope of the if any effect. consider of the radioisotope eflorts descent The stage.

to use batteries in the LEM in the descent stage. Therefore, the study stage specify of the power using the following for the effect on determine supply a requirement configuration; particular which was its

to continue

of preliminary thermal had power
TWX, Power

power

control adverse

characteristics power only used

be acceptable an

existing

characteristics radioisotope

radioisotope

for the descent

W. F. Rector 111, MSC, to (;AEC, Attn: Supply for Lunar Scientilic Experiments,"

R. S. Multaney, March 15. 1965.

sul)ject:

"Radioisotope

An evaluation descent engine The beyond display the pilots purpose the to the failed The location

was made of the cutoff light during of the light, gear to have high of the pads, the cutoff was

feasibility of utilizing a probe-actuated the I,EM lunar touchdown maneuver. by a probe an cut long indicated extending engine off at landings reaction the was time cutoff 20 time (0.7 at least 0.9 m (3 ft) signal percent of for of lunar to of sec) to provide study engine (2)

15

to be actuated of the descent switch,

landing pilot.

Results

touchdown. (1) poor

percentage

of engine-on

attributed

the pilot to a discrete stimulus (a light), and (3) the particular value of a descent rate selected for final letdown (4 ft per sec). It was concluded that a 0.9-m engine to 0.4 (3-ft) before probe would be adequate provided the the to ensure pilot location
"Simulation During Lunar

pilot

cutoff time

of the

descent

touchdown

reaction of the
and

could switch.
of

be reduced

sec or less
Reid, for Sensing

by improving
MSC-IN-65-E(,-10, Cutoff

cutoff
Evaluation

Richard Probe

MSC,

Landing 15, 1965.

(;ear

Engine

Altitude

Landing,"

March

North exceeded

American (BP)

conducted 14. Noise

acoustic levels Prime culprits

tests generated

on

the

spacecraft's spacecraft's the to be

interior, suit

using

15-17

boilerplate

by the

equipment compressor

specifications.

appeared

87

THE 1965 March

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A CHRONOLOGY

and test

the

cabin

fans. itself,

North because of

American its sheet they Data required

engineers metal

asserted, construction, were not

however, compounded representative inside but the

that

the the of space-

vehicle

problem. conditions craft alarm were was "ASPO

These in

tests flight

with hardware.

BP-14,

affirmed, on

communications further analysis,

the

inconclusive sufficiently Weekly loud

and

warning

to be heard Report, March

by

the

crewmen.

Management

18-25, 1965."

16

MSC would

estimated have

the to make

number during

of

navigational landing

sightings mission:

that

Apollo

crewmen

a hmar

• "l'ranslnnar (a) (b) four

coast maneuvers to align the inertial xneasurement 10 maneuvers unit (IMU)

20 navigational coast maneuvers

sightings

requiring

• •l'ransearth (a) (b) • Lunar (a) (b) four

for

IM I.! aligmnent

50 sightings, orbit 10 maneuvers 24 sightings,

25 maneuvers

for

I M U alignment

24 maneuvers.

[The tional network onboard

Mauned data

Space during supply must the

Flight coasting adequate

Network phases data

was of during

the the the

primary mission; circumhmar

source and

for although phase

navigathe as well,

could capahility

be maintained.]

Letter. C. L. Taylor, MSC, to NAA, Space and lnlormation S_stems Division, Attn: J, C. Cozad, "Colltract NAS 9-150, Navigational Sightings Required lot the Lunar Landing Mission," March 16, 1965.

16

Because command was device command and the

the

adapter link with MSC adapters

panels, the

when

deployed

to

45

degrees, system

would on to This panel the

block

the

LEM,

a command directed 014, in the

antenna North 101, interval

adapter such permit a

mandatory. on the

therefore for of the

American and 102. hetween

provide would

spacecraft LEM the

acquisition spacecraft's

deployment

clearing

adapter. Sxstems Division, "Con-

Letter, J. B. Alldredgc, MSC, to NAA, Space axlcL Information tract Change Authorization No. 322," March Ill, 1963.

16

MSC SA tion,

directed 204/'Airframe vestibular

North 012: effects,

American cardiovascular exercise

to

include reflex

nine

scientific bone cardiac

experiments demineralizaoutput, inflight

on

conditioning, inffight

ergt)meter 88

MSC test engineer Jack Slight is shown climbing out of a crater at the Center’s Lunar Topographical Simulation Area. The six-degrees-of-freedom simuIator in which he is strapped produces the effect of one-sixth earth gravity on his body. Slight is wearing an Apollo pressure suit and has a Jacob’s staff in his hand. vector cardiogram, measurement of metabolic rate during flight, inflight pulmonary functions, and synoptic terrain photography. On June 25, the last five experiments were deleted and a cytogenic blood studies experiment was added.
Letter, J. B. Alldredge, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division (S&ID), “Contract Change Authorization No. 323,” March 16, 1965; letter, Alldredge to S&ID, “Contract Change Authorization No. 323, Revision 1,”June 25, 1965.

1965
March

MSC eliminated the requirement for relaying, via the LEM/CSM VHF link, transmissions from a moon-exploring astronaut to the earth. This change allowed the 279.0 megacycle (Mc) transmitters in both vehicles to be eliminated; cleared the way for a common VHF configuration; and permitted duplex voice communications between astronaut and spacecraft. For communicating with the LEM, MSC directed North American to provide a 259.7 Mc transmitter in the CSM.
Letter, J. B. Alldredge, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division, “Contract Change Authorization No. 320,” March 16, 1965.

16

89

TIlE

APOLLO

SPACECRAY'I':

A

CttRONOLOGY

1965
March 16

ASPO design part the backup circuitry a crew of

proposed provided the to verify without distraction

deletion

of a liftoff panel of tile Block backup. power, the boost
MSC, of to

light light E1)S II CM Deletion space, phase
Assistant

in the which (EDS). automatic would and

Block came This abort,

II CM. ON light for at

The gave which improved in

Block as a cue manual EDS the CM

I a to

a redundant detection The weight, enabling manual during
Joseph

liftoff

emergency

system

pilot

was provided. to save

incorporate liftoff reliability,

of the

light and

was proposed

to eliminate

of flight.
lIirectors Apollo for Flight (hew Operations signed

Memorandum, and Flight William A. Lee,

F. Shea, "l)eletion 16, t965,

Operations, March

Lift-off

Light.

Command

Module,"

16-Apdl

15

North pressures figures

American the agreed CM

dropped would well quite

boilerplate generate with during those

I twice obtained and

to

measure water similar data

the

maximum These with model a tests

a high-angle from supported

impact. from the

one-tenth scale model on side wall and tunnel
"Apollo Monthly Progress

of the spacecraft, pressures.
Report," SII) 62-300-36,

p. 3.

17

After and

extensive more reliable, suit

analysis, environment and during

Crew promised the entire

Systems in the much mission.

Division CM. greater

recommended Such a design comfort was

that than

the wear-

"shirtsleeve" ing the space
Memorandum, recommendation

be kept

simpler

personal

Maxime A. Faget, MSC, to Mamtger, ASPO, on establishment of suit wear critm ion," March

"Crew Systems 17, 1965.

Division

18

Russia piloted orbit orbit,

launched by Colonel 497 by Leonov

Voskhod Pavel

II from Belyayev

the and

Baikonur I,t.

Cosmodrome Aleksey

in Kazakhstan, Leonov into an

Colonel

174 km stepped

(309 from

by 108 mi) high. During the vehicle and performed activity, through near Perm, and entering landed

Voskhod mankind's an airlock).

H's second first "walk safely after to the On the

in space." spacecraft following and

After day, the

10 min

of extravehicular leaving

he returned Russia,

(apparently of flight.
and

two cosmonauts

17 orbits

26 hours
Astronautics

Aeronautics,

1965,

pp.

131-132,

136, 157.

18

Because of continuing developmental problems, B. F. Goodrich to replace International I.atex garment
Letter, vehicular

Hamilton Standard as subcontractor

for

chose the

portion
,Joseph

of the Apollo
F. Shea, Unit MSC, to

space
NASA

suit.
lleadqualters, Attn; (;eorge E. Mueller. "Extra-

Mobility

subcontractor

change,"

March

18, 1965.

9O

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Grmnman oxygen mixture After cost stage one. that mode. and and

officials storage at a certain

presented for pressure impacts, be about spokesmen would cost

their the and they

findings temperature, reliability,

on

supercritical state neither tanks than than thermal gaseous They impact, more of being

versus gas nor in the

gaseous liquid]. as this

1965
March 18

systems factors

LEM

_supercritical: and

homogeneous as well that

studying schedule

of weight, tank

control, stressed they the

recommended descent kg any (l 17 lbs)

ascent

a supercritical would these approach

in the 35.66 denied about

stage. schedule

configuration Though this MSC

lighter

an all-gaseous estilnated all-gaseous

$2 million proposal.

was reviewing

Grumman's

During the also looked cah'ulated heavier It was stantial" slim weight than felt

latter into that, that

part the

of the several

month, Crew approaches. one. CSD

Systems Division In contrast to would improved the all-gaseous be but

(CSD) engineers Grumman, CSD 4.08 kg the and (9 lbs) former. "subits offset

at most, the savings

an all-gaseous

system nonetheless

a supercritical that

recommended schedules, approach

heightened

reliability,

cost

accompanied

disadvantage.

During

late April,

MSC

ordered

(;rumman

to adopt

CSD's

approach

(gaseous deof

systems in both stages of the vehicle). [Another factor involved in this cision was the lessened oxygen requirement that followed substitution batteries for fuel cells in the LEM. See March 2.]

(;AEC, "ASPO Report, 1965."

"Monthly Weekly March

l'rogress Management 25-April

Report Report, 1, 1965";

No.

27,"

LI'R-10-43, 18-25, Weekly

May

10,

1965,

p.

17;

MSC,

March "ASI'O

1965"; "ASPO Management

Weekly Report,

Management April 22-29,

Lawrence Programs, listed Station Health the called scientific requirements could that justify Dr.

B. Hall, Office of

Special Space requirements

Assistant Science for and

for space

Planetary Applications, in the

Quarantine, NASA Lunar Sample

Bioscience Headquarters, Receiving

18

preliminary

as recommended Service. The construction, space of the their Randolph support service for net

by the estimates and amounting facilities, U,S.

Communicat)le were based operation to 7201 offices under the Chief not

Disease on CDC

Center of the Public experience involving facilities laboratories, not Hall reflect who noted that area, did and sq ft) for and

design,

of similar sq m (77 492 and other of Agriculture quarantine of CDC

biological areas,

Department done and

or experimenters conditions. were in agreement

work

being

Lovelace

the facility should and that an island

be isolated, certainly would be favored.

in or near

a metropolitan

Memorandum March 18, 1965.

for

Record,

Lawrence

B.

Hall,

"Primary

harrier

for

lunar

quarantine,"

91

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
March

Structures for achieving landing the water
MSC,

and

Mechanics the optimmn reducing controlling structure; aeration
Weekly

Division weight roll changing

engineers of Block by landing attitude

were II CMs

studying without or (i.e.,

several

schemes in a in

compromising "explosions" through shape hole

reliability: pot"

velocity

retrorockets to 0 '_ at medium

18-25

parachutes; and/or
"ASPO

impact

"rotatable

of the water).
Management Report, March 18-25, 1965."

18-25

Crew

Systems

Division

(CSD)

engineers, tested had closely

continuing

their

evaluation

of

liquid-cooled (the I,CG-8). had used improvement comfortable, configuration would fabrication
Ibid.

garments (LC(;), The manufacturer more

Hamilton modified knit fabric.

Standard's placement CSD

newest version of the tubes and this style an

a stretchable,

found

over its predecessor (the LCG-3): and easier to don and doff. CSD of the minimal techniques). garment (chiefly around interface this latest

it was more efficient, more officials accordingly froze the model. Further and design work in improvements

be

modifications

18-25

The of

Atomic America (;E's that

Energy and

Commission Electric vehicle, it was source felt, might and

evaluated ((;E} and was Power tor assigned

proposals an follow-on with carried reported

by Radio work the that separately the

Corporation for the aboard generator's the to latter the

General roving

isotope

generator possible

Surveyor firm. ment LEM. "prospects
Ibid.

lunar the

concept, fuel

compatible to be Division

require-

have

MSC's

Propulsion

. . . look[ed]

very promising."

19

Bell mine major

Aerosystems if it were changes

Company practical to the Lunar

reported to significantly Landing

that

a study increase

had

been

made time

to deterwithout study This

simulation (LLRV).

Research

Vehicle

had been simulation was capable simtdation cluded tained that by

made after time for

MSC personnel had expressed an interest in increased a trainer version of the LLRV. The current LLRV

of about 10 minutes of flight time and two minutes of lunar with the lift rockets providing one-sixth of the lift. It was conlunar doubling to simulate limiting where could simulation the 272-kg one-half time approaching peroxide seven load lift needed normal load F): and minutes and could employing be obthe (600-1b)

jet engine A major Houston, that temperature

of the rocket was vehicle 313 K (40 92 peroxide the

for simulation. weather kg conditions A study (1200 K (59 showed lbs), the at

factor, such

however,

a training a maximum exceed

would

be located. of 544 at 332

in order

to use

not

F) themaxi-

The four pictures above are taken from Ranger I X during the last 33.7 sec prior to impact. The impact point is circled in all photos. Top left, altitude 81 km (50.3 mi) at 33.7 sec; top right, 56.3 km (35 mi) at 23.5 sec; bottom left, 19.6 km (12.2 mi) at 8.09 sec; and bottom right, 7.2 km (4.5 mi) at 2.97 sec. Area covered by the photos is 38.6 km (24 mi) across at top left; 26.97 km (16.75 mi) at top right; 9.3 km (5.8 mi) at bottom left; and 3.3 km (2.1 mi) at bottom right.

mum load must be limited to 465 kg (1025 lbs) of peroxide. On the basis of existing weather records it was determined there would be enough days on which flights could be made in Houston on the basis of 544 kg (1200 lbs) peroxide at 313 K (40”F), 465 kg (1025 lbs) at 332 K (59”F), and 354 kg (775 Ibs) at 353 K (80°F) to make provisions for such loads.
Letter, John Ryken, Bell Aerosystems Company, to Ronald Decrevel, “Preliminary Study of Methods of Increasing LLRV Lunar Simulation Time,” March 19, 1965; letter, Ryken to Decrevel, “Effect of Houston Temperatures on Allowable LLRV Weight and Flight Time,” March 23, 1965.

1965
March

93

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
March 21

NASA launched an Atlas-Agena

Ranger vehicle.

IX, The

last of the series, from Cape target was Alphonsus, a large The best. probe was The initial

Kennedy aboard crater about 12 °

south of the lunar equator. conditions would be at their uncorrected, On March the craft would 2,3, a midcourse

timed to arrive when lighting trajectory was highly accurate;

have landed correction

only 400 miles north of Alphonsus. increased Ranger IX's speed and impacted the following

placed it on a near-perfect day only four miles from

trajectory: the original

tile spacecraft aiming point.

From

2092

km (1300 cameras

mi) out took

until

it was destroyed of the lunar

on impact, surface.

Ranger These

IX's

six television

5814

pictures

pictures Tracking analysis. networks descent. in those

were received at Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Laboratory, where they were recorded on tape They also were released to the nation's three

Goldstone, Calif., and film for detailed major television

in "real time," so millions of Americans followed the spacecraft's The pictures showed the rim and floor of the crater in fine detail: just prior to impact, objects less than a foot in size were discernible.

A panel at a press walls, plains,

of scientists conference believed, therefore the the were moon panel they and

presented that were were was same

some harder

preliminary Crater smoother landing volcanic believed These and likely about

conclusions rims than on and the

from ridges manned floors incapable of

Ranger inside

IX the dusty

afternoon.

moon's

considered dubious solidified origin.

sites for future crater types activity. material several findings

landings. however. of supwere

Generally, Apparently, porting seen that that the

floors

were

a spacecraft.

Investigators

craters

of nonmeteoric at one time

reinforced

arguments

had experienced

volcanic

Astronautics 65-25, NASA March

and

Aeronautics, Two 65-96,

1965, Ranger "Ranger

pp.

140,

142,

143,

146,

148-149;

NASA

News

Release 4, 1965; Photos,"

"NASA Readies News Release 23, 1965.

Spacecraft IX to

for Send

Moon World's

Missions," February First Live Moon

22

(;lynn

S. Ltmney

was named

by MSC

Director

Robert

R. C, ilruth Lunney would Flight C,ontrol U.S. Air

as Assistant continue Division, Eastern

Flight Director for Apollo missions 201 to serve as Chief of the Flight Dynamics and Test as MSC Range Safety Coordinator Range.

and 202. Branch, with the

Force

MSC and

Announcement 202 Missions,"

65-33, March

"Appointment

of

Assistant

Flight

Director

for

Apollo

201

22, 1965.

22

The

change

from

LEM

fuel

cells for

to that 94

batteries system

eliminated and the effort

the on

need

for

a

hard-line

interstage

umbilical

a cryogenic

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

umbilical was chased
MSC,

disconnect during cost were
Weekl)'

was the agreed
Management

canceled. program upon.
Report,

The review

entire and

LEM levels

pyrotechnic of effort and

effort pur-

1965
March

redefined parts
"ASPO

March

18-25,

1965."

Jet

Propulsion that

Laboratory as a result

scientists of Ranger Facility VI station

W. and

L.

Sjogren VII

and

D. be

W.

Trask data,

reDeep to spin to 3 kin im-

22

ported Space

Ranger locations

tracking

Instrumentation

could

determined

within 10 m (10.9 yds) axis. Differences in the within (1.86 proved 20 mi) in (21.9 less than yds). was

in the radial direction normal to tile earth's longitude between stations could be calculated The thought, moon's and radius knowledge had been of found to had be been its mass

by an order
and

of magnitude.
1965, p. 160.

Astronautics

Aeronautics,

ASPO reentry

summarized range control

their :

requirenlents

for

entry

monitoring

and

backup

22

• The "g" trajectory • The shallow range tion failures • The control system

flight entry

crew

would

nlonitor to allow

the manual

entry and

to detect and indications should discrete

a skip

or excessive or

early

enough

takeover

safe reentry. of to() steep provide and or manual naviga-

corridor displayed

should

be verified and control in the and

an entry

to the crew. systems primary after after failures to reentry, reentry.
Guidance and and backup Control reentry Division, ranging "Requirecapability,"

spacecraft capability (PGNS)

guidance prior during

guidance

catastrophic

in the PGNS

Memorandum, Joseph ments for Command March 22, 1965.

F. Shea, MSC, to Chief, Module entry monitoring

MSC instead parallel North

ordered LEM's on

Grumman interstage redundant

to halt

development separation

of linear-shaped system, and By guillotines.

charge eliminating

cutters this by to

22

for the

umbilical explosive-driven

to concentrate

approach, American hardware schedule
W. Driven

and by capitalizing on on the CSM umbilical development improvements
F. Rector III, MSC,

technology already worked out cutter, this decision promised Further, it promised in cost.
Officer, LEM, "Request for

simplify significant

and

testing. and
to

to effect

reductions
Contracting

Memorandum, PCCP-MDF

Guillotine,"

March

22, 1965.

A two-stage Virgil

Titan

II rocket and John

boosted _,V. Young, 95

Gemini into

Ili an

and elliptical

its

crew, orbit

astronauts about the

23

I. Grissom

This view of the Gemini III astronauts was taken through the window of the open hatch on Astronaut John W. Young’s side of the spacecraft. Virgil I. “Gus” Grissom is on the right.
7
March

earth. After three orbits, the pair manually landed their spacecraft in the Atlantic Ocean, thus performing the first controlled reentry. Unfortunately, they landed much farther from the landing zone than anticipated, about 97 km (60 miles) from the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Intrepid. But otherwise the mission was highly successful. Gemini 111, America’s first two-manned space

96

ZZPRODUC ORIGINAL

OF THE POOR

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

mission, used

also

was

the

first

manned

vehicle

that

was maneuverable. orbital and
Gemini C.

Grissom changes.
from with Cape J.

1965
March

the vehicle's
NASA Kennedy," Vorzimmer, 1969), 291-A, pp. Gemini News

maneuvering
65-81, 17, 1965; "NASA James

rockets
Schedules M. and D. Ertel],

to effect
First and

plane
Flight

Release March Project 189-191;

Manned Barton A pp.

Grimwood and April Aeronautics, 1965.

Hacker,

Peter S1'_t002, Fact

Gemini [Ivan

Technology

Operations: 1965,

Chronology 145-46;

(NASA "MSC

Astronautics

Sheet

3 Flight"

Part ing

I of the system

Critical in the

Design Block II

Review CM

of the crew was and held at Mechanics

compartment North (SMD)

and divisions,

the

dockrespec-

23-.-24

American.

Systems

Engineering (SED) and tively, evaluated the two ° Crew compartment:

Structures areas.

with

(a) The attachments

restraint harness, acceptable for the suit umbilicals. and mobility; the

in the These

Block I vehicle, interfered attachments were critical was likewise critical

for suit

ventilation

harness

location

for crew impact tolerances. and umbilical fittings--or Manned (b) they did (c) sled not To tests allow save might at weight, sufficient Restraints

Evaluation both--awaited be the needed sleep room North station

of alternate locations for the harness the availability of a conch mockup. to verify must any be planned stowing when life harness redesigned. in his to such pressure strap gear changes. At crew present, suit. equipin compartstruts (PLSS). oxygen explode, to

for a crewman American

ment to shelves and bulkheads ments, as was done on the Block (d) compressed, "No For tank and report analysis in such in the Most serions, the couches has been PLSS an occurrence, (ttnder might

(rather than I vehicle).

in an earth would strike the about on April crew 409 27.

landing, a portable could kg [900

the attentuator support system that or killed, the

made,"

SED reported,

"to show be injured North

this is acceptable." could

Ibs] of pressure) American

the aft bulkhead on this problem ° Docking (a) SMD The hatch The system:

be ruptured.

was scheduled

approved division (i.e., division (North
Weekly

the also

probe throughout

and

drogue (so that North

concept, only one American's to 90°),

but tool

recommended was needed). for the final MSC's design

that outer word be

fittings (b) side (c)

be standardized limiting

approved

its deployment that of
March 9-150,

pending hatch

on deployment simplified.
MSC, "ASI'O Attn:

reqnirements. recommended American
Management March Ta)lor, Review No. 25-April "Contract 2, Phase

the

forward

mechanism

warned
Report, NAS

schedule
18-25, 1965"; H. for on G.

delays.)
MSC, Osbon, March, "ASPO NAA, Spacecraft 1965," to Weekly NASA Minutes June 15,

Management MSC, of Critical 1965.

Report, C. I)esign L.

1, 1965"; I conducted

letter, Rg:l)

Apollo

23-24

97

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
March 24

Grumman of the thrust

ordered

Space in and

Technology the LEM's was expected

Laboratories descent to delay engine.

to increase This

the required

lifetime subdate

chamber

stantial redesigning about seven months.
MSC, "ASPO Weekly

the engine's

qualification

Management

Report,

April

1-8,

1965."

24

ASP() requested the Structures and Mechanics Division (SMD) to study the prot)lem of corrosion in the coolant loops of the CM's environmental control system, and to search for effective inhibitors. Current efforts at North operating American procedures, to lessen bttt corrosion stopped short included of improved hardware and and it

extensive

redesigning; expected. Division, If by thus July recommend

would be some time before conclusive results could be May, ()wen E. Maynard, chief of the Systems Engineering SMD immediately to begin its search for inhibitors. could corrosion problem remained unresolved, gap measures for the early spacecraft.
Memorandum, "Water/glycol tion on Corrosion Joseph corrosion," Effects N. Kotanchik, March of 24, Water/Glycol to Chief, MSC, 1965, with to

Early in directed 1966 the stop-

SMD

Chief, enclosure: on and

Systems "Detailed Spacecraft

Engineering Plan of Radiators"; Division,

Division, Investigamemo"Water

Mixtures Structures

randum, Owen E. Maynard, MSC, Glycol Corrosion," May 4, 1965.

Mechanics

24

MSC mental

contacted occupancy

Grumman there

with Engineering from

reference May tests

to the until begin

LEM

ascent

engine 1, 1965. a baffled

enwronscheduled It was injector.

tests at Arnold understanding

Development 1, 1965, might

Center September without

(AEDC),

for cell MSC's

that

the

It was pointed and since the

out, however, recent baffle

that the first test was expected injector design selection had checkout

to begin July I, been made, time unit, and ship-

remained for the fabrication of the injector, ment to AEDC for use in the first test. Since the baffled desirable of the action
W.

of the

injector to use injector

represented the design constrain

the for the

final these tests

hardware tests. and

configuration,

it that take

was highly availability necessary
TWX,

MSC requested that Grumman

to ensure
III, MSC,

compliance.
to GAEC, Attn: R. S. Mullaney, March 24, 1965.

F. Rector

24

ASPO spacecraft taken MSC ment Robert

Manager AFRM a special North project Piland, on and and O.

Joseph 009

F. Shea tended

said

that the

the CSM specific

first

major this In

test and

of an therefore

Apollo had both manage1965, to

to pace significance. had applied effort

program additional

program American engineering ASPO

Reflecting spacecraft.

significance, senior the to give fall of priority

to that

Deputy

Manager, 98

was assigned

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESrI'ING

AFRM garding Recently full-time

009

to complement North

and Program had 009.

snpport *lanager assigned ASPO's

the

normal gave

ASP() Feltz. Project management would duties,

project

engineerre-

1965
March

ing activities.

American

simultaneously

a special

assignment

009 to Assistant North assignment plan attention with be Feltz. for

Charles a ('hief

American on the to 009, The for ensuring referral would on Block

Engineer and continne and \V. attention planning, where would headed would to

to project

a

current was: Piland to his normal Project project would through to the with North to

engineering priority directly would spacecraft Block decisions, propriate. Engineer, supported William

spacecraft in addition ASP() all at Chief ASP() KSC.

give deal

Engineer engineering give priority adequate Deputy 009. by

Roll

I,anzkron for all to all timely apbe by Project

responsible to be latmched and Ray in the rapid Pyle,

activities

He

I spacecraft, I,anzkron

schedules of problems coordinate

Manager I,anzkron a group

American's

Chief

matters I proiect

pertaining engineering

effort

Petynia.
Joseph for AFRM F. Shea, MSC. to l)islvilmtion, "MSC Management and Project

Memorandum, Engineering

009,"

March

24, 1965.

After 1964), of the

further

design

studies

following

the

M-5

mockup

review

(October

5-8,

25-April

1

Grumman reconfigured LEM. The structure steps or "porch"
Weekly to GAEC, Module,

the hoarding was flattened, added to ease

ladder on the forward gear leg to fit closer to the strut. 'l'wo stepping from the top rung to the

stirrup-type platform
"ASPO MSC, Excursion

were

being

in front

of the hatch.
March 1-4 and 25-April "Contract 1-13," 1, 1965"; NAS April 9-1100, 30, 1965. letter, Line W. F. Rector Item I11.

Management Attn: M-5 R. Review,

ReporL S. Chits

Mullaney,

.t--Lunar

North sign

American support on
Monthly March

completed the

negotiations control
SID 62-300-36,

with

Ling-Temco-Vought radiators for Block II

for

de-

25-April

1

environmental
Report." 1, 1965."

CSMs.

"Apollo Report,

Progress 25-April

p.

8;

"ASI'O

Weekly

M'anagement

Crew

Systems

Division

confirmed

the

feasibility entire
25-April

of commonality program.
memorandum, R. Williams,

of personal

25-April

1

communications
"ASPO Weekly

equipment
Management MSC, to Chief,

for the
Report, Systems March

Apollo

1. 1965"; Attn:

Richard "Apollo

S. Johnston, space suit

Engineering definition,"

Division, April 5, 1965.

commtmications

program

North obtain

American pressure

began data

a series npper

of water portions 99

impact

tests

with Data

boilerplate

1 to

26

on the

of the CM.

on the side walls

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965

and drops;

tunnel this

agreed was not
Monthly

fairly the

well case

with

those

obtained on
p. 3.

from top deck,

1/10

scale

model

with

pressures

the

however.

March

"Apollo

Progress

Report,"

SID 62-300-36,

27

Test of

Series activating

I on spacecraft Facility. the engine gimbal propellant and firing

001 Vehicle

was completed and facility and The

at WSTF updating installing in

Propulsion progress

Systems consisted and connorwere

Development pneumatic ducted mally. Total

subsystem valve. data time
Report,"

a baffled test operations subsystems

injector operated

individual that all

satisfactorily, engine

indicated

was 765 seconds.
SID 62-300-36, "Review of pp. S/C 13, 18; memorandum, 001 and TF-2 Test Spacecraft Results,"

"Apollo 001 April

Monthly 19, 1965.

Progress to

Project

Engineer,

Distribution,

29

MSC decided upon a grid-type landing point designator Grumman would cooperate in the final design and would device; accept
Letter, Item

for the manufacture equipment point.
NAS

LEM. the could

MIT data
W. 3; LEM

would from
F. Rector Landing

ensure

that

the and

spacecraft's thus
Attn: Marcia R.

guidance the

the

designator
1II, MSC, to

change

landing
"Contract

GAEC,

S. Mullaney,

9--1100,

Point

Designator,"

29, 1965.

29

William

F. Rector,

the

LEM

Project

Officer

in ASPO,

replied 15,

to Grumman's 1964). Rector

weight reduction study (submitted to MSC on December approved a number of the manufacturer's suggestions: • Delete equipment • Eliminate • Delete • Move and from portion Grumman Rector ordered the LEM from But fuse box • Reduce the oxygen of the had one the the VHF of two from water batteries "switchover" and spacecraft recommended and hmar for stay antenna buses explosive (the in the actnal this span length descent liftoff in the redundant the time systems the that the ascent circuit redundancy in the pulse code

modulation

telemetry

electrical (along stage time

power with the

system relay

devices of

assembly)

to the descent

between to those the from moon's

switching in the ascent surface). also for water

stage from

be reduced

100 to 30 rain;

urged Grumman the firm to give and water during the CM transhmar to the LEM. other high

to reduce "additional coast; and

it even further, if possible. He consideration" to the whole concept of the decisions of (2) possibility transferring

oxygen

systems:

(1) in light

for an all-battery

ASPO

vetoed the

proposals intensity

to lighten light. 100

the spacecraft: the rendezvous radar had

• Delete

Because

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

been longer tion

eliminated

from

the

CSM,

Rector

stated

flatly

that

the

item

conld the that

"no reacthe

1965
Ma rch

be considered • Combine the control • Delete • Abridge concept must the RCS the

as part redundant

of the weight legs in the

reduction effort." system that pressurized the system. MSC held

propellants,

to "modularize" be maintained. propellant manifold. hover time.

parallel

spacecraft's

Though for the

the spacecraft,

Center for

was reviewthe present

ing velocity ASPO could And ponents been January no longer vehicular lastly, made 27,

budgets and control offer "no relief." Rector on at valid, the which responded basis of to

weights

Grumman's unit crew been had In light since

proposals (EMU). integration

for These systems

staging proposals meeting for factor,

comhad on were extraMS(;

of the

extravehicular staging LEM.

mobility a LEM had MSC

explored. required of this

Those complicating concept. determined Robert must

discussions

however. to the

a capability

transfer

engineers had reevaluated the entire staging still offered "attractive" weight reductions, they it was LEM January impractical. Program Accordingly, Manager stage of the
F. Rector III, Study

Although staging that, at present, S. Mullaney, revert must to the gear the pre-

Rector EMU and

informed that his firm other

at Grumman, the spacecraft.
MSC, Status," to GAEC, March Attn:

27 position--i.e.,

assorted

be stored

in the ascent
Letter, Weight W.

R.

S. Mullaney,

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

Reduction

29, 1965.

Beech gen three

Aircraft and oxygen and Beech tanks

Corporation tanks failure would by North
Apollo through 4

stopped of tests. Failures heat testing

all

end-item ranged

acceptance reports exceeding to weld action from

tests issued failure

of hydroagainst on the

29-April

4

as a result to meet resume

interim

failure

undergoing

specification was established

tolerances H2 tank. and approved
NAA, March 62-300-36,

leak

requirements corrective

when

American.
Spacecraft April Test 1965)," p. Program 4; Weekly Activity Report (l'eriod Report," 29 SID

"Project 1965

"Apollo

Monthly

Progress

p. 12.

MSC

requested 3 the radio

that

Grumman for from resulted S-band

incorporate turning the from the Manned for ASPO's

in the LEM turning would Space

command Flight the LEM that

list Network.

for

LEMs on by on and Neces-

31

l, 2, and real-time sity after Saturn and LEM

capability command of radio unit

transponder

off and transponder the LEM

for capability instrument

command

separation frequencies.
IlI,

decision

transponders

use the same

transmission

reception
TWX,

W. F. Rector

MSC,

to GAEC,

Attn:

R. S. Mullaney,

March

31, 1965.

101

]'HE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
March

MSC stage

directed of the

Grumman LEM;

to

use

supercritical

helium

only with

in

the

descent for

Grumman

completed

negotiations

AiResearch

the storage
During the Month "Monthly

system.
Progress Report No. 26," LPR-10_2, p. 1.

Bell on

Aerosystems the thrust tests Thus using far, widely problem,
Progress

Company chamber an varied the

received LEM fitted had

Grumman's ascent with engine. a 31.75 from ratios).

go-ahead Bell mm every Also,

to resume conducted (1.25 in), the

work a dozen

of the injector design

stability baffle. (including soakback
"Monthly

Y-shaped thermal

recovered to thicken

induced to ease wall.

disturbance

fuel-to-oxygen

Bell planned
Report No. 26,"

the chamber
pp. 8, 17.

LPR-10-42,

During the Month

Grumman LEM
Ibid.,

recommended that
1.

to MSC effort to refine

that

the

stroking

gear

pad

be used should

on the

and
p.

design

crushing

performance

continue.

During the Month

Grumman landing

reported gear. The

the firm

status was:

of their

development

program

on

the

LEM

• Continuing • Testing per sec (25 fps) • Studying patible stroking) with • Studying footpad • Designing • Planning • Continuing
Ibid., pp. 13-14.

hardware honeycomb high-density the possibility

design crushing

on the 424-cm characteristics materials

(167-in)

gear up to 7.62 still m

at velocities that the rim tests struts would of the

honeycomb secondary strut

be com(non-

a lightweight

of strengthening footpad

fixed

a boilerplate drops testing

for use in drop gear secondary and

of a 406-cm

(160-in)

on primary

During the Month

Space engine, erosion
Ibid.,

'Fechnology Grumman characteristics
p. 19.

Laboratories' reported, over the were

major entire

problems high range.

with

the

LEM and

descent good

attaining throttling

performance

During the Month

Three flights were made with the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV) for the purpose of checking the automatic systems that control the attitude of the jet engine and adjusting weight. 102 the throttle so the jet engine would support five-sixths of the vehicle

A full-scale LEM mockup was located at MSC’s Lunar Topographical Simulation

Area. On March 11 representatives of Flight Research Center (FRC) visited MSC to discuss future programs with Warren North and Dean Grimm of Flight Grew Support Division. A budget for operating the LLRV at FRC through fiscal year 1966 was presented. Consideration was being given to terminating the work at FRC on June 30, 1966, and moving the vehicles and equipment to MSC. 103
1965
March
11

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
March

A contract was placed lmilding at the south struction reduce preflight
Letter, Vehicle for Paul

(on base

March 17) to erect a 12.19 x 12.19-m area of FRC, where the LLRV was in 60 days and Force operations the

(40 x 40 ft) flown. Con-

was LLRV

expected to be complete interference with Air

building should and enhance the

procedures.
Office Progress F. Bikle, of Director, Report April No. 7, 1965. FRC, 21 to for NASA period Headquarters, ending March "Lunar 31, 1965," Landing sgd. De Research E. Beeler

April 1

Grumman cal power • Two

presented to MSC system for the LEM: batteries batteries power cooling

its recommendations

for an

all-battery

electri-

in the ascent in the descent distribution for the

stage stage system descent batteries and electrical control as-

• Four • A new • Active semblies Following man's MSC for power power electrical sible

a review

of cost and

and

resources 15 gave evalttate of the would of the the two however,

proposals, the LEM tile

MSC

approved

Grum-

configuration, requested tile supply. during requirement that This the

on April

manufacturer

a go-ahead. power module's that the posThe still the CSM. might

Grumman checkottt procedure 60 min between for an initial

possibility wholly the This and such charger that

of furnishing from CSM's would eliminate in the that supplying simplify

pre-separation

[JEM obviate checkottt.

connections

spacecraft

additional

battery

Center advised North American, be needed on Block II CSMs.
GAEC, Rector tion "Implementation IIl, MSC, to LEM of LEM GAEC, Attn:

a charger

All-Battery R.S. April

Configuration," "Contract 15, 1965.

April NAS

1, 1965; 9-1100,

letter,

W. F.

Mullaney,

Implementa-

of All-Battery

Configuration."

The static

first firing

stage about and

of the

Saturn

IB

booster The (1.6

(the stage's ntillion that the

S-IB-1) eight lbs)

tmderwent uprated thrust. H-1 H-1 On had

its April

first 23,

at Huntsville, Rocketdyne testing
and

Alabama. annomaced was ready
1065, p.

engines passed

produced Marshall qualification
Astro_mutics

71 168-kilonewtons and

ttprated

for flight.
162; spmc Btt._iness Daily, April 7, 1965, p. 209.

Aerottaltlics,

Apollo Shea hmar

Program that landing

Director Inc., dynamics

Samuel was to determine

C. Phillips conducting "'ftmctional 104

told

ASPO

Manager engineering

Joseph study

F. of

Bellcomm,

a systems

compatibility

of the

naviga-

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

tion, hmar

guidance, landing." areas

control, Phillips which "We

crew, asked

and that

landing useful evaluating

gear

systems of any

involved specific ASP()

in Apollo assignments operation. system that these the con-

1965
April

he be advised in support the

in these Shea with landing

would are

prove

of the lunar We

replied, the

currently and covered

LEM by

landing believe and

Apollo problem

contractors is being

the

NASA

Centers.

adequately

ourselves

tractors." Shea added that a meeting would be held at Grumman and 22 to determine if there were any deficiencies in the program, he would comments
Letter,

April 21 and that later make

be pleased to have and recommendations.
Phillips to Shea, April

Bellcomm

attend

the

meeting

and

1, 1965;

letter,

Shea

to Phillips,

April

6, 1965.

H.

I. Thompson successfully

Company's withstood

first

combustion of four

chamber test

with

a tape-wrapped If further testing

1-7

throat

a series

firings.

confirmed N.Y., the place the cracking.)
MSC, Flight,

its performance, design would be current

reported the resident Apollo office at Bethpage, used in the LEM's ascent engine. (It would rethroat, which suffered from excessive

compression-molded

"Weekly April

Activity 4-10, 1965,"

Report p. 2.

for

Office

of

the

Associate

Administrator,

Manned

Space

The testing. During the Bell and

thrust The the

mount mount same engine

for would period,

the

LEM

ascent

engine

cracked

during

vibration

1-8

be strengthened. Bell tested to replace In unit the the first the oue-piece molded-throat that totaled only negligible ablative design, over eight throat chamber which for de-

ascent

(designed that

veloped decay
"ASPO

cracks

during found

testing). pressure.
Report,

firings suffered

minutes, erosion

engineers

of chamber
Weekly

Management

April

1-8,

1965."

The Crew

cryoformed Systems

steel Division

bottle called

for Inc.,

the passed

portable its first milestone"

life burst

support and

system, tests,

manuwhich

I-8

factured

by Arde-Portland,

cycling

a "major

in its development.

Ibid.

MSC ing was the

and and deemed top

Grumman leaving the "inherently possible" (or transfer)

reviewed LEM while highly was one hatch was

the requirement on the hatch moon. and reliable," of the impractical, 105

for a backup The the only new The failure it would

mode that proposal cost

of enterhatch was even to use 13.6 kg

1-8

rectangular

"remotely

mechanism. because

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April

(30 lb) and would impose ('raft's thermal shield.
Ibid.

an undue

hazard

on both

the

crew

and

the

space-

I-8

North proach ultrasonic these none ables the

American rl'he was could testing be highly

reviewed principal could confirmed The do

nondestructive method upon no only methods danger to meet the more involved thau were

techniqttes ultrasonic and indicate destructive being of equipment

for testing testing, procedure. faulty tests. was that, bond A

honeycomb but this At areas, number but thus apbest, and of far tests,

structures,

dependent

through

promising had weight
*'ASPO

nondestructive to he lowered advantage
Wcekl)

investigated, strength might

was satisfactory.

in this situation restflts construt:tion
April 1 8, Bonding 1965";

if design

allow-

distribution be lost.
D. May D.

of honeycomb
Report, Ridnour,"Recent

Management to R. H.

memorandum, at NAA,"

Few,

RASl'O-Dowqey, with enclosures.

Problems

12, 1965,

North

American

presented

final

results

of their

modification

to the

electrical

power system This consisted on the center

for spacecraft 011 to solve the power and energy problem. of the addition of three batteries which would be mounted platform and used to supply instrumentation and mission

control programmer with the entry and landing recovery

loads during flight. These batteries would be paralleled landing batteries at impact to provide power for postMSC
Maynard, 011 circuit Informatioq

loads.
()Well "S/C Space and E.

concurred
MSC, to

with
Chief, April I)iv.,

this

approach.
and TWX, Cozad, C. April Electronic L. Taylor, 13, 1965.

Mcmmandum, Systems MSC, to Division, NAA,

lnslrnmentation 8, 1965; .l.c. Attn:

protection," S',stems

Following MSC spelled
J. with

a presentation out specific
MSC, 9-150, "Technical

by North and
to

American design
and

on

the

status

of the

adapter,

detailed
NAA, Space LEM

changes

required.
Systenls

Letter, Cozad, 1965,

B. Alldredge, NAS enclosure,

Information Adapter (SLA) SLA

Div., status,"

Attn:

J.c. 2,

"Contract

Spacecraft Description

change

April

of l'ropose(l

Changes."

5-11

Rocketdyne engines. however,
NAA, April

completed These attd
"Project

qualification sttccessfttl. One

tests of the

on

two analyzed.

CM extensions

reaction failed

control to seat,

were

nozzle

was rejected.
Apollo

Its fail ure was heing
Test p. 3. I'rogJam

Spacecraft 1965)/'

Weekly

Activity

Report

(Period

5

1965

through

11 April

5-16

To mock

evahtate them flights

the two

Block

II CSM's that the

manttal Apollo maltttal 106

thrust control

vector

control, at Honeywell.

five

pilots, These

among

astronauts,

flew the

simulator

demonstrated

was suflit:iently

accurate

This space simulator at Minneapolis-Honeywell, 3.96 m (13 ft) in diameter and weighing about 8.16 metric tons (9 tons), duplicated the CSM’s flight characteristics in space. It was so delicately balanced it could be moved by a puff of air. (Honeywell Photo) for transearth injection. Also, researchers determined that the optical alignment sight provided the crewmen with attitude references adequate for midcourse maneuvers.
NAA, “Apollo Monthly Progress Report,” SID 62-300-37, June 1,1965, p. 6.

96
April

Quality verification vibration tests were completed on the command module of spacecraft 006.
Zbid., p. 1; memorandum, W. D. Graves, MSC, to Distr., “Quality Vibration Verification Testing (QVVT) Facility Validation,” April 27, 1965.

6

107

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April 7

A LEM/CSM and referred the requirement withdrawal; the SA-206 the

interface them to the

meeting Systems for

uncovered Engineering panel

a number Division

of design (SED) in earth prior orbit

problems to LEM during for a backup with the a link was SED's

for evaluation:

for ground requirement the absence flight;

verification

of panel deployment

deployment command

of a backup

to the

sequencer such link such

jettisoning the CSM (Flight Projects signal); and Grumman's opposition LEM during withdrawal of the needed through recommendations

Division [FPD] urged to a communications (FPD felt that system by April
1965"; "LEM-1 Systems

spacecraft

verification of reaction control on these issues were anticipated
Report, Engineering Lanzkron April 15, 1965. April 8-15, Division, to Chief,

ignition). 22.

MSC, "ASPO Weekly Management Lanzkron, MSC, to Chief, Systems ing," "LEM-1 April CSM 19, 1965; memorandum, Meeting,"

memorandum, CSM Interface Engineering

R. W. MeetDivision,

Interface

Goddard a deep installed space

Space space on

Flight

Center and Island, Apollo
1965,

awarded Bermuda, flights.
pp.

a $4.6 would

million support

contract The a variety

to RCA

for to be

tracking Cooper's including
and

data

acquisition

system.

equipment,

of NASA

missions,

Astronautics p. 231.

Aeronautics,

174-175;

Space

Business

Daily,

April

12,

1965,

8-15

The suited and

MSC portable

Crew life

Performance to put support on

Section and take systems also, the doff,

evaluated off their The these (PLSS). though subjects

the

ability

of two thermal had thermal some

pressuregarments

astronauts positioning

external subjects modified

considerable garments trouble

difficulty

the PLSS;

were much easier to don and inserting the second arm.
MSC, "ASPO V_reekly Management

still experienced

Report,

April

8-15,

1965."

8-15

Bell sion

Aerosystems system (the

tested first time

a pressure such extremely lines.
Report No. 27,"

transducer accurate at

for the used sensing

LEM's with

ascent hypergolic

propulfuels).

a device

was ever

The transducer proved between the propellant
Ibid.; "Mo,:hly l'rogress

pressure

differences

LI'R-10-43,

p. 13.

George nounced Kennedy, direct

E. Mueller,

Associate

Administrator

for

Manned

Space

Flight,

an-

the transfer of Fla., to Houston, from end
65-119, Flights,"

control Texas. of liftoff
"Mission April

over manned space flights from Cape MSC's Mission Control Center would through
Control

the flights
News

recovery.
Center at Houston to Handle GT-4,

NASA

Release Mamled

Subsequent

9, 1965.

108

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Crew and

Systems

Division

(CSD) protection factors

decided for underlying would the

on a single Apollo

garment

for both CSD's

thermal S.

1965
April 9

micrometeoroid summarized integrated

astronauts.

Richard

Johnston • The simplify greater than less

this decision: be LEM; easier to don and thus and (5 would afford lbs) less by LEM. duror garproand perhaps and

garment for leaving garment protective ascent

preparations visibility, dual-purpose two space, separate the

it would weigh And spacecraft about because

fit better 2.3 kg

mobility,

and access

to suit controls. would covers. of the it would consume

• The would storage

stage here, adverse before

could

be lightened

about three pounds. It was assumed that ing an jettison ment). • Conversely, cedure would even would Johnston impracticable, thermal and they shorten more lessen "immediate

Involved the most abort,"

also, was the abort conditions would crew (such could as the

weight of the be encountered the

the

depressurize

cabin

now-superfluous separate the astronauts'

equipment protective require stay

thermal/meteoroid the to the Moreover, rescue "staging" spacecraft and possibilities

garments--and modifications the would LEM. limit

entailed--would important, crew separate

outside

garments

safety. that, division if for any could garments.
Johnston, Unit (EMU) MSC, to Chief, and Systems meteoroid Engineering protection," Division, April 9,

emphasized the

reason return

the

integration to the concept

scheme of

proved separate

still

micrometeoroid
Richard Mohility S.

Memorandum. "'Extravehicular 1965.

thermal

Systems rectorate's manned either

Engineering missions. from the

Division (Currently

(SED) for the an CSM

reviewed up-data or from guidance

the system MSC.)

Flight in the computer SED

Operations LEM received concluded

Diduring data that,

recommendation computer

LEM's

in the

because the equipment tem did not warrant [10 lbs]) that it would
Owen

was not essential for mission the cost and weight penalties entail.
E. Maynard, MSC, to Manager, ASPO,

success, an up-data sys($750 000 and 4.54 kg

Memorandum, April 9, 1965.

"LEg(

up-data

system,"

The

Apollo by

Program Grulnman

Director, Space

Samuel Flight,

C. Phillips, George all Pratt

informed

the that LEM

Associate action fuel was cell

12

Administrator underway activity hy June fuel cell hardware plus spare parts

for Manned 30, 1965. a!ready would

E. Mueller, gc Whitney

to terminate

Pratt g: Whitney would complete produced and one complete I,EM to MSC 109 for iD-house testing.

testing of LEM fuel cell module

be sent

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAt:I:

A

CIIRONOLOGY

1965
April

North

American's at to exceed of the

Space Pratt

and

Inforn_ati_m on to tile ensure

Systems (;SM fuel meeting

Division cell the for

would 18

continue at lifetime a

development cost not

g: Whitney $2.5 million, system.

months

400-hour

requirement

CSM

MSC ment module to

would t ollowed at

contract by of

directly complete approximately their

with CSM

Pratt m_<lule S2.5

_c Whitney testing

for for (;rumman

CSM a

cell

developCSM

1000-hour was

a cost to

million.

scheduled 29, 1965.

propose

ASP()

battery

contractor

selection

on

April and

Memorandum, Phillips to Mueller, "Plans tm I,EM Effort," sgd. John H. 1)ishcr, April 12, 1965.

Fuel Cell Tcr,nination

Related

12

MSC

awarded

MIT

a new for

S15529000 spacecraft.

comract

to

design

guidance

and

navigation

equipment

Apollo

blSC, "Quarterly Activity Report for Office o1 the Space lqighl, for Period Ending April 30, 1965/' p. 25.

-_ssociate

Administrator,

Manned

13

Marshall contra¢t ing unit, Douglas' California, orbit and of

Space with a full-scale and an

Flight Douglas S-IVB Apollo

Center Aircraft forward thermal

finalized Company stage simulator.

a $2 to

697

546

addition for

to

an

existing test-

provide

environmental test be instrument

simulator, "lesting simulator Saturn

a full-scale would at

conducted Beach, to earth

in

11.89-mand injection

(39-ft-) would into

diameter

space

Huntington from launch

simulate lunar

a typical path.

V flight

A,strozmuties

and Aeronautics,

1965, p. 182; ._,'pa_c Bu,si,ess

Daily,

April 27, 1965, p. 317.

14

Construction of the Vertical fi)r

workers

emplaced

the Building

final at the m

beam Merritt

in

the Island

structural (KSC), (160 would vehicles m

skeleton Florida. [525 ft] a

Assembly completion 10 968 for in

Scheduled tall and

1966, cu

caveruous [129 Saturn million

structure cuft])

comprising enviromnent

476

provide and mating

controlled them

asseml)ling

V launch

to Apollo .4stronautics

spacecraft. and Aeronautics, 1965, p. 184.

15

The

first

firing at lasted

of White

the

LEM

ascent Missile

engine Range,

test New

rig

(HA-3)

was A second

successfully firing on

conducted April 30 sec, 23

Sands sec test

Mexico.

14.45 the

instead series. testing

of

10 sec A helium

as planned. pressurization

A third

firing,

lasting would be

completed before

system

installed

additional Report

could

begin. p]). 1, 13; GAEC, "Monthly Progress

"Monlhl_
Re]mr! No...8,

Progress

No. 27," IA'R-I0-t3,
June 10, 1965, p, I.

I.Pl{-l()-.t4,

110

ADVANCED DESIGN, FABRICATION, AND TESTING

The space simulator at Douglas Aircraft Company, Huntington Beach, Calif. (Douglas Photo)

ASPQ informed North American that a meeting would be held at its Downey, California, plant April 20-23 to negotiate and have signed off all Block I and Block 11 suit interface control documents (ICDs) and the government furnished equipment ICDs. Hamilton Standard, Grumman, and David Clark were being instructed to have representation present to achieve

1965
April
15

111

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April

the form

signed

ICDs.

North

American

was

instructed

to have

the

ICDs

in final

to be signed
C. L. Taylor,

or negotiated.
MSC, to NAA, Attn: J. c. Cozad, April 15, 1965.

TWX,

Midmonth

Officials cerned rangement egress and

from (MSFC,

North KSC,

American and did not MSC) The designs, or hatch.
NAA, to

and

the

three the

NASA environmental

centers

most umbilical rapid group

conarcrew put hood

discussed current emergency including

for the therefore

CM.

configuration lengthening

hampered This the

meet

requirements.

forth several and relocating
Internal Environmental I.etter,

alternative the door
E. P.

umbilical

Smith,

Distr., 15,

"Trip 1965.

Report--MSFC--Command

Module

Umbilical

Interface,"

April

15-22

Grnmman was anticipated
MSC, "ASPO

reviewed

the

engineering

simulation

program.

The

total

cost

at $9 million.
Weekly Management Reporl, April 15-22, 1965."

15-22

At North frame dralnatic April
/ bid.

American, disclosed demonstration

ultrasonic only minor of the

inspection imperfections improvement

of

the in in the

forward the bonding

portion process."

of called

air"a (See

007 1-8.3

bonding,

15-22

MSC

and

(;rnmman The that

reviewed

the

program

for

the

LEM's

reaction

control MSC alone

system. felt that should
Ibid.; Reynolds,

only issue outstanding was effort was "overestimated" support
W. RCS F.

(;launman's and that

in-house effort: the manufacturer

not

handle

from
Rector April

subcontractors.
III, 22, MSC, 1965. to Assist:mr Manager, ASPO, Attn: H. L.

memorandum, "LEM

Status,"

15-22

North righting
"ASI'O Report,"

American system.
Weekly SlD

began

full-scale

developmental

testing

on

the

CM's

up-

Management 62-300-37, p. 3.

Report,

April

15

2'2,

1965";

"Apollo

Monthly

Progress

16

MSFC S-1C). produced Associate nificance landing

conth,cted The 33 360

the

first five

clustered F-1 (7.5

firing million

of the lbs)

Saturn for al)out

V's first George E.

stage

(the and

booster's

engilles

Imrned

63:,/_,seconds

kilonewtons

thrnst.

Mueller,

Administrator for Manned Space Flight, emphasized the sigof this test, calling it "'one of the key milestones in the whole lunar prograln." 112

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Eight days later, at American first fired event April.
Astronautics p. 276; Ibid., and April

its static the S-II, as the

facility in intermediate "second

Santa Susana, California, stage of the Saturn Saturn V milestone"

North V. The during

1965
April

was

chronicled

major

Aero_mutics, 28,

1965,

pp.

188,

198;

Space

Business

Daily,

April

20,

1965,

1965, p. 322. 16

Owen that

E. Maynard, the ordering and

Chief replaced

of MSC's Systems into two with

Engineering and

Division, third primary order and

announced had been secondary

of objectives

first, second, classifications:

discontinued

objectives. Primary objectives were defined as those which were mandatory. Malfunctions of spacecraft or launch vehicle systems, ground equipment, or instrumentation which would result in faihtre to achieve these objectives would be cause to hold or cancel ohjectives the mission were those until the malfunction desirable had been trot not eliminated. Secondary considered

mandatory. Malfunctions would be cause to hold
Memorandum, April 16, 1965. Owen E.

resulting in failure to achieve these objectives or cancel the mission as indicated in Mission Rules.
Maynard, MSC, to Distr., "Changes to objective classification,"

Two CSM fuel cells failed qualification 101.75 hrs of the vacuum endurance test. termined that the failure was caused and plugged trodes. The preparation An internal the oxygen lines fuel cell would procedures short Block
Monthly

testing, the first Pratt and Whimey fluid which the oxygen qualification

failing after Aircraft decontaminated

16-May

15

by a cleaning

and ctmtaminated be rebuilt for to be revised. in the test.

gas at the electesting and test

were

circuit I mission
l'rogress

occurred

second and did

fuel

cell failure

16 hrs the

l)efore

the

end of the 400-hour the current
"Apollo

qualification

In spite

of the

fuel

cell met

specification
SID 62-300-37,

not need

to be redesigned.

Report,"

p. 10.

North SM's

American reaction
p. 11; 1965

completed system.
"Project 18 April

qualification

testing

on

the

fuel

tanks

for

the

16-May

15

control
NAA, through

Ibid.,

Apollo 1965),"

Spacecraft p. 3.

Test

l'rogram

Weekly

Activity

Report

(12 April

On the basis of current systems reliabilities and North American estimated at one in a hundred ing Apollo crewmen The contractor used plate 28 and
"Apollo

the design reference inission, the possibility that returnon for water. boiler-

16-May

15

would land this estimate 002A and

on solid ground rather than in formulating test programs 007.
p. 12.

spacecraft
Progress

Monthly

Report,"

S1D 62-300-37,

113

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April 16-May 15

North

Amerit:an

halted

testing

on the

hydrogen Testing on

tanks

for the

CSM, tank

produced assembly

by Beech, because began on May 8.

of weld

failures.

a redesigned

Ibid., p. 9; "Project Apollo Spacecraft through 18 April 1965)," p. 5.

Test

Plogram

Weekly

Activity

Report

(12

April

19-2 6

North tween

Anlerican, the space MSC

Hamilton meeting suit and directed the

Standard, ill Downey, two North blocks

(;rumman, California, of spacecraft. and

David resolved Grumman

Clark, all As a result

and

MSC besome

representatives, agreements,

interfaces to make

of these

American

minor changes (suggested by the Crew Systems Division) tions cables; to remove the portable life support systems to add thermal
"ASI'O Johnston, (EMU) Asst. Chief,

in the communicafrom the CM; and providing merely

a thermal-meteoroid protection--to the
Weekly MSC, thermal Management to and Chief, meteoroid Control

garment--rather CM.
Report, April 22-29, Division, April (;. J. (EMIT) 9,

than

one

1965";

memorandum,

Richard Mobility Johnston of RECP's Unit

S. to

Systems

Engineeling protection," Attn: Unit

"Extravehicular 1.°,65; memorandum, "Implementation and meteoroid

l'rogram

l)ivision. Mobilit:_

Stoops, thermal

pertaining to Extravehicular April 21, 1965.

protection,"

2O

NASA

and

Boeing Boeing

negotiated would furnish Space

a contract Flight

modification. program

For

an and

additional engineertesting

$3 135 977, ing support of the Saturn
Astronautics

instrumentation Center's

equipment

for Marshall V.
and Aeronautics,

for dynamic

1965,

p. 191;

Space

Bu._iness

Daily,

April

22,

1965,

p. 291.

2O

At the initial design engineering inspection (DEI) at Downey, California, MSC and North American compatibility Review further Board study.
Daniel 009 p. 3. A. Nehrig, 1," MSC, April to 20, I)istr., 1965; "Minutes "Apollo of

of Spacecraft 009, officials reviewed requirements. The 26 others assigned

held the DEI for

of the

vehicle 11

with

SA-201

mission changes and

approved

hardware

Memorandum, [or SID AFRM 62-300-37,

Houston

Board Progress

Review Report,"

DEIIl'hase

Monthly

2O

The must

ASP() be

CSM

Project Toward had been

Officer, the that FY end, and

C. L. Taylor, 1965 said expenditures he directed that several the

said attention

that on North and

immediate the CSM to a cost had of

action program reduction

taken "Project Squeeze

to reduce Squeeze,"

by $5 million. program, Project significant mended

a joint

American/NASA resulted in items recom-

in operation were North

months majority

program for investigation

reductions.

However,

American-oriented. 114

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Taylor 1965, fication analytical

requested and pointed effort, programs,

items out

for consideration some specifics quantities, to excess,
MSC, to Distr.,

be submitted which tests, (5)
"Project

no later be considered:

than

April testing,

27, (3)

1965
April

might etc.,

(1) quali(6) changes.

hardware (4) design
C. L. Taylor,

(2) component and
20, 1965.

documentation,
Squeeze," April

Memorandum,

MSC requested Grunnnan to make portable life support system (PLSS) batteries batteries
TWX,

provisions batteries. storage
Attn: R.S.

for storage of two additional This was an increase of two requirement for six.
Ivlullaney, April 20, 1.°,65.

2O

over

the

previous

requirement;

now

was

for

two

in the PLSS
W. F. Rector lII,

and additional
MSC, to GAEC,

MSC's

Systems

Engineering

Division

requested

that

Grulnman

be

advised

2O

to terminate It had been data presented complete

the RCA determined

systems engineering that this contra_t during save about
MSC, NAS 9-1100,

subcontract as soon as possible. was rio longer useful. Based on review, an immediate and

by Grumnlan would
E.

a program $45 000.
to Chief, RCA

termination
Owen Review

Memorandum, "LEM April Program 20, 1965.

Maynard

Contract

Engineering

Branch,

Contract

Systems

Engineering

Sub-Contract,"

Grumman the structure Grumman possible tures and

and

MSC

engineers LEM. that the being Based

discussed on present studied (SMD):

the

effect

of was

landing loading inadequate. and

impacts conditions,

on

21-22

of the reported

analyses jointly

of critical by

confignration

Several the Struc-

solutions Mechanics

were

Grumman

Division the and

• Strengthening weight of the ascent spectively) • Modifying • Reducing velocity

spacecraft's descent stages

structure by 19 and

(which

would

increase 70 lbs],

the re-

32 kgs [42 and

the gear factors of safety and landing dynamics, including vertical

at touchdown was expected from SMD by June 1. the that, performance the latter's SMD was company's rather be than should study modifed. on the a The

A decision Also design

Grumman of the

representatives footpads. design, the They current

summarized recommended rigid footpad

adopting

stroking-type modification, the stroking

they said, would improve design, without entailing lowered reliability.

as much as would increased weight and evaluating Grumman's

complexity and recommendations.
MSC, "ASPO Weekly

Management

Report,

April

22-29,

1965."

115

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April 22

MSC LEM $23.2

completed and million).

the

program the cost

review through

on

the

electrical of

power the

system program

for the (about

approved

completion

Ibid.

22

The MSC Systems Engineering Division published revisions to Apollo Mission 204A objectives and mission requirements. The principal difference between the revised version and the Initial Mission Directive for Mission 204 was the the expansion radiation of the secondary meter garment propulsion which thermal and system was blanket performance and the objectives objective, survey objective, deleted,

don/doff of the Block I pressure which had also been deleted.
Memorandum, to Apollo 22, 1965. Owen Mission E. Maynard, objectives MSC, and

to

Apollo

Trajectory

Support sgd. C.

Office, H.

"Revisions April

204A

mission

requirements,"

Perrine,

22

The

LEM

Project Committee areas, with

Officer

notified had

Grumman established

that

the

President's to work

Scientific on specific was suits. with

Advisory technical concerned This regard ments, stration measures. May 17, Standard
TWX,

(PSAC)

sub-panels

beyond the full the environmental representation through and material a primary 24.
IIl, MSC, to

PSAC briefings. One control subsystem, from Hamilton of the assessment be available meeting

of the sub-panels including space to discuss design

group to the of

desired

Standard reliability and of

LEM-ECS reliability,

its interpretation its frank should discussion

requireits demonin these by

its implementation Briefing 1965, with on May
W. F. Rector MSC,

development

test phases, confidence to the held at

sub-panel Hamilton

to be

GAEC,

Attn: Attn:

R. E.V.

S. Mullaney, Marshall,

April April

22,

1965;

TWX,

W. L. Corm,

to Hamilton

Standard,

22, 1965.

22

(;rumman equipment
TWX,

was requested to field
W. F. Rector

to ship

ground

support

equipment

and

associated

test sites as soon
III, MSC, to GAEC,

as it was available.
Attn: R. S. Mullaney, April 22, 1965.

22

Grumman was requested to attend reasons as to why the LEM reaction could required
TWX,

a meeting control with the additional

at MSC and to present system (RCS) propellant CSM RCS propellant program development

their tanks tanks. was

not

be of common was to also for the LEM
W. F. Rector

technology say why an

Grumman

tanks.
to GAEC, Attn: R.S. Mullaney, April 22, 1965.

11I, MSC,

116

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

North

American

conducted

the

final

zero-g

trials and

(part

of developmental good results

1965
April 22-23

testing on the CM's waste management for both urine and feces apparatus.
"Apollo Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-37,

system)

reported

p. 4.

After Bell

reviewing and training

the Control vehicle

status were

of more
Report,

the than
April

LEM reported

landing that

simulation "significant

program, data" from

the the

22-29

Guidance

Division

a year away.
22-29, 1965."

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Allison failures

Division in the

of General LEM descent

Motors stage's

Corporation propellant

completed tanks.

an

analysis

of rebe

22-29

Investigators

placed

the blame on brittle forgings. MSC's Propulsion and Power Division ported that "efforts are continuing to insure [that] future forgings will satisfactory."
Ibid.

Crews ing for the

Systems and by upcoming

Division that critical

reported design

that mockups

work had

on The

the visor

suit sent

visors

was

progressAmerican and protection

22-29

well,

operational

been it

to North thermal

review. also,

could

be attached

detached and allowed
Ibid.

a pressurized a complete range

crewman; of light

afforded

attenuation.

North

American

updated

the

electrical

power

profile

for

spacecraft

011:

22-29

Requirement Prelaunch Ascent Entry Postlanding During spacecraft's control would
Ibid.

(watt-hours) 159 4457 1032 2288

the

flight, fuel

the cells;

entry three and the

and

landing

batteries batteries At

would would touchdown,

supplement the all

the mission

auxiliary

power

programmer supply energy

instrumentation. requirements.

batteries

for postlanding

MSC

and

Grumman 10.

conducted and

the

design

engineering Division called

inspection

on

LEM that

23

test article

Structures

Mechanics 117

it "significant"

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April

there ment latter's

were

no

requests Oklahoma, delivery
W. F. Rector of the "Minutes

for

design

changes. testing until
to (;AEC. l)e_elopment

The May 28.
Attn: Engineering R.

vehicle

was ready American,

for shipbut, at the

to Tulsa, request,
letteR', Minutes

for static was delayed
Ill, of MSC, LTA-10

by North

Ihid.; 9-1100,

S.

Mullaney,

"Contract April 29, April

NAS 1965, 23,

LTA-10

Development

Inspection,"

with enclosure: 1965."

Engineering

Inspection,

26

North shields shields

American from Avco received
Monthly

received by the
Progress

CM

009

forward

and

crew were ablative

compartment the first CM application.

heatheat-

Corporation. contractor
Report," SID

These with

heatshields complete
p. 1.

"Apollo

62-300-37,

26

Operating (;enter (See July
"ASPO

tm began 7-9.)
Weekly

a round-the-clock simulations

schedule,

researchers aborts and

at

Langley

Research dockings.

of high-altitude

CSM-active

Management

Report,

.April

22-29,

1965."

26-May

2

Using 009. and

hoilerplate The then test internal
"Project I_.Ri5 through

14, North was conducted power.
Apollo 2 May

American in two showed

simulated phases, with satisfactory
Weekly

the the

mission vehicle performance.

for spacecraft on external

All data
Spacecraft 1965)." Test

NAA, April

l'rogram

Activity

Report

(Period

26

27

ASPO be held review Program and The

announced at Grumman would Plan be and

that

a LEM during

Test the first

Program week with missions. allocation

Reqtfirement in June. Grumman The on an

Review purpose overall

would of the Test

to reach to consider

agreement planned to flight

of hardware,

test schedules,

test logic review

in relationship would result catalog form above testing

in publication the program the basis for of flight part level at Grumman, the

of a certification of testing, certification missions. being higher of on

document

which

would define and tion which would capable vendors, conducted of meeting testing component anywhere qualification

analysis, and rationalizaof flight spacecraft as It would done level test at logic, cover all formal or testing such subcontractors of assembly and test vehicles individual

requirements

in support

of a portion

system test requirements as LEM test article 1. The gram MSC format for the review

to be conducted

integrated

would

consist

of individual

subsystem

test

pro-

reviews by the respective MS(; and Grumman Subsystem Managers. Subsystem Managers would be supported by RASP(), ASP(), and GE 118

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

personnel Grumman review tests, with

where board,

appropriate. would

After summarize deficiencies problems,

their their and

initial findings

meeting,

the

MSC

and

1965
April

Managers

to a MSC/(irumman (to include which were inadequate inconsistent

emphasizing availability

in the program schednles

hardware flight

support
Owen April

requirements).
E. Maynard 27, 1965. MSC, to Distribution, "LEM Test Program Require-

Memorandum, ments Review,"

North

American

stunmarized

its position

on

the

design

of the

CM

for earth since the 25, 1964, as the

27

impact in a letter to MSC. A numl)er of meetings had taken place NASA/North Ainerican Technical Management Meeting February at which primary The of the landing decision site. the history of boilerplate during the 28 drop two tests and was made to reorient Apollo impact

to water

letter MSC/North

reviewed

a series of 1964 Cali-

American

meetings

last

months at Downey,

and the first two of 1965. On February fornia, North American had recommended: • Design • Retain design of upper should plastic spacecraft continue figuration Block II. for 0.99999 the 27.5: crew criteria. hang angle

12, at a meeting

to eliminate side wall. The

the

requirement dual hang angle subseqnently

for through

retim-

compartment

be eliminated deformation 009 with

for spacecraft of the of possible a probability 28 testing

017 and

• Allow • Continue • Fly 0.999, and criterion.

aft heatshield. upper to give deck and at ttmnel water problems. impact of this of success

investigation boilerplate

assurance

of meeting

In a follow-up mendations At the time changes

meeting in the form of the April

on March of signed

2, NASA meeting North CM

gave minutes.

concurrence

to these

recom-

27 letter, in the Apollo

American design

was changes

implementing for water

the impact.

design

defined

The changes were based on North American's ments between it and MSC regarding criteria, mate land envelope, within
J. C. .0-150, Earth

best understanding loads, definition that by
B. Alldredge, Command

of agreeof the ultino-leakage test.
"Contract Module

structural ultimate
North for April Project

analysis, load
to

and be

the requirement demonstrated
Attn: of J.

integrity
Letter, NAS for

the
Cozad,

level
NASA

American, Apollo

MSC, Design

R&D

Spacecraft

Apollo

Impact,"

27, 1965.

LEM the

Project minimum

Officer

_,V. F. Rector NASA

III,

in a letter

to Grumman,

established the inspec-

27

acceptable

requirements 119

for accomplishing

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April

tion, acceptance, and delivery major ground test vehicles.

operations

at

Bethpage,

N.Y.,

on

flight

and

Following undergo an active for Mercury evolved

manufacture, a thorough member and the the of CSM

and checkout portion

prior

to NASA team.

acceptance, with Through a team The

the MSC experience

spacecraft participating in proved

must as had highly which and In evaluaProjects

by the

contractor

a checkout

of Apollo, activities. of MSC problems to both of skills

concept concept

of operations had

aforementioned

successful in providing a balance assured that the evaluation of resulted addition, tion Prior in this solutions "cross acceptable pollination" performance acceptance

and contractor personnel received proper attention NASA provided and the contractors. complete a more

of the spacecraft to starting

and systems testing, all

anomalies. should have completed a

systems

pre-installation configuration plete were tute installation Equipment the

acceptance check, verified. Acceptance of all subsystems After The which that the time ACE hook-up (ACE).

been installed in the spacecraft, and the checkout would begin following comand was hook-up installed, of ACE team all to the to the would system work Acceptance Checkout tests constia means to be perwould provide testing individual spacecraft assume must and subsystems responsibility

to he performed. point at At and

checkout recording

for the vehicle. for authorizing formed
Letter, NASA April

a documentation

permanently

on the spacecraft.
W. F. Rector Ill, for MSC, Inspection, to GAEC, Attn: R. aqd S. Mullaney, l)elivery "Contract Operations at NAS 9-1100,

Requirements 27, 1965.

Acceptance

Bethpage,"

27--30

Part system

II of the for the 27A.

Critical Block (Part

Design II CM

Review was held held

of the

crew 23-24.) 49

compartment California,

and using

docking mockups

at Downey,

28 and

I had been

on March

• Systems quested most (2) and in the serious

Engineering crew problems and were: knees

Division (1) stowage striking

reported 45 of which of the the main Division

design acted console a crew

changes upon. life support number transfer the the

were The

retwo

compartment,

were portable

systems; of and minor opera-

the crewmen's

display reported

at impact.

• Structures

Mechanics

changes to the docking system, tion of the hatch mechanisms. • Crew of the craft. adequate versions space CSD Systems suit and reported Division MSC's that the

primarily (CSD) new suits

to simplify engineers helmet sufficiently

evaluated with

compatibility Block and II spaceearly still afforded

in-house were

mobile

visibility; of the suit,

problems had been

with the shoulders, solved; and while 120

experienced in the three crewmen

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

quite longer

literally hampered
"ASPO

rubbed

elbows,

this problem

also

had

been

alleviated

and

no

1965
April

the crew's
Management

performance.
Report, April 29-May 6, 1965."

MSC,

Weekly

NASA Dryden, the the without

Administrator and Associate

James of any group

E.

Webb, crew

Deputy should

Administrator Jr., that Apollo should as long

Hugh decided as long training,

L. that as

28

Administrator Apollo was training

Robert

C. Seamans, be delayed reasoned there generalized They

announcement jeopardizing astronaut entire

as feasible

schedules. undergoing

and until individual mission to make even tentative crew
Memorandum, Seamans Mueller, "Apollo Crew

planning selections.

was complete,

be no need

to Associate Administrator Selection," April 28, 1965.

for

Manned

Space

Flight

George

E.

Joseph mendation

F. Shea, and

ASP() the promised

Manager, "shirtsleeve" greater

approved overall and only in and

Crew mission

Systems for the reliability; part of the

Division's CM. space inside had heat The suit the explored exchanger operations, system. schedule partly during also,

recomdesign it would would cabin. the for the North impacts successful

28

to retain comfortable problems the be of 012. gain advised, fully putting It was crew

environment _,Vearing

was simpler be more compotmd Accordingly, or would feasibility airframe crew could water manned could American --condensation

for the crewmen. with would a water hoped suited. humidity be clad (MSC that, in the that such separator

condensation in their the American cabin partially cost would Shea suited and be only operations

constant-wear

garments

North

through spacecraft's considerable a device

confidence however, Moreover, would and flight.)
Joseph F. Shea,

pressurization

be expected. separator Apollo

still the

be a major of partially

problem. suited

therefore

vetoed the

the first

idea

Memorandum. 1965.

MSC,

to

Distr.,

"Wear

of space

suits

in C/M,"

April

28,

Under on the Division.
MSC,

NASA contract, proton irradiation of primates tests were conducted Oak Ridge cyclotron by a team from Brooks AFB and Crew Systems During
"ASPO Weekly

28-Ma y 3

this

period,

136 monkeys
Report, May 6-13,

and
1965."

900

mice

were

irradiated.

Management

Portable CM would American would

life

support prevent

systems the crew

(PLSS) couch the

stowed from in

against stroking was a water

the aft bulkhead fully. forced landing, This inward. the

in the condition North bulkhead

be aggravated spokesmen

if, at impact, maintained

bulkhead

that, 121

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
April

would their cern were lessen safety); disastrous invited Houston
"ASI'O Haines,

give limits. only the adamant

only They

slightly argued,

and

that On

the the

couch that this contrary,

struts said

would MSC.

not would

compress

to

therefore,

condition

be of conofficials it would crew obviously capability to meet 12.)
Charles R.

in a land that attenuation the results). representatives to deal
Weekly MSC, to

landing. any capability bulkhead Because transfer from the

Center jeopardizing (with the

interference might of from the question
Report, Maynard, April "PLSS,"

was of the this the

absolutely couch even be

unacceptable: (thereby ruptured because LEM involved (See
memorandum,

possibly,

problem--and CM of to the three contractors PI,SS
6, 25, 1965.

for extravehicular

was required--MSC in May

with
Management Owen E.

stowage.
1965";

29-May May

29-May

6

(;rumman propellant NASA's aborted.
"ASPO

recommended system of ground rule the that

redundant

pyrotechnic

or

solenoid

valves

in

the

LEM's ascent stage. Thus the firm could no single failure would cause the mission

meet to be

Weekly

Management

Report,

April

29-May

6,

1965."

29-May

6

The

Flight

Projects at Merritt checkout FPD's and be and plan

Division Island at the was to

(FPD)

proposed

a change

in

the

checkout would facility. from where the to study the the new its

procedure eliminate Basically, Operations ECS would procedure, feasibility.
Ibid.

(KSC). The environmental transport

idea, drawn from control system the mated CSM

Gemini, (ECS)

directly

Checkout Building tested. Officials at FPD requested the

to the North

altitude American and Test

chamber, approved Division

Chet:kout

3O

Grumman vendor a proposal this latter
Ibid.

advised for batteries

MSC

that Electric

it had stages

selected of the

the

Eagle-Picher At the same for the a sizable models

Company time, weight ascent because saving,

as

in hoth produce

LEM. promised

by Yardney firm would

Company

"pre-production"

stage.

30

North signed

American to improve

announced operational

an program.

Apollo The

Engineering and to be reorganization

Reorganization, consistent would: with

deexisting and and sup-

efficiency

requirements

of the Apollo

(1) increase

the number of managers, but reduce eliminate one level of management, better port communications; equipment systems (2) incorporate engineering

the individual manager's scope making for clearer assignments certain functions 122 checkout into and ground

Systems

Engineering,

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

strengthening cednres; Engineering vision,
NAA, Osbon,

the and (3) were

integration basic being the

capabilities of

and

simplifying engineering and

operational within Engineering

proApollo Di-

1965
April

functions transferred effective

analytical to the

Research and

increasing

use of technical

management
Manager, Supervision,

personnel.
and H. G. "Apollo

Organization Announcement, Dale D. Chief Engineer, Apollo Engineering, Reorganization," April 30, 1965.

Myers, Apollo l'rogram to Apollo Engineering

Engineering

A tentative sion personnel test scheduling times relating schedule not sion early The start rig)

a_eement concerning

was

reached the

between

Grumman System

and

MSC

propulFacility's

3O

Propnlsion

Development

at White Sands to the ascent and that until therefore the ascent 1967. April

operations in regard descent development LEM The Test PA-1 to prove Article rig the

to stand occupancy rigs. The tentative vehicle ascent and would propulsupport

showed testing would

(LTA)-5 (prototype final design

be required

I,EMs. PA-I rig was designed tanks, and advantages with was the requested tanks and was being no plans running fabricated to accommodate small ones. duraaccom-

propellant Therefore, tions, and Grumman modate or other
TWX,

there were of flexibility, tank and outlet install to take

to update it with larger tests of hmger sustained would to ha_e tanks by not the use be rig action

final

configurations the smaller

realized.

immediate

the larger methods.
W. F. Rector

of adapters

In,

MSC,

to (;AEC,

Attn:

R.S.

Mullaney,

April

30, 1965.

As a result

of the

decision

for an all-battery

LEM,

MSC

advised

Grumman

3O

that power for the be drawn from that prior to separation). the two spacecraft From furnish
TWX,

entire pre-separation module's batteries and

checkout of the spacecraft would (instead of only dnring the 30 minutes the electrical mating between battery charger in the CSM. however, the CSM would still

This change simplified obviated an additional start of the checkout,

docking power
James

until

the

to the LEM.
L. Neal, MSC, to GAEC, Attn: R.S. Mullaney. April 30, 1965.

Gruminan (1)

reported Space

two

major

problems

with (STL)

the asked

LEM's that

descent the thrust

engine: chamber the cur-

During the Month

Technology

Laboratories Weight

be lengthened rent

by 13.9 cm (5.5 in).

penalty

would

be 11.3 kg (25 lbs). heatshield,

(2) STL conclnded that, if used nozzle extension would melt.
"Monthly Progress Report No. 27," LI'R-10_t3,

with

Gruinman's

pp.

3, 13.

123

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
May !

North American and NASA on boilerplate 23A at White approved ing four requests on the on boost
Dodson,

officials conducted Sands Missile Range, structural cover,
Distr., "Results

an engineering New Mexico. a fifth slated
DEI on

inspection The board involvstudy.
4,

minor

changes; was
of

request,

tolerances

protective
MSC, to

for further
BP-23A," May

Memorandum, Joe w. 1965, with enclosures.

Systems nician's the only vironment overall was a firm

Engineering suit by and system. test integrated For

Division subjects spacecraft that reason

did test use

not

concur 008

in use tests.

of the

chamber 008

techenthe I suit

in AFRM under considered

AFRM step

represented

a simulated a significant flight

thermal-vacuum in man-rating Block

was therefore

of the

configuration

requirement

for the AFRM

008 tests.

The same rationale chamber tests. Only mobility unit garments
Owen

would be applicable to the LEM and Block II vehicle flight configured spacecraft hardware and extravehicular would
E. Maynard, Block I Space

be used
MSC, Suit

by test subjects.
Crew AFRM Systems 008," Division, sgd. Robert "'Utilization W. Williams, of

Memorandum, a Flight May 3, 1965.

to Chief, with

Configured

R.

Wayne

Young ASP(), May 3.

was At the

appointed the same time Officer

Chief functions Branch, for

of the

LEM was

Contract Officer appointed would and Joe of II the

Engineering for the LEM, of the autofor the Electric Chief

Branch, effective Gg:N/ACE for matic Apollo Support all

to perform

of Project ASPO, the and Little and

M. E. Dell

Contract

Engineering

be responsible systems General

functions checkout spacecraft, Contract.

of Project and for

guidance

navigation,

equipment-spacecraft, technical

management

Memorandum, Engineering craft I'rogram

J. Thomas Branch Office," and May

Markley, Chief, 4, 1965.

/vlSC,

to

l)istr.. Contract

"Assignment Engineering

of

Chief. Branch,

LEM Apollo

Contract Space-

Gg:N/ACE

Technical personnel failure that occurred tests. from the The failure a fingerprint test be repeated
TWX, Ma_ C. L. Taylor, 4, 1965.

at MSC became concerned over an RCS oxidizer in February 1965, during propellant exposure and had previously tank tighter
to NAA,

tank creep caused that

been shell

explained heat

as stress treat. NASA

corrosion requested

on the under
MSC,

before

controlled
Space and

procedures.
Information Division, Attn: J. c. Cozad,

A Panel Flight Flight

Review (()MSF) Mechanics

Board Panel

(PRB) attended.

meeting and the

was held MSC and

at Office MSFC

of Manned Chairmen

Space of the

in Washington

124

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Prior revealed Samuel orbital 205. an PRB

to the that flight The additional was

formal

meeting, had the no that that for an

discussions recommended contingency unmanned to lack was obtain of

with mission

T. to

Thompson Apollo for AS for mission 204 from was the

and Program be

B. Kaskey Director planned for MSFC stage. conin com-

1965
May

Bellcomm and

C. Phillips reason

204 be an unmanned to give S-IVB

contingency contingency orbital specific data

unmanned

opportunity informed that

requirements Flight Mechanics

concerning Panel

tingency

mission

capability

hampering

pletion of interface control documents Contingency capability was classified ity to provide of the launch for failures and during the hardware; vehMe.
C.

and associated mission development. into two types: (1) contingency capabilflight program due or schedule adjustments of the to malfunction

(2) in-flight

contingencies

Memorandum, Report on Panel

H.

Perrine, Board

MSC, Meeting

to

Chief,

Systems

Engineering May

Division, 7, 1965.

"Trip

Review

at OMSF,

May 4, 1965,"

NASA

Associate

Administrator

for Manned

Space

Flight R. Gilruth Network.

George

E. Mueller a he

concurred three-station understood station, network would academic
Letter,

with a plan of MSC Director Robert developmental Solar Particle Alert that (,ilruth you out will under would examine contract," "review having and could of data.
Alert Network,"

to implement Mueller said for the related felt the one Guaymas

the all adding

necessity data reduction that he

and

that

to this program or more

carried be enhanced

if arrangement in the analysis
"Solar Particle

be made

to involve

institutions
Mueller

to Gilruth,

May

4, 1965.

A preliminary flight readiness (BP) 22. Several participants integrity of the boost protective quired for pressure measurements) Division representatives argued They stressed that BP-23's

review voiced cover,

was held in Houston serious doubts about because of its sizable

on boilerplate the structural cutouts (reMechanics however. greater of the

and its poor fit. Structures and that the article not be modified, which also fit poorly, Final endured

cover,

dynamic pressures than were anticipated for Bp-92. cover would be made at _,VSMR. (See May 19, 1965.)
"ASPO Weekly Management Report, May 6-13, 1965."

inspection

Although ment

North

American II CSMs

was including (as NASA had

real-time directed),

digital the

command firm

equip-

in Block

recommended

that such equipment based their contention impacts; flights.
Letter, Contract Command E. E. Sack, Change NAA,

not be placed on Block on two factors: (1) the capability was not

I vehicles. anticipated essential

North American cost and schedule during earth orhital

and

(2) command

to

NASA

MSC,

Atm: Revision Block

J.

B. 1,

Alldredge, Preliminary; May

"Contract Real 4, 1965,

NAS Time with

9-150, Radio

Proposal on

S11)-150-370, Block I and

Requirements

II

CSM's,"

enclosure.

125

THE 1965 May 4

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

MSC 020 sion and such

directed with engine. the Flight

North to April

American monitor

to

provide

spacecraft instability Propulsion in

012, tile and on the would the device

014, service Power

017,

and

a system (On

combustion of ASP(),

propulDivision, of autoastro-

8, officials

Operations Should down out the the

Directorate vibrations engine. become Manual system

had

agreed

desirability would the

a system.) shut to lock

excessive, controls and to

matically nauts

enable the engine.

automatic

restart

l.etter, J. B. Alldredge, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division, "Contract Change Authorization No. 347." May 4, 1965; memorandum, Christopher C. Kraft, Jr., MSC, to Manager. 1965. ASPO, "Flight Combustion Stability Monitor (FCSM)," May 13,

In

resptmse

to

a query,

Apollo

ProgTam for Manned

Director Space

Samuel Flight the for CSM, the of the

C. George LEM,

Phillips E. and

told Mueller extra-

NASA that

Associate plans to use astronauts reviewed. (USB)

Administrator VHF

communications and to use X-band

between radar the installed the earth.

vehicular were S-Band

CSM/LEM nsing CSM the and

tracking Unified LEM for

Bellcomm type with which and

reexamined would tracking be by

merits in

communication

It

was

found from there an

that all

no USB be

appreciable system no in

weight the Apollo

saving

or

weight Also,

penalty it in all S-band and was

wottld deterthe

result mined system. at that

spacecraft. or

would noted,

significant that of an the

advantage implementation design cost of and Only the

disadvantage of an CSM,

using

It was stage of

however,

system astronaut

development incur

LEM, penalty. S-Band

equipment

would

obvious

schedule Unified

Memorandum, Phillips to Mueller, "Use of Equipment in Apollo Spacecraft," May 5, 1965.

Communication

After North

lengthy American 2H-1 in hatches II standard through and replace

investigations to and space and incorporate 2TV-1. without those During hatch the when the use an wtmld of

of

cost airlocks

and on

schedule CMs 008 enable their to this to

impacts, and 014,

MSC 101

directed through

1 12, and experiments standard Block the

The

device having to

would leave were

astronauts vehicle. be

to conduct Initially, the on changed: of airlock hatch an

with October, be

airlocks

interchangeable was

spacecraft. outer

however, strut:tured kit

concept

permit as

incorporation part of the inner

airlock assembly); would

a conversion was

(included an

airlock one.

installed,

interchangeable

standard

TWX, Samuel C. Phillips, NASA, to MSC, Attn: J. F. Shea, January 4, 1965; letters, J. B. AIIdredge, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division (SgclD), "Contract Change Authorization No. 348," May 6, 1,_5; Alldredge, MSC, to NAA, S&ID, "Contract Change Authorization No. 348, Revision l," July 27. 1965; James Stroup, MSC, to NAA, S&ID, "Contract Change Authorization No. 348, Revision 2," August 4, 1965; Alldredge, MSC, to NAA, SgzID, "Contract Change Authorization No. 441/' October il, 1965. 126

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

ASP()

overruled

a recommendation link in the spacecraft's

by

the

Flight

()perations

Directorate

1965
May 6

for an up-data data into the were prohibitive

LEM. Although compnter was

an automated deemed "highly

means of inserting desirable," there

consequences: kg (16 lbs) million delay--five ASP()
William May

• Weight--7.25 • Cost--S1.7 • Schedule This last effect
Memorandum, Up-Data Link."

in the ascent

stage

months "flatly
MSC.

termed
A. Lee, 6, 1965.

unacceptable."
l)irector for Flight Operations, "LEM

to Assistant

As a result previous compare and to fabricate hindered
TWX, 6, 1965;

of the

Critical Crew space with

Design suit

Review with

at

North directed

American Hamilton zipper. which leaked

during CSD

tire would

month,

Systems

Division

(CSD) gusset

Standard excessively

an Apollo donning

a pressure-sealing design,

this concept

the current

the suit.
MSC, to R. E. Bleeding, Report, June Hamilton 3-10, Standard 1965." Division, May

Richard MSC,

S. Johnston, "ASPO Weekly

Management

The (BP) BP-22 chutes

Apollo (see before

earth May the

landing Calif. also, 19);

system The full
SID

(ELS) drop

was tested removed

in a drop on trial

of boilerplate the (see EI.S June for para3). main

19 at E1 Centro, start
Progress

constraints test program

it was a "prequalification" qualification
62-300-37, p. 3.

of the

of the
Report,"

"Apollo

Monthly

Both

General of

Electric using generator the the

and during

Radio initial of the serious.
Report,

Corporation phases adapter of the about

of

America

studied heat The from back

the the

6--13

feasibility radioisotope would raise spacecraft
MSC,

spacecraft-LEM-adapter

to dissipate mission. 30:; radiation

generator to the

temperature

was not considered
"ASPO Weekly Management

May

6-13,

1965."

Structures LEM-adapter mediately planned attenuators
Ibid.

and after

Mechanics wotfld not the jettisoning

Division survive of tipper 009. the

engineers a hinges service and launch

determined propulsion escape fasteners tower.

that

tire spacecraftabort imAmerican the shock

6-13

system North

to strengthen on spacecraft

and to resize

127

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
May 7

Launch ing the
"Apollo

escape

system

(LES)

installation

for CSM

009

was completed,

mark-

first LES completion.
Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-37, p. I.

The on Sir

U.S.S.R. a trajectory Bernard

launched to Lovell, the

a 1476-kg moon. the speculated

(3254-1b) that the

scientific mission Luna the

probe, among was V crashed vehicle's

called them a soft and

Luna England's landing. all

V,

Western attempt thought

observers, craft's failed: that

If that

was indeed

its goal,

transhad

missions ceased. malfunctioned.
Astronautics 49-50; M. Ten Years "Desyat' pp. let and

It was generally

retrorockets

,,teronautics,

1965,

p.

222;

Space

Business

Daily,

May O.

11,

1965,

pp.

K. Tikhomavov, o] Space Research issledovaniya 1967, p. 17.

B. V. Raushenbakh. G. A. Skuridin, and in the USS'R, NASA Technical Translation v SSSR"; Kosmicheskiye Issledovaniya,

L. Vaysberg, F-II, 500 of: Vol. 5, No. 5,

kosmosa

643-679,

10

ASPO critical control would design. LEM's placed

reviewed and save system only

Grumman's modes MSC 14.96 (ECS). about

recommendation for storing engineers kg (33 oxygen lbs) over

for

a combination LEM's that such an

of superapproach all-gaseous

gaseous

in the

environmental

determined only criterion,

a high-pressure,

Mission objectives demanded cabin. On the basis of this at less than of this nine pounds. MSC storage
to

four repressurizations of the the weight differential was

As a result with

analysis, oxygen

directed system.

Grumman (See June

to design 11.)
"Contract May

the

LEM

ECS

an all-gaseous

Letter, _V. F. Rector IIl, MSC, Lunar Excursion Module--ECS elldosures.

(;AEC, Oxygen

Attn: R. S. Mullaney, Storage Configuration,"

10,

NAS 9-1100, 1965, with

10

Public had lems

Heahh discussed with the

Service the NASA

(PHS)

officials

revealed on During

that this

the

Surgeon the

General probSurgeon

PHS/NASA

relationships

back-contamination discussion,

Administrator.

General contract to NASA; mittee on

proposed: program and both

(1) expansion of the space biology and contamination in the PHS; (2) assignment by the PHS of a liaison officer by NASA of an interagency problems advisory with comPHS outbound and inbound contamination

(3) development

participation. The Administrator and the Surgeon were General appropriate. were to the 128 reported Surgeon to have NASA General agreed was that

negotiations a proposal

at staff level to go from

As a result,

drafting

Administrator

embodying

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

not

only

the

three

items

listed

but

also the

proposing

a NASA of the two

organizational agencies.
Headquarters, of the on Public back to

1965
May

structure

capable
O.

of implementing
E. Reynolds, for Director Space

objectives

Memorandum, Associate Health

Bioscience and Space and

Programs, Applications, Administration

NASA "Status

Administrator Service--National May

Science

Aeronautics 10, 1965.

negotiations

contamination,"

ASPO LEM

Assistant radar

Manager

William

A. FY

Lee 1966

heard costs

a proposal by $7 million.

to modify It was

the his

10

programs

to reduce

tmderstanding Control Board. but later The major

that the proposal would be presented Lee said he at first thought the change idea. were: LEMs 1 and of these two

to the Configuration would be "tolerable,"

felt it was a poor points

of the proposal

• Delete landing radars from essential to earth-orbital missions planned proposal to drop it on was a violation LEM-2 of the

2: the landing radar was not vehicles. In fact, ASPO had the set a

(AS-207) to save weight. Nevertheless "all-up" concept, and, if adopted, would on LEM 1. on KSC

precedent for further deletions. • Delete the rendezvous radar 2 and than Lee

• Use "qualifiable" but not qualified rendezvous radars 3. • Install the rendezvous radars for LEMs 2, 3, and 4 at at Grumman. opined that in the the establish program. LEMs in the LEM violations of program precedent also, specific almost ground he said, rules back the "open inherent

LEMs rather

in

these

changes too early

would

a dangerous It would tailored program

and cut

existing door these will

margins to a series .... to be require-

of 'one-of-a-type' It is too early ments, and false economy."
Memorandum, radar expenditures,"

to their reasons

development compromising certainly

missions prove

to consider

to do so for budgetary

William May

A.

Lee,

MSC,

to

Manager,

ASPO,

"Proposed

reduction

in

LEM

l l, 1965.

Crew Systems Division let a contract to the Zaret of radiation on the lens of the human eye. The instruments the Up safely generally reparable. precise to this was that, dose time, not For thought by that known, that the crew's examining it had the nor this changes amount the the damage in the absorbed. could Radiation of radiation initial was amount 129

Foundation foundation organ, could that be and that

to study effects would develop would produce could that the detected. it determine cataracts. be absorbed It was was ir-

I1

however,

damage of radiation

cumulative

safety,

eye could

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
May

sustain dosages
"ASPO

had

to be

known.

And, 2.)

of course,

some

technique

for measuring

was essential.
Weekly

(See July
Report,

Management

June

3-10,

1965."

11

MSC batteries

instructed for the

Grumman ascent and had and

to solicited

negotiate stages and The

award of bids, and and as(ent the received

of

a contract with from fees, on May evaluated batteries; at a cost to place work other the could battery
"LEM

to

supply

descent

LEM

Eagle-Picher Eagle-Picher were: the 6 that and Eaglebids; they with

Company. and made Yardney mately development appropriately
Memorandum curement, J. B. Trout,

Grumman Electric $1 945 222;

proposals including Grumman proposed descent battery not

Yardney

Corporation. Yardney, for to MSC personnel;

Picher, negotiate

$1 I01 673. ascent

presentations with for $600 000. done
of MSC May

Eagle-Picher MSC by

development contract with

of a lighter instructed Yardney, work MSC

of approxiproposed be more vendors.
Prosgd.

(,rumman stating with
Program

that

such or

Yardney
Management for

Conference, Comments 11, 1965. on

Apollo GAEC

Office, Contractor

Battery Selection,"

Recommendation

12

Developmental using before craft ture. provide
MSC,

testing (mounted The a landing new first, concept,

began

on method

a new for

landing that would ensuring practicable,

device the

for

the

CM,

one space-

rockets impact. during The

on the heatshield) current in rough should lighten water

be ignited integrity would

immediately of the of the aft struc-

involved the CM

strengthening considerably;

it prove landing

offer second,

a twofold it would

advantage:

it would

an improved
Space News

emergency
May

capability.

Roundup,

28, 1965, p. 8.

12

MSFC to 1000 capability.
Letter, in the

informed kilonewtons

MSC

that

the

thrust lbs),

of the thus

H-1

engine the

was being Saturn IB's

uprated payload

(205 000

increasing

Frederick Saturn

E. Vreuls, IB Vehicle,"

MSFC, May

to O.

E. Maynard,

MSC,

"Uprating

the

H-I

Engine

12, 1965.

12-June

24

Representatives MSC discussed (PLSS). Current CM tion MSC at

from North the problem

American, (;rumman, Hamilton of stowing the portable life

Standard, and support systems

specifications launch, one some laid

called of which serious down for

for

two

PLSSs however. rules

under

the back

crew to earth.

couch This

in 6.)

the loca-

would problems,

be brought

presented officials • The

(See April for the must

29-May

several

ground

discussions: be maintained.

capability

extravehicular 130

transfer

The space suit for the lunar landing mission was the only operational equipment designed to go all the way to the lunar surface and return to earth. Above is a photo of a subject in that suit as designed at that time, with the portable life support system strapped on. During translunar flight, the capability must exist for general extravehicular activity from the CM. * And upon landing, the PLSS must not interfere with the sweep of the crew couch.
0

1965
May

T h e participants explored a number of stowage options (and the complications involved), even exploring the possibilities of staging and of using a 131

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
May

Gemini

Extravehicular

Life

Support

System. feasibility CM and both that, the

As

a result

of

these

talks,

Hamilton Standard began to fit underneath the side reshaped During would engineers, volume the must Center study Systems patibility
TWX, randum, randum, agement Juqe stowage Information Support

studying the hatch of the

of repackaging the PLSS to determine whether the

system the next North acceptable

would

be compatible MSC spacecraft. and

with concluded With

spacecraft. at earth help Standard of launch, Hamilton out agreed to provide stressing in the that impact; LEM by the one PLSS

few weeks, in each American MSC the with Grumman egress had side the with the
MSC,

be stowed

Standard a stowage for stowage the system also, and the to Crew to repackage

Grumman Hamilton North couch for reshaped that, shape

designers American again stowage from the would during PI,SS

worked

to all concerned. ordered hatch crew to plan the new
to

PLSS not

accordingly. beneath interfere and

of one PLSS

of the CM,

landing

directed ingress and
R.

backpack.

(Studies

Division

already

indicated

standpoints be acceptable.)
May May "ASPO James to 9-150, L. NAA, 17, 1965; 25, 1965; Weekly Neal, Space Portable

of com-

mobility,
Young, R. to Haines, Record,

probably
R.

Wayne Charles Haines, Report,

GAEC, to Owen stowage 1.065"; R.

Attn: study," MS(;, J. B.

S. Mullaney, "PLSS," 25, MSC, 1965; to Weekly MSC, NAS June May

memomemoManReport, "PLSS and Life

MSC, "PLSS 3, 21,

E. Maynard, "ASPO Young,

May LEM," (PLSS)

27-June June Division, Stowage

Management

10-17, in

1965"; the Systems

memorandum, Attn:

Wayne J.

1.065; letter, in the Command

AIIdredge, "Contract

C. Cozad,

System

Mtxlule,"

24, 1965.

13

Samuel for

C. Phillips, CSM.
"'Apollo Directive

Apollo 201. The

Program mission

Director, would

issued flight-test

the the

mission Saturn

directive IB and

Apollo-Saturn

the Apollo
NASA sion,"

OMSF, i'rogram

l'rogram Flight Mission M-D MA 2240.061, May

Directive 13, 1965.

for

Apollo-Saturn

201

Mis-

13

AC

Spark an to

Plug optical were let

officials planned, and the

presented sensor AC Itek gained

to

MSC the (,ttidance

their LEM.

evaluation Because Control were and

of three

bidders different

to ap-

design proval Hughes
MSC,

rendezvous subcontracts.

for The

approaches

Division's Perkin-Elmer,

three

firms

chosen

Aircraft,
"ASPO

Corporation.
Report, May 20-27, 1965."

Weekly

Management

13-20

Crew Space believed impact study

Systems Laboratories these limits bradycardia

Division forces

(CSD)

representatives effects in that hazardous." in animals 132

contracted of tailward

with

Northrop (CSD lowest would the

to study might heart

physiological be "very were

g forces. Northrop

Consequently, direction.) induced by such

for Apollo (slow

missions rate)

acceleration,

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

and would apply these whether current limits
MSC, "ASPO Weekly

findings to humans. were "ultraconservative."
Report, June

CSD

hoped

thereby

to determine

1965
May

Management

3-10,

1965."

To broaden mission, the moved
MSC,

communications capabilities during S-band omnidirectional antennas on toroidal
Weekly

near-earth all Block forward

phases II CMs

of a were

13-20

to the
"ASPO

(doughnut-shaped)
Management Report, May

section
27-June 3,

of the
1965."

heatshield.

North American Documentation," President's at of all Apollo crew percent. in each should crew 60 expected dundancy parison (LOR)

released a preliminary in response to an Advisory reliability reliability function. between and the logic program safety

report, "Apollo Reliability Modeling action item assigned to MSC by the (PSAC) for the at 0.973 indicated noted lunar crew AS-506 while Space panel with Technology in the that orbit safety January. amonnt a direct number of a confidence Panel The level recom0.976

16-June

15

Scientific

Committee briefing was assessed diagrams North mission

Flmctional CSM not safety 012. be made reliability The LOR

American

rendezvous

preliminary

for spacecraft

assessment,

preliminary,

was developed

in greater depth than increase in reliability because number
NAA,

the assessment was indicated values functions
Progress

for the PSAC from spacecraft about LOR
62-300-38,

briefing. However, a real 012 to the LOR mission and far the greater.
p. 13.

the

reliability

were in the
Report,"

equal, were
July

complexity

and

of required
"Apollo Monthly

SID

1, 1965,

North Data of the full-scale
Ibid.,

American 1 to the The testing.
p. 3.

conducted measure manufacturer series supported

the pressures

third on those

in a series forward tests therefore, from

of water portions of one-tenth

impact the scale

tests spacecraft.

on

16-June

15

boilerplate from CM.

with that

models

reported,

it planned

no further

MSC

informed

Grumman program tests

it believed

it would

be

beneficial manned Internal

to the

LEM

17

development control system

for MSC

to participate

in the

environmental Environment

to be conducted

in Grumman's

Simulator. The following individuals naut William A. Anders or an alternate more monitor manned for runs; the D. Owen Coons aforementioned

were suggested to participate: Astroto act as a test crewman for one or or an alternate and ,John to act W. as a medical O'Neill or an

astronaut; 133

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
May

alternate astronaut
Letter, MSC May

to monitor comnlents.
R. Wayne participation 17, 1965. Young, ill

voice

communications

during

the

test

and

record

MSC, Grumman

to GAEC, manned

Attn:

R.

S. Mullaney, control

"Contract s_stem

NAS (ECS)

9-1100, tests,"

envi,-onmental

! 8-20

Representatives design review pointed ing out improved
Letter, Mullaney, Young R.

on

from the

Motorola, RCA, S-band transponder the equipment to
MSC,

(;rumman, for the the

and LEM.

MSC held the first Several areas were was incorporatmet specifications.
NAS TWX, 1, 1965; 9-1100, to TWX,

in which circuitry
VCayne Radar Young,

was deficient. that
Attn: Input

Motorola

ensure
to GAE('.

transponder

R. S. Mullaney,"Contract May 28, 1965; June Voltage June Levels," 1, 1965.

Rendezvous

Transponder "LEM S-Band

Assembly Subsystem Transponder,"

Design,"

Young

"Communication to Mullaney,

19

Apollo t,VSMR. miles, fectly, ASPO objectives "proved Appendix
NASA May 1965, WSO, 1965; Project

mission About the Little

A-003, a planned high-altitude abort test, was flown at 25 seconds after launch, and at an altitude of about three Joe and II booster The lifted not in an the met," actual Joseph disintegrated escape as a result system (LES) 22) clear that that (See the mission of violent--and per"prime in of the vehicle. A-003's LES nonetheless objectives

unprogrammed--roll. however, Manager its 5.)
News 9, with General Apollo: 1965; Flight enclosure; Dynamics, Final Release

launch spacecraft while rightly

functioned

(boilerplate acknowledging observed

F. Shea,

. . . were mettle

emergency."

54-145,

"NASA George

to

Test E.

Apollo

Escape NASA, Launch May Joe lI Vol. 28,

System to

at

High

Altitude," "Apollo 1," May May 24, 19,

memorandum, Abort Test, MSC, "Apollo Report,

Mueller, Post

Administrator, Report No. TWX, J. F. NASA, Shea, Vehicle,

Spacecraft

Mission News Mission

A-003, Roundup, one Little (May A-003

Space Convair

1965; sgd.

MSC/ NASA

to addressees,

hot, r leport," Test 1966),

Division,

Launch

GDC-66-042

I, p. 1-18.

20-27

Engineers Engineering to the

from LEM weight
R. Wayne

General

Electric determined a 5.4-kg placed the
to GAEC,

and that (12-1b)

MSC's increase

Crew in

Systems water the latter's was
3, 1965.

and from

Systems the CSM the separation

Divisions involved had

transferring at only transfer

weight. LEM's
TWX,

Grumman

the penalty water
Attn:

1.8 kg (4 lbs). scheme
June

Because

was so critical,
Young, MSC,

canceled.

R. S. Mullaney,

20-27

To

determine

lunar

touchdown

velocity

uncertainties, Guidance provide

MIT

studied

radar-

aided powered sion concluded the guidance
MSC, "ASPO

descent. From MIT's findings, that one or two sensors should system
Weekly

and Control Divivelocity updates to

throughout
Management

the descent
Report, June

maneuver.
10-17, 1965."

134

This spectacular series o photos shows the breakup of the A-003 Little Joe I1 f at top left. The photos at top right, bottom left, and bottom right show the launch escape system lifting the boilerplate spacecraft safely away from the disintegrating booster. Marquardt Corporation completed preliminary flight rating tests on the reaction control engine for the SM.
“Apollo Monthly Progress Report,” SID 62-300-38, p. 10.

NASA launched another reentry heating experiment, Project Fire 11, from Cape Kennedy, Fla. An Atlas D booster propelled the instrumented probe,

135

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
May

called

a "flying

thermometer,"

into

a ballistic

trajectory

over

805 km (500 mi) its descent, a

high. After solid-fueled The and probe generated

26 minutes of flight, when the spacecraft Antares rocket accelerated its fall. entered the atmosphere of about at a speed 11 206

began

of 40 877

km

(25 400 on

mph) heating

temperatures to ground launch--and in the

K (20 000_F).

Data

were transmitted minutes after the the device impacted

stations throughout the descent. but six minutes after the Antares Atlantic about 8256 km (5130 mi)

Thirty-two was fired-southeast of

the Cape.
NASA 1965; May News NASA 27, 1965. Release News 65-131, Release "NASA 65-179, Schedules "NASA Project Reports Fire Project Launch Fire in May," April 28,

Performed

Well,"

23

The from

IMe the

Sciences Board moon Simons and

Committee planets be

of the to NASA kept

National that

Academy American

of

Sciences' three entitled

Space weeks "Po-

Science

recommended contamination reported

astronauts for at least A report

returning organisms,

in quarantine Post.

to prevent Howard

possible

of the earth Washington

by extraterrestrial

in the

tential Hazards tine and other returning possible and on Mars any

of Back Contamination from the Planets" presented quaranrecommendations: the need to avoid decontamination of until it had home; methods
1965,

equipment need samples for the before astronauts
and

been the life

subjected their need brought outer

to biological garments and on immediate

study; the

the moon to

astronauts

to shed

returning with

to conduct to earth; chance

research runs

of extraterrestrial

trial

acquaint

for minimizing

of contamination.

Astronautics

Aeronautics,

p. 246.

21-24

The Resident ASPO I_EM manufacturer: (1) the (2) Mechanical Hartman

at Grumman

approved

three

vendor

selections

by the

Products, sealed Electric Products

Inc.--circuit breakers.) (also of

breakers. hermetically Aircraft

(MSC

concurred

in

use of hermetically

Co.--relays Division

sealed). Co.--rectangular

(3) Electronic connectors.
MSC, Sawyer, Breakers," "ASPO MSC, May Weekly to

Hughes

Management Systems

Report, Engineering

May

20-27, Division,

1965";

memorandum, usage of

Ralph Circuit

S.

Chief,

"Common

18, 1965.

24

MSC concurred LEM's steerable
l.ettcr, LEM R. high Wayne gain

in Grumman's antenna.
Young, steerable MSC, antenna to

selection

of the

RF

tracking

mode

for the

GAEC, RF

Attn:

R. May

S. Mullaney, 24, 1965.

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

tracker,"

136

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

At Wright-Patterson tests of crew transfer F. Eisele hatches might and and Richard the

AFB, North using mockup F. Gordon, assembly. pieces
Report," ASI'O, Installation

American 27A. The had North of hardware.
SID 62-300-38, Tunnel June

engineers two subjects,

conducted astronauts the that

zero-g Donn forward handles

1965
May 24

difficulty

manipulating reported

drogue on those
Progress to Manager, and

American

be required
Monthly MS(;, Removal

"Apollo Slavton, Zero

p.

5;

memorandum, and Docking

Donald Hardwarc

K.

"CM:LEM Test,"

Hatches

Gravity

18, 1965.

Donald

K.

Slayton,

Assistant

Director

for

Flight

Crew

Operations,

de-

24

scribed a potential hazard involved in crew procedures inside the LEM. Two sets of umbilicals linked the Block II space suit to the environmental control system (ECS) and to the portable life support system was gas (PLSS). Though slight, the valve inside from the suit. astronaut's it would turn the possibility existed that when a hose the suit might not seat. In that event, Should this occur while the LEM was disconnected, would escape the cautioned, This in

depressurized,

life would be in jeopardy. Consequently, Slayton be unwise to disconnect umbilicals while in a vacuum. several could mission not be constraints: recharged while the LEM was

imposed • PLSSs

unpressurized. had to their

• If the switch to the vehicle. • Because the crew must

astronauts PLSSs and the

were planning disconnect the circuit the
to

to leave the spacecraft, they ECS hoses be/ore depressurizing PLSS operated only

cooling

in the

in a vacuuna, to their
"Apollo

depressurize
Slayton, MSC, LEM,"

LEM
Chief,

shortly
Systems

after
Engineering

switching
Division,

PI,SSs.
suit

Memorandum, procedures inside

the

May

24, 1965.

NASA Kennedy.

launched (See

Pegasus February

II, 16,

a

meteoroid The

detection Saturn

satellite, I launch

from vehicle

Cape (SA-8)

25

1965.)

placed the spacecraft, protected by 740-by-509-km (460-by-316-mi) orbit. jettisoned. then device began
News 17, the 1965; 24 May

a boilerplate Once in orbit, second panels.

CSM (BP-26), into a the dummy CSM was of the launch vehicle, the several hours,

Pegasus

II, still attached (96-ft) meteoroid
6r_151, "Project through "NASA Apollo 30 Space May Flight to

to the hits.
Launch

stage Within

deployed

its 29-m registering
Release NAA, 1965

winglike

NASA May (Period o] 1965

Second Test pp. 1-2; ]rom

Pegasus

Meteoroid Activity Omce,

Satellite," Report History 31,

Spacecraft 1965)," Center

Program MSFC January I

Weekly Historical through

George

C. Marshall Vol.

December

(MHM-II),

I, p. 53.

MSC directed North American to install Block directional S-band antennas on CMs 017 and survive reentry and thus would afford 137 telemetry

II-type, flush-mounted 020. These antennas transmissions

omniwould

25

throughout

ELECTRONICS CANISTER (Memory Bank, Transmitter, Batteries, Located in Center Section

Etc.)

SOLAR

PANELS
IMPACT POINT

TO EARTH TRACKING STATION

//
Pegasus "finds" a meteoroid. 25, shaped)
MSC,

1965
May

the

flight.

()n

June

the

Center

ordered

that

they

be

installed

in

the

toroidal
I.etters, "Contract Sg:II),

(doughnut
James "Contract Stroup,

section
to NAA, No.

of the alt heatshield.
Space 357," No. 357. and Information 1965; J. 1 ," June Systems B. Alldredge, 25, 1965. Division MSC, to (S&ID), NAA,

Change

Authorization Change

Ma)'25,

Authorization

Re'_isiotl

25

ASP() the Space

pointed Flight

out Apollo Network

to the missions

Systems

Engineering constrained

Division and

that

planning the Manned

of

manned

had been available to

to maximize to maximize onboard both

support to

for guidance technique neglect feasible, malmed both mission full on computations

navigation mission (;g:N

(Gg:N) success

functions. probabilities, "It is

While

this

was a desirable a tendency wherever fully results that of

it led policy be

capabilities. and and and to ground missions. in the comthis GgcN

ASP() will vehicle, .... and that

that, should the

onboard developmental the grotmd recorded

systems Spacecraft flight pared policy capability

exercised

during these

maneuvers and any

be computed Apollo to omit

It is requested tendency be corrected."
William G&N A. Lee, capability

planning of the

conform onboard

exercise

Memmandum, tion of onboard 25, 1965.

MSC, durit_g

to

Chief. Apollo

S_stems Manned

Engineering 1)evelopment

Division,

"UtilizaMay

Missions,"

138

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

MSC on idea

completed for the and

contract LEM's camera the
Weekly

negotiations television mockups). cable in
Report,

with camera Because both
May

Westinghouse (cables of and was
3, 1965."

Electric connectors,

Company stowage the

1965
May 25

gear

containers,

technical

requirements, abandoned.

of using
MSC, "ASPO

same

spacecraft
27-June

Management

To

aid

reacquisition American II spacecraft,

and to study one system.

tracking the would

of the use rate this

high-gain of an signals the

antenna, from the

MSC CSM's would

directed system have on to stabiliza-

26

North Block tion

feasibility

inertial

reference

that

and

control

"_Vithout

system,

astronauts

perform anywhere from 250 to 500 lunar mission. And during sleeping in the vehicle, the earth.
Letters, "Contract S&ID, James "Contract

antenna periods, the

reacquisitions during a single when the CM pilot was alone antenna automatically reacquire

it was

mandatory

that

Stroup, Change

MSC,

to

NAA, No.

Space 358," No.

and 26.

Information 1965; 1 ," July

Systems 23, 1._5.

1)ivision MSC,

(S&ID), to NAA,

Change

Authorization

May

J. B. Alldredge,

Authorization

358, Revision

ASPO weight

requested at transhmar • Ascent • Descent • Total

the

Apollo iniection

Program as follows:

Director

to revise

the

LEM

control

26

stage stage I_EM would

............................. ............................ (fueled) be made requirements that existing a ...................... possible by reductions

2193 2166

kg (4835 kg (4775

lbs) lbs)

14 515 kg (32 000 lbs) of service propulsion

The system ASP()

increase

propellant pointed out with
F.

associated with CSM and adapter LEM launch
Headquarters, 26, 1965.

the revised AV budget. control weight propellant weight payload
Director

requirements (32 800 lbs)
Letter, "Revised

allowed

maximum in the
to NASA May

injected vehicle
Attn:

of

14 877

kg

no increase
Shea, MSC, Weights,"

requirement.
Apollo Program,

Joseph LEM

Control

William vision the initial

A. Lee, to study Apollo

ASPO the flights.

Assistant Because

Manager, of the

asked uncertainties

Systems mission,

Engineering especially

Diduring

26

feasibility

of an

abbreviated

involved

in landing, reserves. removing equipment. landing budgets

Lee emphasized, the first This could be accomplished, surplus batteries and

LEMs should he suggested, and

have the greatest possible by shortening stay time; reducing the scientific

consumables;

Theoretically, this would enable the LEM pilot to hover over the site for an additional minute; also, it wotdd increase the velocity 139

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

both (:raft's

of

the

LEM's

ascent be

stage

and

of

the

CSM. mission:

He

asked

that

the

space-

specifications

changed

to fly a shorter

• Stay •

time--10

hours time--six man-hours kg (70 lbs) kg (80 lbs)

Exploration

• Scientific • Lunar

payload--32 samples returned--36

Lee adapted

said

that to short

this and

modification long missions.

would

produce

a spacecraft

that

could

be

Memorandum, craft capability

William for

A.

Lee,

MSC, lunar

to

Chief,

Systems missions,"

Engineering May 26, 1965.

Division,

"Space-

short-duration

landing

27

Because hinted that mission at

correspondence deleting would some be an

from equipment

Grumman from spacecraft,

and the

the first as

Resident LEM, MSC in

ASP()

there

reaffirmed SA-206A

LEM-1

"all-up"

specified

the

requirements.

MSC for R.

Internal Apollo Wayne

Note Spacecraft Young,

No.

65--PL-I l)evelopment

(Revision Mission Attn: 206A 1965. R.

A),

"Project 206A S. (LEM

Apollo 1),"

Mission May I1,

Requirements 1965; TWX, for 6,r_-PL-I

MSC, I)evelopment

to

GAEC, Mission June 2,

Mullaney, I) MSC

"Mission Internal

Requirements Note No.

Apollo (Rev. A)

Spacecraft dated May

(LEM

11,

1965,"

27-June

3

MSC's Division comfort crease scheduled

Crew

Systems cooling Preliminary with to validate

Division garment tests only the a

(CSD) which by small the

received had contractor

from been

Hamilton modified to

Standard include a inCSD

a liquid liner. in comfort tests

showed to cooling

a substantial capacity.

decrement

performance.

MSC, "ASI'O Weekly

Management

Report,

May 27-June

3, 1965."

28

ASPO and (under contractors II

approved space their suits.

the

use The

of common hardware

commutfications would 1)e procured then

equipment from North

in

Block

I

American to the suit

contract (David Clark

with and

Pacific Hamihon

Plantronics), Standard).

furnished

TWX, J. c.

James Cozad, June

Stroup, 7, 1965.

MSC,

to

NAA,

Space

and

Information

Systems

Division,

Attn:

30-June

5

ASPO

Manager

Joseph items:

F.

Shea

reported

the

accomplishment

of

a number

of important

• moved equipment

Boilerplate to the launch

23A pad was

command at WSMR in progress.

module and

and stacked;

launch integrated

escape

system ground

were support

checkout

140

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

• North on CSM 006. CSM 008. • The had passed • The rig PD-1

American Test

was directed objectives would LEM

to stop

all work

on systems to boilerplate control

installation 14 and assembly test LEM enItem 1,

1965
May

be reassigned and on

first

deliverable Engineering and HA-4

attitude and rig Inspection

translation LEM descent

acceptance Design was completed rig

test at RCA the was

was delivered shipped

to Grumman. propulsion The engine End on June

to WSMR/PSDF. to AEDC for ascent LEM Master

ascent propulsion vironmental tests. • The Specification 1965.
"Weekly Activity

shipped

LEM were

Technical incorporated

Specification into the

and

the

Grumman

contract

Report,

May

30-Jtme

5,"

sgd.

Joseph

F. Shea.

Thiokol jettison of the pyrogen
"Apollo

Chemical motor. igniter seal,

Company An ignition cartridge.

completed

qualification

testing

on

the

tower

During the Month

delay on February 22 had necessitated Subsequently, Thiokol developed tested
SID

a redesign a modified September.

which

the

firm
Report,"

during
62-300-38,

late
pp. 2,

August
8, II.

and

early

Monthly

Progress

Using at the range

one-third extremes was

scale models, Grumman of the frequency range. errors
Report No.

tested the LEM's antenna field Data evaluation showed that the within
p. 16.

During the Month

adequate;
Progress

were
28/'

well

expected

values.

"Monthly

LPR-10-44,

Using the

improved of

restraint landing they no on

hardware, the moon. bounced the longer

Grumman Investigators of[ the superior system

resumed reported floor. to those

tests Astronaut used

simulating lateral Donn in earlier F.

During the

shock who

better

Month

stability--and Eisele, trials.
Ibid.,

took

part,

judged

p.

14.

Bell pellant

Aerosystems valve 500 conducted to verify
p. 1.

Company times heating

successfully (double the

cycled specification

a LEM firing with

ascent an

engine Also,

prothe nozzle

During the Month

requirement). ablative

company extension
Ibid.,

a full-duration characteristics.

altitude

MSC

postponed would type).

the The

formal be redefined Center

I_EM directed

program the 141

review company

(wherein contract to submit

spacecraft converted firm to proposals

rean

During the Month

quirements incentive

and

Grumman's

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
May

ft)r July

all II.

contract Grumman meantime,

change both described within

authorizations parties its itself were

(CCA), a revised negotiating cost by

which on all

were of total

promised program

by cost. CCAs.

was preparing

estimate

Ill the

outstanding effort. firm The was To

,.Xls_, (;rtmiman expenditures detailed made a ntnnber budgets

continuing and

reduction the

keep had and, an

limits for

"suggested" to strengthen

MSC,

preparing

both

its subcontractors. its administrative possible schedule

company structure with

of changes

with Houston's support, was reviewing eye toward eliminating some test vehicles.
II,id., I _. 1.

changes

During the Month

lhree by I:R(:

flights pilot

were Don

made Mallick and would

with

the

hmar purpose

landing

research the

vehicle initial

(LLRV) weighing,

for the the automatic update than

of (:hecking systems. (:F-700 Mass. and (200 The

the thrust-to-weight, (;eneral Eduards tion "lhe and would ttpdating would
I ctter, i.ogress

throttle LLRV date

Electric AFB mean

the

jet

engines cost production

at

their loca-

facility would

rather make

at Lynn,

change

in work

an earlier

delivery the engines

a significant to the lbs) of thrust.

reduction. engines

comparable

add an additional
Patti rcport F. Bikle, No. 23 FRC, for the to

890 newtons
NASA Headquarters, ending May

"I,unar 31, 1965."

Landing

Research

Vehicle

period

Juno

ASP() 1)irector II (:Ms ASPO dtmdant

Manager

Joseph

F. Shea

replied

to a recommendation warning actuator would because: gimbal propulsion the be lights secondary

by the Assistant in Block drive for I and motors. the checkout burns; orbit and and rere-

1

for Flight to indicate decided drive would that

Operations failure no failure in Block motors deorbit would procedures

to incorporate of the gimbal indication I spacer:raft to service would

provided (1) in-flight

motors drive Block system lights

procedures and action (2) all

provide

for exercising prior

actuators in earth

by the primary

secondary manned control

system

I missions

be conducted was stipulated. it) Block apply
1)irector Motor Fail

capability

"l'he warning in-flight

be incorporated would
MSC, to

II spacecraft, II lunar
Operations, June 1, 1965.

and

the

checkout
Joseph System

also
Assistant

to
for

Block
Flight

missions.
"Serv-

Memorandum, ice Propulsion

F. (SPS)

Shea,

Secondary

(;imbal

Indication,"

In an attempt lauding Research I,etmard Zwink, research

to reduce vehicle

the

overall

preflight activities, Mallick, Matranga. 142

time were Cal

in connection was White, Jim held Ray Jarvis,

with at Leroy Adkins,

lunar Flight Frost, Zeon

(LLRV) Don Gene

a meeting

Center. Ferrier, Wayne

Principal Joe Walker, and

participants

Ottinger,

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

The of the might

session be on

commenced on units the in shortened flight

with

an

estimate checklist. ways: safety (1)

of time Review since

required indicated the or the radar

to perform that altimeter that

each and radar withcockpit (3) the H_()_

1965
June

functions radar

preflight several affect

preflight

doppler checks out would when the after

did not

of flights, to a minimuul

it was suggested dc vohmeters avionics properly streamlined the need

mornings coverage; need and drag

be reduced (2) addition for power

be performed in the checked down preflight; from

inspection eliminate the weight prinie. weight and

of ac and checks had could during been be

drag preflight

computer check and

in flight,

30 minutes

currently

required;

(4) investigate

to refill

In general, most and thereby
Memorandum

though reduce
for

several it appeared overall
Files,

operations other preflight
Preflight

were operations time.

performed could

simultaneously be performed

during in parallel

of preflight,

"LLRV

Procedures,"

(;one

J. Matranga,

June

2, 1965.

ASPO

advised

North

American

that,

at present,

no

unmanned

flights

were

planned for the Block of Apollo requirements, must time" be verified involved, prior North pending

II CM. After the company MSC would detertnine to manned American a final
to NAA, for

concluded whether because securing

its own analysis the heatshield of the the long "lead reqnisite

missions. should decision.

But continue

instrumentation
TWX, Cozad, in Block

C. L. Taylor, subject: II CSM,"

MSC, June

Space Mission

and

Information

Systems and Heat

Division, Shield

Attn:

J.C.

"Requirements 2, 1965.

l'rogrammers

Measurements

Northrop-Ventura for Apollo landing
"Apollo

began a drop took
Progress

qualification of boilerplate place
Report,"

testing 19 at all
pp.

of

the

earth

landing The performed

system entire well.

with sequence
Monthly

El Centro, parachutes
2-3.

Calif.

as
SID

planned;
62-300-38,

NASA piloted

launched by

Gemini

IV, James

America's A. McDivitt primary during the hatch

second and objective prolonged on his

multi-manned Edward H.

space White

mission, II, from

astronauts

Cape Kennedy. Gemini IV's formance of man and machine this flight, White opened America's and White

was to evaluate the perspace flight. Also during spacecraft and performed four days in space, McDivitt Ocean some 724 km (450 mi)

first "space walk." On June 7, after landed their vehicle in the Atlantic

east of the Cape.
James M. Grimwood and Technology and Operations: Barton C. Hacker with A Chronology (NASA Peter J. Vorzimmer, Project SP_O02, 1969), pp. 200-202. Gemini

143

Astronaut Edward H. White I1 is shown during the third orbit of the Gemini IV flight as he floated in space, attached to the spacecraft by a 7.6-m (25-ft) umbilical line. His right hand gripped a hand-held self-maneuvering unit which he used to propel himself during the 21-min “space walk.”
1965
June

MSC approved North American’s recommendation that a programmer timer approach be used for earth reacquisition by the CSM’s S-band highgain antenna.
“ASP0 Weekly Management Report, June 3-10, 1965.”

3-1 0

ASP0 Manager Joseph F. Shea concluded, after reviewing the boilerplate 22 mission, that all the test objectives would be met satisfactorily either in the flight of spacecraft 002 or in the ground qualification program. For that reason the boilerplate 22 flight would not be repeated.
Memorandum, Shea to Distr., “Test Objectives,”June 5, 1965.

144

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

ASPO Report.

reported

a number

of

significant

activities

in

its

Weekly

Activity

1965
June 6-12

• The at North pleted

CSM

design June

engineering 8-10. Apollo

inspection standard the

was satisfactorily initiator was

conducted comaccom-

American

• Qualification

of the

successfully was

by Space Ordnance Systems, Inc. • The first full systems firing of at Bell Aerosystems I,EM LTA-5 developtnent ascent stage, using the

LEM

ascent ascent

engine (HA)-2 LEM and

plished

heavyweight was article

propulsion test FTA-2 article were

test rig. • The (LTA)-4, eliminated.
"Weekly

program flight test

revised

and

(FTA)-I,

Activity

Report,

June

6-12,

1965,"

sgd.

Joseph

F. Shea.

George proved The there, NASA's selection

E. Mueller, procurement package, would Office of transmit of

Associate of the

Administrator lunar on the and surface moon other and

for

Manned LEM would that the

Space package crew make LSEP

Flight, that

ap-

experiments by each scientific

(LSEP). landed to earth. the must final be

to be deployed Space

geophysical Science Mueller

data

back

Applications emphasized

experiments.

ready in time for the first lunar landing for the project was assigned to MSC's
Memorandum, Approval NASA Lunar of OMSF, Surface George Procurement Apollo Experiments E. Mueller, l'lan Program Package for NASA, Lunar (LSEP) Directive

mission. Management Experiments Program
to Surface No. Project," 3, MSC, Attn: "Management June 15, 1965. Dave Lang,

responsibility Office.
"Request June 7, for for 1965; the

Experiments

Package,"

Assignment

Apollo revised new increase

Program velocity (to would:

Director budgets two

Samuel for the degrees) the two the

C.

Phillips

approved trajectory out-of-plane

MSC's constraint; launch

request that and capability. to

for these (2) this

spacecraft. free return LEM's and

It was understood

values

(1) still meet

at least

the

MPAD/FOD decision.
Letter, Spacecraft Samuel

provided

analysis

recommendations

leading

C.

Phillips,

NASA, (U), per

to letter

MSC, dated

Attn: May

Director, 18, 1965,

ASPO, Reference

"Revised

Apollo

Delta

V Budget

PS8/L-82/65,'" "Comments on

June 7, 1.°,65; Memorandum, Volume III of The Apollo

Carl R. Spacecra]t:

Huss, JSC, to JSC Historical Office, A Chronology," June 6, 1973.

MSC for the and

directed Block

NAA II CM.

to make (The full-scale

a "predesign" Center drop had tests.)

study

of a rocket

landing

system feasibility

already

studied

the system's

had conducted
Letter. Cozad, 1965,"

C. L. Taylor, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division, Attn: "Contract NAS 9-150, CM Rocket Landing System Study Meeting, 15 June 22, 1965, with enclosure, "Minutes of Rocket Landing System Study

J.C. June Meet-

145

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
June 7-13

ing,"

June

15,

1965;

TWX,

J.

C.

Ellis, July

NAA, 15, 1965.

to

NASA

Headquarters,

Attn:

Director,

Procurement

and

Supply

Division,

North CM's

American's reaction
"Project through

Rocketdyne system
Spacecraft 1965)," p. 3.

Division engines.
Test Program

began

qualification

testing

on

the

control
Apollo 13 June

NAA, 1965

Weekly

Activity

Report

(Period

7 June

Russia that flight, course than all

lannched onboard however, correction.

Luna equipment the

VI,

an was

instrumented functioning engine caused failed Luna

moon normally. to shut VI

probe. Two down

Tass days following

reported into the a midby more

spacecraft's This failure

to miss

its target

160 000 km (99 419 mi).
Space Research Business in the Daily, USSR, June p. 17. II, 1965, p. 216; Tikhonravov, et al., Ten Years o/ Space

8-10

MSC CM.

reviewed The design of the

a lighting concept, Engineers suit

mockup though Crew worked from

of the crew needing Systems quite

compartment refinement, found

in the was lights that

Block deemed on

II the

further Division well;

acceptable. fingertips

gloves

optimum

positioning

was as

yet undetermined, of the Block I side requirements). warpage hatches arm

however. At the same hatch (i.e., not modified found North from space. coordination"

time, MSC reviewed the design to meet Block II extravehicular American's major problems were Further, the design of both side with that of the umbilical access

Reviewers

and crew ingress needed "additional tower
Management 10-17, 1965."

of the launch
"'ASPO Report, Weekly June

to ensure
Report,

compatibility.
June 3-10, 1965"; "ASPO Weekly Management

Crew

Systems

Division seven layers
J.

reported

that

MSC

had

ordered into the
MSC,

Hamilton A5H
to for

Standard suit.

to integrate
Memorandum, on June 9, vehicular

of thermal
I)eVos June and 22, 1965.

protection
William and C.

pressure
"Meeting Extra-

Francis 1965, to Unit,"

Kincaide, protection

Record, the Apollo

discuss

thermal

meteoroid

Mobility

10-17

Crew mental control methods

Systems control for an

Division system all-battery

reported (ECS) the in the

that, I,EM thermal

as currently would Grumman capability, loop.
Distr., "LEM battery

designed, was

the

environthermal several

not afford and

adequate

spacecraft. ECS's for the coolant

investigating

for improving configuration
Owen 17, 1965.

was to recommend

a modified

Memorandum, lem," June

E. Maynard,

MSC,

to

thermal

control

prob-

146

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

NASA to study marily, (such

hired ACEL's as lung

the

U.S. study

Navy's would could

Air aspects try

Crew of

Equipment pure-oxygen

Laboratory environments. known (2) whether and

(ACEL) Prieffects such

1965
,June

several

physiological collapse)

to determine: infections.
June 10-17, 1965."

(1) whether

somehow

be reversed;

10-17

environments
"ASPO Weekly

enhanced
Management

respiratory
Report,

A list of materials area MSC course were omitted ordered given
Ibid.

that than

North

American that to determine

reported had why.

using This

in the in earlier item

CM's such could but

halfitable reports. affect not the tested"

10-17

more the

70 items testing.

appeared listed

company toxicity priority

of backup highest

Materials testing.

as "used

in toxicity

MSC

ordered LEM's

Grumman

to propose control

a gaseous system

oxygen (ECS),

storage including

configuration all oxygen on the

11

for the

environmental

requirements simultaneous LEM's defined portable worked
TWX,

and system weights. surface excursions by onefor cabin systems. of these
MSC, toGAEC,

Because no decision the crew, Grumman operations. quantities rules.
R.S.

was yet made should design the Center

ECS for either requirements life support out on the basis
R, Wayne Young,

or two-man Oxygen ground
Attn:

And and and

further of the would be

repressurizations

replenishment pressures 1-8.)
11,1965.

(See July
Mullancy, June

The and

question there

of whether

a data

tape

recorder 206

would

be installed

on LEM-I Plan meetings

11

had been

discussed

at several possibility

Apollo

Mission

()perations

was a strong

it would

not be installed. F. Shea, pointed Assistant out that test Director objectives of the The integrates underlying for are the

In a memorandum Flight had but Operations responsibility This with also through profile

to ASPO Christopher to ASPO is done considerable the

Manager C. Kraft, of insuring not only

Joseph Jr., "that by

his Directorate mission,

all possible conduct planning

accomplished. desired

real-time Flight is the such The

premission Space activities spacecraft telemetry. Apollo without .... and the " the

which

Manned

Network. accumulation as LEM-1 FOD Mission (Flight

purpose of all these operations for unmanned, nonrecoverable vided sured and Kraft mitter through does of being associated said the the nut use of RF rectorate) believe

of data, which can only be proOperations can tape be Dias-

206A

Objectives of a data

accomplished playback tradeoff possible

addition

recorder

transmitter of weight

cost of a data for primary 147

recorder

and

dump

trans-

versus

loss of data

mission

objectives,

consider-

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
June

ing

the

cost and that on

of the

a

Saturn ground tape (and
to Shea,

IB support recorder

launch and

vehicle, seemed test
Data

a

fully playback

functional transmitter were

LEM be

spacecraft, mended installed

required, that

inequitable. objectives
Tape

He recomachieved.
June 11,

a data I.EM-1
Kraft

associated

2) to ensure
"LEM-l/Mission

Memorandum, 1 ._15.

206A

Recorder,"

11

ASP() said Block into Donald

Manager that, K. Slayton, II Apollo the implications

Joseph both spacecraft

F. Shea, their had agreed were

in a memorandum with that HF needed. Christopher orbital Shea

to

Robert C. Kraft,

Williams, Jr., and in the to look

confirming

discussion not

communications asked Williams

of removing
to Williams, "Block

the requirement.
11 communication system," June 12, 1965.

Memorandum,

Shea

11

MSC cover might number

and and

North the up

American possibility and adding cause materials

discussed that, damage and fabric during

the to the

brittleness tower jettison spacecraft.

of the or Having the

boost abort, North

protective the cover a

break

investigated American Company likely of 009,

of various believed in flight. Block

construction the would

techniques, cover The for would

recommended engineers tear cover Block apart I and

a nylon thus Even II CMs,

to strengthen this

structure. be less the weight applied 002,

that,

reinforced, though MSC and

to the and

increase

by about

27 kg (60 lbs), vehicles.

concurred. effective

change spacecraft

to both

was

all sul)sequent
Letter, J. June Cover Owen resulting June "CCA 15, C. C. Cozad, 21, E. 1965, L.

Taylor, "Contract Boost with Area Boost on

MSC, NAS Protective enclosure: Review, MSC, to Protective

to

NAA, Cover "'Abstract MSC,

Space Problem of June Structures Problem to Boost

and

Information of Actions at Review Jtme Review Cover,"

Systems MSC 1965; MSC,

Division, at 11, June Boost

Attn: the 1965,"

9-150,

Implementation Area Proceedings, 11. 1065/' a,ld Area Chief, Protective

Recommended

NASA/NAA Problem

NASA/NAA 14, at June Division,

Protective Items 1965," Branch,

memorandum, "Action June 11,

Maynard, from Hxi5;

Chief, Cover

Mechanics C&SM Contract

memorandum, backing

Maynard, material for

Engineering 24, 1965.

to NAA

12

Apollo systems and The with for craft (Rg:D) capability.

Program envisioned requested first three

Director by ASPO LEMs to

Salnuel NASA Manager (LEM-1,

C. Phillips Joseph LEM-2, (1) F.

listed on Shea's the

the first

RF

communications R&D LEMs

Headquarters

three

comments. would required required (3) updating (4) redundant be equipped in the of LEM spaceengineering tracking

and

LEM-3) to that of and

communications hmar data; equipntent missions (2)

equipment provide: redundant via an up-data

in addition transmission

operational colnmand

telemetry; link:

148

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

The the the

LEM equipment

RgeD

communications communications bay (which

system systems.

was

essentially be would

independent housed house primarily the

from in scientific

1965
June

operational

It would flights

on operational

payload
Letter, 3," June

equipment).
Phillips 12, 1965. to Shea, "R&D Communications and Tracking systems in LEMs 1, 2,

Samuel port

C. Phillips, Goddard

Apollo Space agreement to ASPO in the

Program Flight to furnish Manager design,

Director, Center on limited Joseph their

noted LEM support. F. Shea and experience

MSC battery

request

for

supas

12

from

development

well as Goddard's Phillips much battery MSFC suggested experience systems, be contacted

that

since and

MSFC aspects

had of

development, to use had not already
Battery l)evelopment,"

operational

it was important if sttch action
to Shea, "LEM

recommended

occurred.
June 12, 1965.

Memorandum,

Phillips

MSC Director mittee, headed Receiving

Robert R. Gilruth by Edwin Samfield, at the Center.
R. Gilruth, for MSC, the to assist

appointed to oversee

a Technical Working the design of a Lunar

ComSample

14

Laboratory
Robert Working of

Memorandum, Technical and June designation 1,t, 1965.

to Chief, design in the of

E,_gineering a Lunar selection of an

IIivision,

"Formation

of a tirm,"

Committee consultants

Sample

Receiving architect-engineer

Laboratory

Using Roger (PLSS). pack ference

a I,EM

mockup and Systems hinder any were period that LEM.
Progress

at Grumman, Donn tests of F. the Eisele,

and

with

the

assistance life the and were damage

of astronauts Standard system back interthe prefor be support reshaped

14-15

B. Chaffee mobility Crew problems for through inside
"Moqthly Management June 17-24,

engineers reported the

from portable that

Hamilton

performed did not

reconfignred (CSD) when CSD

Division inescapable of time, and the

entering

or leaving

spacecraft; the PLSSs that

while worn

some inside

spacecraft vented however, mobility
GAEC, Weekly Report,

believed movement had

could

training the

by limiting newer

by the crew. "serious

Grumman,

contended

PLSSs

implications"

Report June

No.

29,"

LI'R-10-45, 1965"; MSC,

July "ASPO

10,

1965, Weekly

p.

3;

"ASPO

Report, 1965."

10-17,

Management

Independent effects and

studies impact

were

made

at

MSC

and Block

North

American

to determine system

15

of off-loading

certain

II service

propulsion

components for Saturn mine the weight change

IB missions. The contractor involved and schedule and 149

was requested to detercost impact of removing

RADIAL BEAM TRUSS (6 PLACES) SECTOR 4

HELIUM

TANKS TANK

FAI

TANK

PRESSURE SYSTEM PANEl ECS SPACE RADIATORS (SECTORS 2 AND 5t FUEL CELL POWER PLANT (3) TANK TANK H 2 TANK

RCS PACKAGE

(4 PLACES)

OXIDIZER

SERVICE PROPULSION SYSTEM ENGINE

H2 TANK EPS SPACE RADIATORS (SECTOR SECTOR 1 1 AND 4)

FUEL TANK

(REF)

SPS ENGINE EXPANSION

NOZZLE

The

service

module.

1965
June

one ware

oxidizer (fuel

tank, and

one oxidizer

fuel

tank, transfer from

one

helium

tank

and

all

associated sensors The MSC with

hardand study such a

lines, CSM technical

propellant 101 and CSM problems

quantity 103. associated

certain change The

gaging and North the

wire toward

harnesses) determining on study

was oriented

effects

spacecraft indicated

operational that

requirements. the equipment would 454 kg impact and for

American

removing

save about (1000 lbs). provided CSM The

$690 000, along with a weight reduction of approximately Their report also indicated there would be no schedule go-ahead was given for CSM 101 prior to June 1, 1965, to November indicated 1, 1965. a maximum temperature; might not of the burn limitation of 280

103 prior MS(" study

seconds,

due

to excessive drop in change to the gaging stated ever, because those of the problems
Owcn IISPS

helium system

and also pointed out that the be as simple as North American secondary sensing system. How-

arrangement did not appear
E. Maynard, for MS(],

insurmountable.
to Manager, 1B Missions," ASPO, June Attn: W. A. Lee, "Off-

Memorandum, Loading Block

Components

Saturn

15, 1965.

150

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

In a series of meetings American worked out

at Downey, most of the

Calif., interface

MS(;, (;rttmlnan, and North between the two spacecraft. were: the thermal environloads and bending modes

1965
June 15-18

Among the most signiticant items yet unresolved ment of the LEM during boost: and the structural between
Letter, J. c. GAEC June2t

the docked
C. Cozad, L. Taylor, "Contract July 1965: 28,

spacecraft.
MSC, NAS Meetings 1!)65, with l'rogress to NAA, 9-150, No. Space Resolution 27 Report and No. 29, and of "Minutes 2!1," LI'R Information CSM/I_EM June of 15-18 S_stems Interfaces, and June l)ivision, 24-25, Meeting .... Attn: 1._5, "

MSC/NAA/

Coordination 25,

respeclively,"

enclosure:

Coordi,mtion 10 .t5, p. I.

"Monthly

At Bethpage, (FPD) agreed that

N.Y., the

officials status

t:rom

(;rtmmtan development malmfacturing support (;rtnnman another "It

and

the early plan and

Flight May, checkout

Projects

Division had one reand FPD the di. . .

16

discttssed to devise included for however, no longer reported the I,EM-1

of LEM-1. status; ground

1luring

the company spacecraft, sequences; software; the plan. meeting

a comprehensive facilities, and remain to ASP(), progr'am
J. Thomas 7, NAS Report,

for the and on status

hardware

quirements projected details, could vision until

equipment, was still intention LEM-1 month to work

schedules.

By mid-Jttne, rettuested patient: plan
Markley, 1965; letter, 9-1100, June

tmprepared of this office,"

to discuss

is the

"'to condttct

a monthly defined."
H. Status L.

is clearly
MSC, R. LEM-I 10-17, 1965." to Wayne

Memorandum, ing schedule," Mullaney, Weekly

Reynolds, MSC, Meeting,"

"Detailed to June GAEC, 25,

LEM-1 Attn: 1965;

workR. "ASPO S.

June "Contract

Young,

Management

To

prevent during

the

CSM's dot:king

contacting simtdations), degrees
Report,

the

LEM's deviations

radar in

antenna the CSM's

(a problem roll

dis-

16

closed would

attitude

be limited
Weekly

to eight
Management

or less.
June 17-24, 1965."

"ASPO

MSC adapter and--at

ordered

North

American

to

revise

the

deployment

angles

of

the

16

panels: 45 degrees most--60 degrees
J. B. Alldredge, MSC,

for separation, docking, and LEM withdrawal; for abort separation. (See December 7, 1964.)
to NAA, Space Revision Taylor, Item June and Information Systems Division, "ConOsbon, Project

Letter, tract NAA, Apollo Guidance

Change Authorization No. 275, to NASA MSC, Attn: C. L. Spacecraft and Results Panel of Action Meeting."

1," June "Contract Eleventh

16, 1965; letter, H. G. NAS 9-150, R&D for Flight enclosure. Mechanics,

from

Dynamics,

Control

29, 1965, with

MSC timing

directed

(,rumman assembly assembly the

to modify to enable Thus, guidance (AEA).

the

LEM's from

pulse the two

code data AEA

modulation from the disagreed

and abort with

16

electronics from

it to telemeter if data computer, 151 the

electronics those

spacecraft's

sets could

be recon-

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT"

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
June

ciled on the ground (using inputs from relieving the astronauts of this chore.
Letter, James L. Neal, MSC, to GAEC, Attn:

the

Manned

Space

Flight

Network),

John

C. Snedeker, Capability in

"Contract PCMTEA

NAS to

9-1100,

Contract Change Authorization AGS Computer Digital Data,"

No. 112, l'rovide June 16, 1965.

Telemeter

16

The that should

net the

effect total

of a decision fuel cell effort than funds $9.7

by ASPO at both million

Manager and during

Joseph Whitney

F. Shea and The North

in May

was

Pratt

American as to the subsystem

he no more of the

FY 1966.

decision fuel cell

distribution manager.
Memorandum

was left

to the

discretion

of the

for

Record,

J.

Thomas

Markley,

"C&SM

Fuel

Cell

Effort,"

.June

16, 1965.

16-23

Structures and Mechanics found two thermal problems (1) antennas engineers, environment" inner panels. (2) from the Also, SM's Grumman reaction had panels On the after of basis

Division with the

(SMD) LEM:

reported

that

Grumman

had

of current during the

predictions, the boost problem, and by

the believed

spacecraft's of an heat that the that

skin

and

several SMD LEM

would

overheat analyzing could the adapter

phase the

mission. from by the

"acceptable

be achieved

by lessening increasing that,

transferred emitted

the outer

reported

when the

exposed skin

to exhaust would

plumes overheat

control

engines,

LEM's

in about five seconds. "Since the LEM withdrawal . . . requires RCS firing," SMD understated, "it is apparent that a problem suggested
"ASPO

20 to 26 sec exists." One

solution
Weekly

involved
Management

improved
Report, June

insulation.
17-24, 1965"; memorandum, Joseph CorporaControl N.

Kotanchik, MSC, "Review of requirement tion (GAEC) ground support equipment System," June 30, 1965.

for (,rumman Aircraft Engineering (GSE) Item LDW-410-12050, Thermal

16-July

15

North CM scheduled
NAA,

American (applicable to l)egin
"Apollo

submitted to 014 and shortly.
Progress

a design all Block

proposal

for a scientific Structural

airlock

for

the was

II spacecraft).

design

Monthly

Report,"

SID 62-300-39,

August

1, 1965,

p. 4.

16-July

15

North American reported two service propulsion and a third at WSMR. At the first location, both separatitm instance, of the weld thrust chamber were from the the injector deficiencies culprit.

engine failures

failures at AEDC were attributed to in the these latter failures of all

assembly;

Analysis

was continuing.
Ibid., p. 11.

152

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

MSC

directed

Hamilton a manual activity,

Standard override a failed relief

Division current valve

to study pressure would

the relief

feasibility valve. further

of operation

in-

1965
June 17

corporating lunar surface of the suit.
TWX, June

in the

During

prevent

Richard 17, 1965.

S. Johnston,

MSC,

to Hamilton

Standard

Division,

Attn:

R. E. Breeding,

Officials Washington (applicable Space

from

Beilcomm, planned

MSFC, primary through launch

and and vehicles SA-208).

the

Apollo On July

offices 16, the IB

in Houston for and the V Office

and

in IB

17

alternate (both

missions Saturn

Saturn of Manned hardware)

to SA-201 specified missions.
OMSF, Apollo "Apollo

Flight

for Apollo
NASA Hardware Bellcomm,

Program Alternate

Directive Approval," Missions

No. July

4,

"Apollo 16, 1965; Case

Controlled memorandum, 217 (U)," June

Milestones B. 22, 1965.

and Kaskey,

Quantities_Change to File,

Meeting,

A Development at W. North M. Bland,

Engineering Downey, .Jr., Chairman; O. G. Morris, Request resulted the study; RFCs three
Jr.,

Inspection California. R. H.

(DEI) The and

was

held

on Board

spacecraft consisted

002 of

17

American,

NASA

Ridnour,

J. Chamberlin, O. Tarango. were of for submitted at the

S. A. Sjoberg,

F. J. Bailey, A total DEI,

O. E. Maynard, for Changes the from was: design the seven

of 20 and eight of for

(RFCs) review inspection approved and

and MSC

reviewed; to the final five The action;

12 of them disposition approved

resulted

from

conducted

prior

vehicle. not
002

immediate

rejected;
MSC

five
"Results 23, 1965.

determined
of Spacecraft

applicable.

Memorandum, Engineering

W. M. Bland, Inspection," sgd.

to Distr., June

Development

E. M. Fields,

Crew for the main

Systems portable and

Division life backup of the
S. June

engineers system. arrangement, vehicle.
Johnston, 17, 1965.

evaluated The which

various division would

battery recommended save about

combinations a three-hr 9 kg (20 lbs)

17

support

a one-hr weight

in tile total
Memorandum, "PLSS

Richard sizing,"

MSC,

to

Chief.

Systems

Engineering

Division,

battery

NASA on the
inents.

representatives Apollo work

briefed on

officials program a radioisotope

from and

the

Atomic

Energy of to power

Commission coordinating those experi-

17-24

the

experiments

discussed generator

means

Commission's

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report,

June

17-24,

1965."

153

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
June 17-24

Crew Systems Division (submitted by Hamilton (See July
Ibid.

began evaluating space suits for the Apollo Standard I)avid (:lark, and International

program Latex).

8-15.)

21

North American's Rocketdyne Division conducted the Saturn V's first-stage engine, the F-l, MSFC.
5"pa_e Bmi_e_s Daily, June December 31, 1965, p. 240. 23, 1965, p. '275; Itistorw oI

the

1000th

test

firing

of

Marshall

. . . ]amta_y

1-

21

.Joseph the

F. Shea,

ASPO to connect

Manager, the space

established suit to the

as a firm I,EM's

mission

requirement system capability This

capability

environmental

and to the portable life support system while in a vacuum. was essential for operational flexibility on the moon's surface.
Memorandum, (ions," June Joseph 21, 1965. F. Shea, MSC, to Chiet, Crew Systems Division,

"Suit

Connec-

21

The

following

definitions design tradeoff

were

specified and

for in

use

in

evaluating Interface

design Control

re-

liability, for Documentation: • Mission complished mary would covery

studies,

appropriate

success--all and both the

primary crew and

mission

objectives module

must

have

been recovered.

ac-

command

safely

• Alternate mission--if a contingency prevented completion of all primission objectives, but did not require immediate termination of the an alternate not of be included only crew
William "Mission

mission,

mission in design

plan

would after the

be followed calculations. an abort

but

alternate was caused
Systems

missions safest the re-

reliability

• Abort--the the

objective

decision which
MSC, June to Chief, 21, 1965.

the

considering
A. Lee success and and

contingency
I,. Reynolds, definitions."

abort.

Memorandum, ing Division,

Harry crew

Engineer-

safety

21-July

1

Crew whether in zero

Systems the and

Division cabin one-sixth the

(CSD)

conducted LEM several

a series was Together

of flight with

tests its

to determine performance of satis"ap-

layout division

of the made

suitable

for crew that

g environments.

report

factory results, propriate": • CSD

observations

it thought

suggested

hand

grips were

in a number needed

of places

to aid the

the Velcro

crew pile on

• Additional the cabin floor

restraints

to supplement

154

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

• Some one-g
froln

problems

with

crew

performance or zero-g

and

mobility,

present (e.g.,

during moving

1965
June

simulations were absent in lowone crew station to another).
Management Report.

environnlents

MSC,"ASPOVqeckly

July8

15, 1965."

MSC LEM's left order

advised abort after over

(;rmnman guidance the basic MSC

of additional section listed as: requirements

functions only were

for

the

computer of its memory

in

the was in

22

(to be added

if a part

digested).

These

functions,

of priority, • Midcourse • Automatic • Display • Antomatic

corrections abort from a {oasting range and rendezvous
to GAEC,

descent range (with
Attn: R.

of CSM-LEM terminal
Young, MSC,

rate manual
S. Mullaney, June

velocity
"Contract 22, 1965.

control).
NAS 9-1100,

Letter, LEM

R. Wa}ne Abort

Guidance

Section

Functional

Requirements,"

NASA

Headquarters

established

an

Ad

Hoc

Surveyor/Orl)iter

Utilization of two proposed with the mission

22

Committee members. plalming planned ()n July

and MSC was It was suggested and for late 2!), A. constraints Jnly. Director William (;ilruth of

reqnested that the the

to snbmit names nominees be familiar program. The

Apollo

first

meeting

was

MS(" Lee and

Robert

R. to serve to the

Gilruth Jr. He as MSC a desire extent

sublnitted noted that that that the travel members

the the meetings would

names same of be

of two the

William individuals Site

E. Stoney, expressed

were could

being

Dominated

on the

Apollo mini-

Selection

Board.

two groups mized.
Letter, to MSC,

be coordinated

Homer Attn:

E. Newell, Dr. Robert

Associate R. Gilruth,

Administrator "Members of

for

Space

Science

and

Applications, Utilizatioq Hoc Surveyor/

Ad Hoc

Surveyor/Orbiter of Ad

Committee," June Orbiter Utilization

22, 1965; letter, Gilruth to Committee," July 29, 1965.

Newell,

"Members

In a memorandum tion Control Board Control groups sponsible keep are can the afford Division, were not subsystem number the to meet

concerning Configuration Control Panel and Configuraactions, J. Thomas Markley, Chief of ASPO's Program pointed out that area many evahlated manager. and We are .... "
June 23, 1965.

23

proposals He

coming said,

before impact

the by the "We those when can

two rethat we show must

being

adequately

for program incorporate beyond

or technical of changes program design

in part, only the time they

to a minimum objectives. improvement program

necessary

luxury

changes,

unless

substantial
Memoramlum,

savings

to the

overall

Markley

to l)istr..

"C(:B,.'CCP

Actions,"

155

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
June 23

The priate ticality

operational contract

requirement capability direction the and this HF was

for

Block

I and change the

Block ASPO Block from

II

CSM

HF that and

orbital approimpracbe the

communications mediately investigated.
Memorandum, Subsystem, Capability,"

investigated. from

requested II CSM the

specification orbital

notices

be submitted Block I CSM

to eliminate of eliminating

capability

capability

William "Requirement June 23, 1965.

A. for

Lee,

MSC,

to

Subsystem Block II

Manager, CSM HF

CSM Orbital

Communications Communications

Block

I and

24-July

1

Dalmo-Victor tend The report.
MSC, "ASPO

submitted

to MSC the and

a report

on

modifications

necessary

to ex-

to hmar distances Instrumentation

operating Electronic

range of the CSM's Systems Division

high-gain antenna. was reviewing the

Weekly

Management

Report

June

24-|uly

1, 1965."

24-July

1

MSC

completed at

a cursory touchdown at 8-4 sec horizontal.

analysis velocities This velocity

of of

LEM 2.43

landing m (8 the gear ft)

gear per

load-stroke sec vertical to determine be designed

reand the and

quirements lowest crush

1.22 m (4 ft) per loads still meet
Ibid.; TM-5

study

was conducted could

to which requirements.

its landing
memorandum, vehicle from the

performance
William LEM G.

McMulleu, Gear

MSC, Subsystem

to

Manager, Test

ASPO, July

"Elimination 7, 1965.

of

Landing

Program,"

25

NASA rector signed Space

announced for Flight,
News

the first and Mission

appointment second Operations

of Col. Apollo/Saturn Organization

C. H. IB in

Bolender flights. the

as Mission Bolender was of

Dias-

the

to the

Office

Manned

NASA.
Release 65-211.

NASA

25

MSC in the The CSM possible

approved CM's crew separation freezing
C. L.

North reaction

American's control before heat the

concept the system when valves

for thermal for for about

control ten

of the minutes

valves before

system

(essential

long-duration thereby

missions). forestalling

could

electrically and of the oxidizer
Taylor, "Contract MSC, NAS to

was pressurized, it contacted
and of June

the valve.
Systems Venting Division, Systems ou Attn: RCS

Letter, J. C. Propellant

NAA, 9-150,

Space Effects of,"

Information Spacecraft 23, 1965.

Cozad,

Requirements,

Determination

25

Harry weight

L.

Reynolds, clear the that

Assistant we are control

Manager going He 156

of said

ASPO, a difficult the

said job Grumman

it

was

"becoming the was LEM not

increasingly below

to have

keeping effort

weight."

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

adequate and suggested that trol as a full-time responsibility.
Memorandum, trol," June Reynolds 25, 1965. to

R. Bullard

of MSC

be given

LEM

weight

con-

1965
June

Chief,

Systems

Engineering

Division,

"LEM

Weight

Con-

ASPO June Daytona

informed 21, 1965, Beach,

Grumman, General Fla., had

NAA, Electric assumed checkout

AC

Spark

Plug, Apollo

and for

MIT the

that

effective and NASA

25

Company, responsibility equipment

Support training

Department, for

preparation

conduct of all automatic and its contractors. To satisfy conditions NASA

(ACE)

of its contract, and contractor

General ACE

Electric training

would: requirements and pre-

• Survey

pare for ASPO endorsement a standard set of lesson plans (course outlines) for three distinct ACE training courses--(1) for ACE operators and operational ments satisfy These checkout but • Issue plans were with would procedures not operators, approval prior writers, and assignment (2) for personnel who individuals ACE and had site who training deviations common by ASPO. organization. months as plans and assigndid not (3) for all other considerations. plan from for each ASPO. contain approved reference course. would baseline approval documents a lesson

the aforementioned ASPO without

be considered

not be permitted

• Prepare one study guide which would information for all three ACE training courses. • Issue This well coordinated monthly ACE training reports schedules to each • Distribute status

participating

report would contain a training as a discussion of achievements. the coordinator for determining with which other would facility.

schedule for the next three To control established

implement changes, would be responsible ordinating sired tion training • Issue to those those needs at that a citation qualifying

for each participating organization local training requirements and cocontractors acknowledge or NASA satisfactory elements course who de-

comple-

students. of a single ACE was and training contractor participating understanding
"Contract

Purpose of sufficient
Letters,

of selection set amount
R. Wayne

and

establishment organizations of ACE.
NAS 9-1100, Brady, Attn:

a standard

of courses of training
Young, MSC,

to provide a universal
Attn:

a

to GAEC,

R. S. Mullaney,

ACE Training," "'Contract NAS M. NAS B. Trageser, to 9-150, NAA, ACE

June 25, 1965; M. E. Dell, MSC, 9--497, ACE Training," June 28, "Contract Space and Training," NAS June 9-4065, ACE Systems

to AC Spark Plug, Attn: Hugh 1965; M. E. Dell, MSC, to MIT, June Attn: 28, I. 1965; C. J.

Training," Division,

B. Alldredge, "Contract

MSC,

Information

Cozad,

29, 1965.

NASA additional

announced S-IVB

negotiations stages

with

Douglas third

Aircraft stage

Company Saturn

for

nine

25

to be used

as the 157

of the

V launch

Douglas engineers are shown installing the electrical system in the forward area of the S-IVB stage.
1965
June

vehicle being developed at Marshall Space Flight Center. Work was to include related spares and launch support services. T h e S-IVB contract, presently valued at $312 million, would be increased by $150 million for the additional work.
NASA News Release 65-209, “NASA to Negotiate with Douglas for more S-IVB Stages,” ,June25,1965; Space Business Daily, June 28, 1965, p. 295.

25

MSC approved North American’s proposed location of the antenna for the radar transponder in the CSM, as well as the transponder’s coverage. This action followed a detailed review of the relative positions of the two spacecraft during those mission phases when radar tracking of the LEM was required.
Letter, R. Wayne Young, MSC, to GAEC, Attn: R. S. Mullaney, “Contract NAS 9-1100, Radar Transponder Antenna Location on CSM,” June 25, 1965.

28

Owen E. Maynard, Chief of the Systems Engineering Division, vetoed a demand by the Flight Control Division for redundancy in the LEM’s pulse code modulation telemetry system. Two factors determined Maynard’s 158

ADVANCED DESIGN, FABRICATION, AND TESTING

action: (1) cost and schedule impacts, and (2) the resultant weight and power increases that redundancy would impose. Also it would produce only a “marginal” increase in the total reliability of the spacecraft.
Memorandum, Owen E. Maynard, MSC, to Chief, Flight Control Division, “LEM PCM telemetry redundancy,”June 28, 1965.

5
June

The first ground-test version of the Saturn V’s first stage is shown being removed from its vertical assembly tower at NASA’s Michoud Operations Facility June 27, 1965. The stage was 10 m (33 ft) in diameter and 42 m (138 ft) tall.

At the right is the launch of PA-2; below, the boilerplate spacecraft as it rests on the desert floor at WSMR.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Systems study at sites on

Engineering and a LEM request). in excess

Division Electronic Dnring communications

chief,

()wen

E.

Maynard, (IESD) by descent longitude),

reported the his the results own

to

the of a

1965
June 28

Instrumentation IESD's (those

Systems problem of

Division powered west

(undertaken

group landing of

phases

to certain of sight be lost.

of 20 degrees

east or

structure

the spacecraft would earth. Communications

bh)ck the steerable with the ground the problem

antenna's line would therefore could best

with tile Maynard the

concurred with IESD that LEM about its thrust axis.
Memorandum, tems antenna Division, during Owen lunar E.

be solved

by rotating

Maynard, adequate anti

MSC, earth ascent,"

to Chief, coverage June

Instrumentation from the LEM

and

Electronic S-band

Sys-

"Providing descent

steerable

28, 1965.

John broad ment

H.

Disher, open

Director to concern (1) structural

of

the

OMSF

Apollo and (2)

Test

Office, heatshield

stressed

two of

28

areas program:

in the integrity,

Apollo

spacecraft

develop-

flight-test

confirmation

the Block The

II design. integrity material question integrity, the and centered and Block around the following problems:

structural ablative

welding, MSC fied had Block

impact

strength. by flight tests of modicould not

planned

to qualify 017 into modified limitations by ground to Apollo

If heatshield of the Block

I spacecraft and

020.

Some

If changes

be incorporated rent schedule

Block I spacecraft of facilities would testing.

in time to meet the curnot permit full evaluation

of all modifications Disher suggested

Program

Director

Samuel

C. Phillips

that

ASP()

Manager Joseph Shea be asked and Block II heatshields, and craft, meet as well mission as the test plan requirements.
Dishcr to Phillips,

to present physical descriptions of the Block I interim versions as applied to specific spacethat would ensure adequacy of heatshields to

Memorandum,

"Apollo

Spacecraft

Heat

Shield,"

,June 28, 1965.

MSC thermal

directed The

North

American garment would

to design rather the carry

the than TMG

CM into

to store the the

one

integrated coverdurfor use

29

meteoroid

(TMG),

merely

thermal

ing alone.

crewmen

LEM

ing extravehicular
Lctter, tract J. Change

operations.
MSC, No. to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division, "Con-

B. Alldredge, Authorization

371:" June

29, 1965.

NASA (LES) escape (5000

launched

Apollo

mission

PA-2,

a test

of the

launch

escape

system

29

simulating a pad abort at WSMR. All test objectives were met. The rocket lifted the spacecraft (boilerplate 23A) more than 1524 m ft) above the pad. The earth landing 161 system functioned normally,

The Langley Research Center’s Lunar Landing Research Facility.
1965
June

lowering the vehicle back to earth. This flight was similar to the first pad abort test on November 7, 1963, except for the addition of canards to the LES (to orient the spacecraft blunt end forward after engine burnout) and a boost protective cover on the CM. PA-2 was the fifth of six scheduled flights to prove out the LES. [Mission objectives in Appendix 5.1
Memorandum, George E. Mueller, NASA, to Administrator, “Apollo Spacecraft Pad Abort Test, Mission PA-2, Post Launch Report No. 1,” July 2, 1965; MSC, “Postlaunch Report for Apollo Mission PA-2 (BP-23A),” July 29, 1965, pp. 1-1, 2-1, 3-1, and 10-1.

29

North American reported to MSC that no structural changes to the spacecraft would be required for uprating the thrust of the Saturn IB’s H-1 engine from 90 718 to 92 986 kgs (200 000 to 205 000 lbs). Effects on the performance of the launch escape vehicle would be negligible.
Letter, H. G. Osbon, NAA, to NASA MSC, Attn: C. L. Taylor, “Contract NAS 9-150, R&D for Project Apollo Spacecraft; Spacecraft Structural Impact of Increase of H-1 Engine,” June 29, 1965.

29

NASA formally announced the selection of six scientist-astronauts for the Apollo program, chosen from a group aominated by America’s scientific

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

community. earlier by mittee on candidates the United level tional

Qualifications NASA and the

and

recruiting

procedures of

had Sciences'

been Ad

worked Hoc

out Com-

1965
June

National

Academy

Scientific Qualifications must have been born States; be no more of a doctorate

of Scientist-Astronauts. To be eligible, on or after August 1, 1930; I)e citizens of than 1.83 m (6 ft) tall; in experience. and have The an educaone six, only

or the equivalent

of whom was oil active military service, were Owen K. Garriott, Edward G. Gibson, Duane E. Graveline, Lt. Cdr. Joseph P. Kerwin (USN), Frank Curtis Michel, and Harrison Schmitt.
Letter, attachment, August 19, Homer 1964; E. Newell, "Suggested letter, NASA, Public Newell to to Robert H. R. Hess, (;ilruth, of the NAS, MSC, August August 19, 1964; 19, 1964, with News

Announcement Harry

Scientist-Astronaut

Program," NASA

Release 64-315, "NASA Reports Program," December 16, 1964; News Release 65-63, June

Some 900 Persons MSC News Release

Interested in Scientist-Astronaut 64-195, December 16, 1964; MSC

29, 1965.

Langley

Research

Center

put

into

operation

its $3.5

million

Lunar

Landing 121.9 m various vehicle

3O

Research Facility. The huge [400 ft] long) would be used problems of landing under
and A

structure to explore moon. The g conditions.

(76.2 m [250 ft] high and techniques and to forecast facility would enable a test

on the one-sixth

to be operated
Astronautics Research: November

Aeronautics, o]

1965, the

p.

303;

Michael Research

David

Keller, Center,

Fifty 1917-1966

Years

o] Flight (HHN-65),

Chronology

Langley

1966, p. 89.

In a memorandum LLRV lieved 5/6th matic the better simulation g lift. Control system in understand Project that the of

to T. Manager, LLRV

Tarbox, said not

John configured

Ryken, that in a copy help felt

Bell

Aerosystems Grimm jet to the engine

Company of MSC bethe Autoon provide

3O

he understood rocket and these thrust

Dean addition

was

to have

a constant-lift forwarded Service that system. which hope the System the

providing "LLRV plus notes

Ryken

to Tarbox would

of a report, Manual," him and suggestions

Maintenance included

NASA about

personnel reducing with LEM

He also Grimm

aerodynamic simulation.
Interoffice "LLRV,"

moments

might

interfere

Memo, June

Bell

Aerosystems

Company,

J.

Ryken,

Bell,

to

T.

Tarbox,

Bell,

30, 1965.

The

Development

Engineering

Inspection

(DEI)

for Little

Joe

II

12-51-3 Calif. in the with the DEI F. J.

July 1

was satisfactorily The vehicle had power-on emphasis encountered Board: J. A. tumbling

conducted at General Dynamics/Convair, San Diego, been assigned for Mission A-004, an abort mission boundary which the had A-003 region. been mission. The effected The S. A. 163 DEI following Sjoberg, R. was conducted of the served on as a result

on changes during

malfunction

Chamberlin,

Chairman,

F. Gordon,

An S-IVB Facilities Vehicle arrived a t Cape Kennedy from Seal Beach, Calif. Built like a flight stage (except for having no engine installed), it was used at the Cape to check out modifications being made to Launch Complex 34, from which Saturn S-IBs would be launched with S-IVBs as the second stage. The stage had previously been used in a checkout of Douglas Aircraft’s Sacramento, California, S-IVB test facility.

1965
July

Bailey, R. C. Duncan, W. M. Bland, R. A. Gardiner, and L. P. Gallagher, Secretary.
Memorandum, Chief, Checkout and Test Division, MSC, to Distr., “Development Engineering Inspection for LJ I1 12-51-3,” sgd. James J. Shannon for W. M. Bland, June 25, 1965; “Weekly Activity Report, June 27-July 3, 1965,” sgd. Joseph F. Shea.

1

On the basis of information from the two Apollo spacecraft manufacturers, the Systems Engineering Division (SED) reported a possible thermal problem with the Saturn V during ascent: On Saturns 501 and 502, the temperatures of the SM and the adapter would exceed design limits. (These limits were based on heating rates for 504, a heavier vehicle with a consequently cooler trajectory.) And on 504, heating rates on the adapter would create an “unacceptable thermal environment” for the spacecraft within.
0

0

164

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

SED both).

laid

down (either

study by

procedures the

to

determine or

the the

best launch

solution

to

this

1965
July

problem

modifying

spacecraft

trajectory--or

Memorandum, July i, 1965; "Item 2.10, Heating Boost

Owen

E.

Maynard,

MSC,

to

Distr.,

"'Saturn

V ascent

beating

problem," I)ivision, Boost

memorandum. SESAME No. July July 26,

Aaron Cohen, MSC, 2 Meeting Minutes, 1965, with enclosure:

to Chief, Systems Engineering SM and SLA/LEM l'otential "MSC/NAA Meeting,

Problems," Heating,"

SM/SLA/LEM

15, 1965.

Within Selection Manned landing

its Office Board. Space

of Manned Space Flight, As an advisory body to Flight, George E. Mueller,

NASA organized an Apollo the Associate Administrator the group would

Site for

recommend

sites for Apollo.
George July I, 1965. E. Mueller, NASA, to l)istr., "Establishment of Apollo Site Selection

Instruction, Board,"

NASA Associate Administrator for Manned told MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth he Executive organizations It was Mueller's program to provide in the effective tives status, policy Group. were This carrying group out that would the the

Space Flight George was establishing an of space senior flight

E. Mueller Operations whose

consist

executives operations. basis and flight needed that to work to the

manned group with each meet the other

objective resource decisions.

on a regular and to ensure enough background was well

review make execudirectly

requirements, management A second area knew

management, objective problems. be held members

operations

executive operations sohttion

in the rapid Mueller intervals equipment.
Letter,

of time-critical

planned that at locations

one-day meetings would that would acquaint

at two with

to four month facilities and

Mueller

to Gilruth,

July

1, 1965.

Gruxnman

completed

its

study

of

oxygen

storage

systems

for

the

LEM (one 6894-

1-4

(see June 11) and 20 684-kilonewton kilonewtons to the design, avoidable bad tion, this from the per

reviewed with MSC the company's per sq m [3000 psi] tank in the sq m [1000 psi] tanks in the ascent

recommendation descent stage, two stage). One

drawback

which the Crew Systems Division termed an "apparently unfeature," was that, by the time of the final cabin repressnrizatime would and increase cabin to about Although pressures, 12 minutes requesting the Center (though more data approved a conservative on temperatures estimate).

repressurization

was admittedly (;ruinmall

the configuration.
MSC, "ASt'O Weekly Management Report, July 1-8, 1965."

165

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAI,'T:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
July 2

The

NASA

Director of Sciences' from

of Bioscience report the on that back moon

Programs because

pointed

out placed which

that

the

National on the From

Academy potential this report, in the very

contamination of the short had problems

emphasis must

hazard

stay on the moon.

it was evident near future.

NASA

be solved

It was recommended back (ontamination It was felt this prol)lem munity, and contamination the ntanned
Memorandum, Space Science

that NASA and that there of NASA

accept the operational be a clear-cut assignment to establish adequate

responsibility soon. authority

for

that

failure

to handle

and other

thus to satisfy the regulatory agencies

public, the could result

press, the scientific comin direct control of back constraints upon

by those agencies and (ause lunar and planetary missions.
I)irector and of Bioscience i'rograms, for NASA,

unnecessary

to

Associate

Administrator July 2, 1965.

for

Applications,

"Responsibility

Space

Quarantine,"

ASPO Manager Joseph some type of protective eyes during a solar flare.

F. Shea ordered devices that the ASP() regarded high. still see

Crew Systems Division to develop astronauts might use to shield their the risk of cataracts during these it was Should rules devices Although not mandatory, while wearing the devices. LEM, CSM; mission therefore, ground such

solar events as extraordinarily desirable that the crew could

a flare occur while the crew manned the (:ailed for an abort back to the safety of the would be needed for the CM alone.
Memorandum, cataracts Joseph F. Shca, MSC, July to Chief. (h'e_

Systems

Division,

"Incidence

of

in Apollo

crewmembers,"

2, 1965.

4--10

The

Weekly

Activity

Report

for

the

period

indicated

that

(1) the

CM

002

was transferred internally within North American from manufacturing to the test organization on July 8; (2) the CM 009 checkout at North American continued out were shipped with the and to KSC central the new and timing North equipment American, for the and batteries respectively; LEM batteries signal for conditioner CSM and was (3) the check011 by Grumcompleted, 40-ampere-hour 009 and approved

man subcontract NASA.

to Eagle-Picher

"_,Veckly

Activity

Report,

July

4-10,

1965,"

sg(I.

J.

Thomas

Marklcy

for

Joseph

F. Shea.

7-9

Langley Research (:enter lunar orbital docking runs.

completed

(:SM

active

docking

simulations

and

Memorandum, Michael K. Lake, MSC, to Chief, Docking Simulation," July 23, 1965, with enclosure.

Spacecraft

Operations

Branch,

"Apollo

166

A1)VANCED

I)ESI(;N,

FAI_,RICATION,

AND

TESTING

Illustrative American Block If

of continuing representatives environmental

design

and

managerial

prol)lelns, therlnal primarily

MSC

and

North

1965
July 7-13

attempted to resolve control systenl (ECS), were fruitless. tim contractor

problems the ECS

with the radiator.

The week-long talks dence notwithstanding, approach, satisfied pany's Systems any other American's]

MSC's arguments and supportive evisteadfastly opposed the water-glycol MSC, similarly, was hardly less so with the comreported ttnless their Crew [North difficult to complete

favoring a nonfreezing with North American's effort and performance. "is that in support is changed." Division, attitude

liquid (Freon). intransigence--and "A pertinent be

observation," extremely II schedules

. . . it will

development

of Block

"ASPO Weekly MSC, to Chief, opment Systems program,"

Management Crew Systems July

Report, July 8-15, Division, "llesign memorandum, "Viscosity data

1965"; criteria Frank of

memorandum, for backup H. Samonski,

Owen E. Maynard, ECS radiator develJr., MSC, July to 23, Chief, 1965.

6, 1965;

Engineering

Division,

RS-89A

(water-glycol),"

At a design by RCA, objection could far several redesigned on problems,
TV_rXs, 1965.

review Grnmman centered exceed heat

on

the

VHF

radio loads, limits.

equipment its approval. which RCA asked anticipated
Attn:

for the Grtunman's under therettpon

LEM,

conducted most serious conditions exploring and informed

8--9

refused

to vote

on thermal specification including sinks. Grnmman actions,
MS(',

extreme began MSC well

approaches,

new

materials, was and

relocation to keep

of components,

corrective
Young,

impacts.
July 12, 16, 19, and 22,

R. Wayne

to GAEC,

R. S. Mullaney,

An

RCS

oxidizer with of ten

tank

failed

during

a test

to demonstrate

propellant

comfrom durto be

11

patibility a group

titanium tanks. This was the first of seven tanks to fail tanks put into test to investigate a failure that occurred 1965. These results caused an intensive investigation

ing February undertaken.
Memorandum, to Bell RCS

Darrell

Kendrick, Company

MSC, (BAC)

to Chief,

Propulsion 15, 1965

and

Power

Division, S/M

"Trip 26)

Aerosystems Shell

on July

14 and

regarding

F (S/N

Tank

Failure,"

,July 26, 1965.

During of Army the held II

the

period Block

the to II

NASA/Department airlift suit by LEM and David adapters preliminary

of the was design

Army signed review

agreement by was both Apollo being
.Joseph

for

use

11-17

helicopters Clark

parties; Block reduced.
F. Shea.

Apollo space

space

successfully Standard

by David suits and

Company; I,atex
July 11-17,

evaluation Clark

testing Company, with
Markley

of the Hamilton data
for

submitted International
Report,

Division
"Weekly

was completed,
1965," sgd. J. Thomas

Activity

167

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT;

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
July 12

Joseph capability suit the

F. Shea, had

ASPO been (using ensure

Manager,

informed Crew release)

Flight Systems

Crew and

Operations disconnecting

that

the the This

firmly

established

for connecting to satisfy while

oxygen connector

umbilicals

in a vacuum. a two-position safe umbilical

Division this in an

was modifying unpressurized

requirement.

change wonld spacecraft.
Memorandum. June "Lunar II, 1965; Surface

operation

l)onald

K.

Slayton,

MSC, Shea,

to MSC,

Manager, to Asst.

ASPO, Dir.

"Lunar for Flight

Surface Crew

Operations," Operations,

memorandum, Operations," July

12,

1965.

13

Crew Systems Division controlling the amount searchers found that, of the would mobility

(CSD) completed of bacteria vented by placing special filters

its study on the from the LEM. in the

feasibility Division

of re-

environmental be greatly of effluents

control lowered. from the

system (ECS) This reduction extravehicular by the dubious LEM's amount effluence

spacecraft, emission levels could be meaningless, however, in view unit (EMU)--the moon would Because of weight penalties--and recommended that bacteria filters Division further from the advised EMU that, nor at

still be contaminated not because of their be added to the neither the this

space travelers. vahte--CSD ECS. The

present,

of bacteria emitted was yet known.
Robert controlling July Cabin 13, and E. effluent 1965, Smylie,

a means

of controlling

Memorandum, bility of

MSC,

to from

Chief, the

Systems LEM cabin of

Engineering and

Division, environmental Micro-Organisms

"Feasicontrol from

bacteria with enclosure:

subsystem," the LEM

"Control System."

Effluent

Environmental

Control

13

A Little in which

Joe

II failure (E&D) of the

investigation

presentation (GD/C) and

was made MSC's

at MSC Engineering

July

13 and

General

Dynamics/Convair

Development investigations (Boilerplate

Directorate presented mishap which occurred 22, 1965, at WSMR.

results during

of independent Apollo Mission

failure A-003

22) on June

The (;D/(: investigation results Program Manager, in the form made the following points:

were presented of flight movies

by J. B. Hurt, Little Joe II and a slide talk. The data

• At approximately in a direction to cause reached the fully deflected

one second the observed position

after liftoff, the Fin IV elevon clockwise rotation and at 2.5 where it remained until vehicle

moved seconds breakup fully desufficient normally

• Although computer simulatiolls of the flected did not precisely duplicate the observed correlation existed while Fin IV alone • The complete electrical servo loop,

flight with Fin IV dynamic motions, III functioned of the Fin

to conclude that Fins I, II, and caused loss of the mission. attitude performed

control system, exclusive correctly as designed. 168

IV hydro-

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

• The hydro-electrical servo-valve.

most

probable servo-loop

cause due

for the to an

faihtre internal

was a malftmction mechanical failure

in Fin of

IV the

1965
July

The Eg:D Guidance vestigation different

investigation and Control were computer stated

results were presented Division. In summary, to have confirmed used. the Littleton electrical not be were

by

O. P. Littleton results of the of GD/C with the agreed

of Eg:D

the in-

findings

although conclu-

methods

sions of GD/C, but emphasized that an Fin IV hydro-electrical servo-loop could source of failure at that time.

malfunction discounted

within the as a possible

Memorandum Presentation,"

for

Record, 1965.

Bill

J.

McCarty,

MSC,

"'Little

Joe

II

Failure

Investigation

July 20,

Structures figures for

and the

Mechanics Apollo

Division CSM.

(SMD)

presented General

meteoroid Electric

protection [GE] had

14

(During

April,

developed reliability estimates for the LEM, based for the 8.3-day reference mission. The probability had found, was .9969.) SMD's figures were:

on revised design criteria, for mission success, GE

Block (14-day CM SM earth

I orbital flight) (8.3-day

Block lunar .99989 .9941

II mission)

.99987 .9943

The mission

division goal the

consequently (Block was .99. above figures,

placed I, CSM

the

meteoroid and .99089

protection (Block

for

the and

entire LEM).

at .99417

only)

II, CSM

Apollo's All of

both

GE's

and

SMD's,

were

derived

from

the addistill

inherent protection afforded by the spacecraft's structure. Thus no tional meteoroid shielding was needed. (Meteoroid protection would be required, of course, during extravehicular operations.)

"ASI'O

Weekly

Management

Report,

July

8-15,

1965."

Willis

B.

Foster,

NASA's

Director

of

Manned

Space

Science

Programs, persons advisory Lunar Clark

14

informed MSC's Maxime A. Faget that to continue to serve as members of an group Sample to Foster Receiving with regard to the E.

he had asked the following Ad Hoc Committee as an and Chao construction (Chairman), of the

design C. 169 T.

Laboratory:

Lorin

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CItRONOLOGY

1965
July

(alternate Bell, and

chairman), alternates

James Jonathan

Arnold, Klein

Cliltord and Larry

Frondel, Hall.

Briggs

Phillips,

P.

R.

Letter, Sample

Foster Receiving

to

Fagct,

"MembersMp July

of 14,

the 1965.

Headquarters

Advisory

Committee

on

Lunar

Laboratory,"

I$

North to satisfy

American the

began requirement

redesigning for

tile

side

hatch transfer I

mechanism from Block were adding

in

the II

CM space-

extravehicular to thermal the Block warpage; once it was

(:raft. (1)

Two enlarging

basic it to

modifications overcome the

mechanism and (2)

required: some hinge

retention

device

to secure

hatch

opened.

Memorandum, .luly l)ivision, Ablative Manager, 6, 1965; Attn: ILttch ASPO,

R. letter, J. to

1).

Langley, C. L.

MSC, Taylor, "Contract July ablative 15,

to

Manager, to

ASP(), NAA, 9-150,

"Side Space

Access and of E.

Ablative

Hatch," Systems SMe Access MSC, to

MSC, NAS 1965; hatch,"

Information S/C 006

C.

Cozad,

Shipment Owen 1965.

MSC," access

memolandum, July 23,

Maynard,

"Side

IS

ASPO had

Manager made during

Joseph the

F. LEM and "not extent

Shea

informed Review deviations best

(;rumman on had interests by GAEC." July been of

that

a proposal

they broader

Program parts in the proposed

6 regarding reviewed the program by

qualification and the it was

scheduling considered to the

NASA to relax

requirements

Shea fied:

cited

a paragraph

of tests

the

Contract

Technical a particular

Specification flight from the

which vehicle Contractor."

specishall be

"Qualification prior to

supporting vehicle being

completed

that

delivered

It

was

NASA's test logic at that 6

desire

that

LEM required weeks program not signed in

program in to

scheduling support scheduled as accord of

be launch launch

such dates dates. by

that would

all

ground be

constraints least the six LEM were

completed out July June

prior

Shea

pointed at the

schedules complete by Shea.

presented with

Grumman previously

Review

dates

provided

7 in a datafax

Shea vember I.FM-4, 1967; 1968;

required 15, July LEM-7, I_EM 10,

the 1966; 15,

following LEM-2, 1967;

delivery February

dates 15,

from 1967; 15, April 1967;

Grumman: LEM-3, LEM-6, 1968; April

LEM-I, 15,

No1967; 15, 15,

LEM-5, 15, 15, 1968; 1968;

October LEM-8, and

December LEM-9, .June

February August

15,

IYAM-11,

October

15,

1968.

Grumman their plata

was

requested

to

provide program

NASA,

no

later

than schedule

August which

2,

1965, would

fin" support these

of a LEM

development

incorporate

requirements.

Letter, LEM

Joseph Development

F.

Shea, Program

MSC,

to

GAEC,

Ann: .July

R. 15,

S.

Mullaney,

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

Requirements,"

1965.

170

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

North

American

recommended

to MSC

that,

for the

time

being,

the

present

1965
July 16

method However, that the American

for landing the CM (i.e., a passive water landing) on the basis of a recent feasibility study, the landing that in impact
L. Taylor, July 9, I, 1965, pp.

be maintained. contractor urged on. North through reliability

a rocket said increase
TWX, J. C. Scptvmber C. Cozad,

system such

be developed would on
Space

for improve land

possible missitm and

use later water.
S3stems Report,"

a system capability

both
aml Monthly

MSC, 1965; 12-13.

to NAA,

NAA,

Information Progress

1)ivision, SID

Ann:

"Apollo

62-300-40,

MSC tools

directed needed for

Grumman transfer kit,

to

provide the to that

stowage two in the

within CM,

the (either would

LEM intra-

for or

those extrain the

16

between similar

spacecraft

vehicular). The tool LEM at earth launch.
Letters, James L. Neal,

be stored

MSC,

to GAEC,

Attn:

John

C. Snedeker,

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

Contract Change Authorization No. 122, and "Contract NAS 9-1100, Contract Change Tools in the I.EM," July 16, 1965.

Extravehicular Authorization

Crew Transfer No. 123, Stowage

Provisions," of Inflight

On tural

the basis

of wind

tunnel on the

tests at Arnold now considered rolling CM's

Engineering as negligible moment and

Development the on effects propellant

Center of struccon-

16-August

15

(AEDC), sumption.
"Apollo

North

American

protuberances

Monthly

Progress

Report,"

SID

62-300-40,

pp.

6-7.

In order to abort jection, spacecraft's prompted situation. with the

to use the the mission helium North Gntmman

LEM

as a backup the North would designers own

for the service 15-hour likely period that be American to undertake findings, this

propulsion following some their latter own This

system translunar redesign analysis group

(SPS) inof the

16-August

15

during informed system

required.

information of the disagreed

American

On the basis of their LEM manufacturer: transposition free-return the in the system. of two such 15-hour event and

• Before • During required only mission-critical The can prot)ability concluded,
Ibid., pp.

docking,

the

two

spacecraft

would

already would be

be on a confirmed

trajectory. interval, of failures moreover, in the SPS LEM and propulsion some time-dependent,

failures

during

the

abort

period,

North

Amerisystem.

was not sufficient

to warrant

redesigning

the helium

12-13.

171

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
July 18

Russia were spacecraft between

launched announced began

Zond until

III, some

but time

neither later. the and and thus

its objectives Ahout of mi]). 6217 36 the an far side

nor hours moon After

its achievements after (at passing launch, a range the planet. the of On Those This U.S.S.R. moon,

photographing orbit

11 600 and

10 000 km [7217

it entered

a heliocentric

became

artificial

July 29, Zond Ill transmitted pictures showed clearly the

its pictures back to earth, as planned. heavily cratered nature of the surface. that the

mission dramatized the advances in space photography had made since its first far-side effort six years earlier.
Astronautics Years o] Space and Aeronautics, in the 1965, USSR, pp. pp. 337, 20-21. 378-379, 3W2-393;

Tikhonravov

et

al.,

Ten

Research

19

NASA existing Apollo be used

was acquiring DOD lunar during

eight

KC-135 Apollo

aircraft

and

three

ships

to help two for support transports sheath

maintain of the of the would blackout

communications

during

moon

flights.

In addition,

ships

instrumentation mission's reentry reentry

fleet were being remodeled phase. The KC-135 jet the effects of the plasma

to combat

which had drowned out communications on previous manned launchings. In addition, three primary ground stations were being prepared at Goldstone, Calif.: Canberra,
and

Australia;
1965, Space

and Madrid,
p. 340; FIigilt, memorandum, "Apollo

Spain.
Samuel Instrumentation C. Phillips, Ship NASA, NASA, Schedules," to Julian to

Astronautics Assoc. Admin.

Aeronautics, for Manned enclosures; of Spanisi_

July 23, 1965, with Scheer, "Designation

memorandum, tracking station,"

Arnold W. Frutkin, July 23, 1965.

19

MSC

directed • Total • Ascent • Descent

Grumman LEM stage stage
James .July

to implement

changes

in weights

of the

LEM:

14 515 kg (32 000 lbs) inert inert
L. Neal, 19, 1965. MSC, to GAEC, No.

2193 2166
Attn: 12.1.

kg (4835 kg (4775
John Addition

lbs) lbs)
"Contract Weights NAS to

Memorandum, 9-1100, Contract Specilication,"

C. Snedeker, of Control

Change

Authorization

19-20

North American conducted zero-g tests at Wright-Patterson the design of the CM's unitized crew couch and restraint
"Apollo Monthly I'rogress Report," SID 62-300-40, p. 4.

AFB to evaluate hardware.

19

NASA

Headquarters cells to

authorized Pratt and

North Whitney.

American Estimates

to subcontract placed the

the cost

Block at

II $30

CSM fuel million.

TWX, Abbott,

George J. Vecchietti, July 19, 1965.

NASA,

to

NASA

Office,

I)owuey,

Calif.,

Attn:

George

A.

172

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

At a LEM-1 on the status company of various
MSC, MSC, Number

review of

held design on the

at Bethpage, drawings spacecraft.
Report,

N.Y., and for

Grumman manttfacturing

briefed procttrement. and

MSC

officials the

1965
July 21

hardware

Also, installation

prepared systems
"ASPO to

a detailed

schedule

Weekly Attn: August

Management R.

July

1:5-22, NAS

1965"; 9-1100,

letter, LEM

R. I

Wayne Status

Young, Meeting

GAEC, Two,"

S. Mullanev

"Contract

6, 1965.

North American reported that qualification two items of electrical hardware, the CSM technic
NAA, July

testing battery

had been completed on charger and the pyro-

21

battery.
"Project 1965 through Apollo 25 July Spacecraft 1965)/' Test p. 3. Program Weekly Activity Report (Period 19

MSC gram, of the with (The by the

officially LEM. the hmar

notified The which

Grttmman package Center outlined be stored equipment. given the off

that, would

as part be left weight And on

of the the

Apollo moon

scientific by the

profor along for

21

an experiments

crewmen

and MSC system's gave

storage stage

requirements of the vehicle the the disrupt need generator.

package,

would heat that

in the descent by the it

geological generator

emphasized radioisotope despite off would

dissipating many

waste scientists

radioisotope

was a firm radiation

requirement,

fear voiced the ex-

periments.)
Letter, Request ments "ASPO R. Wayne for Package Weekly Young, (LSEP), Management MSC, of aml to the Report, GAEC, Lunar July Attn: R. S. Mullaney, for the Equipment," 5, 1965." "Contract Lunar July 21, NAS Surface 1965; 9-1100, ExperiMSC,

Preparation

Interface

Control

Documents

Geological 29--August

Several

lunar

surface

vehicles that the agency of the

received it had said, spacecraft

national dropped stemmed per se

attention: plans from and that Apollo result LFV, for developing Surveyor a desire on it had its a small spacecraft. instrua rocketin their study "Hopper," Bell an(almost a the so-called for exploralbs) of exthat

21

• NASA rover This to be action,

announced carried the to space

moon

aboard

soft-landing

to concentrate scientific

on the development mentation. • Bell propelled ploration the company Aerosystems Lunar of the had Flying moon.

Company Vehicle This for work

announced (LFV) MSFC. to aid The was the

designed

astronauts nicknamed

of a year-long

conducted

would be able to travel about 80 nounced also that it had received

km (50 mi) without stopping. additional funds from NASA vehicle, a tool

half million dollars) to continue work on another lunar Manned Flying System. This latter craft, also primarily tion, would be able to transport an astronaut 173 and about

136 kg (300

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFF:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
July

equipment (or two astronauts) original landing site.
NASA News July 21, 1965; Release 5.t-245, Astronautics and

for

distances

up

to 24 kin

(15 mi)

from

the

"NASA '_Vill N_t l)c_clop Aeronautic% 1965, p. 3.12.

Sutxeyor

Roving

Vehicle."

22

MSC

and

Grumman velocity
R. for Wayne Lunar July August

discussed touchdown
Young, MSC, Dynamic to

the

IA'_M landing

gear

design

and

determined

the landing
TWX, l)csign

envelope.
GAEC, Attn: R. S. Mullaney, July 22, subject: 1965; "Structural TWXs, Report Young No. 30/'

Landing

Magnification 18, 1965; GAEC,

Factor," "Monthly

to Mullancy, LPR 10-46.

30 and August 10, 1965, p. 8.

Progress

22

Agreements and tracker were: • Development

decisions

reached

at the

MSC

briefing

on

the

LEM

optical

of the

LEM

rendezvous

radar

should

be continued. of the tracker optical was

• One contractor tracker with schedules • A decision deferred. on

should be selected to support installation the rendezvous radar

for development in early LEMs. versns the optical

"I_,VX, Samuel C. Phillips, Tracker," .July 28, 1965.

NASA,

to MSC,

Attn:

Joseph

F. Sbea,

subject:

"LEM

Optical

23

MSC

authorized

North

American

to make

a number

of significant

hardware

changes: • Delete hardware for transferring water from the CM to the LEM.

• Place filters in the propellant lines • Cease all work on an extravehicular now assumed). • Delete CSMs from the stabilization thrust vector control and

of the SM's reaction control system. probe (responsibility which MSC control system (This the (SCS) change of all Block II the with II

the hybrid

apparatus. simplified from CSMs

reduced interface

functional capability of the SCS and the guidance and navigation system.) • Delete spacecraft. Block which thermal
Letters, tract

system's 014,

the

HF

orbital

antenna

012,

and

all Block

• Change the II spacecraft. would • (;o require on ahead

propellant mixture in the The service propulsion additional thermal coating for the LEM
MSC, to 384, NAA,

service engine and

propulsion would be qualification (to achieve

system of modified, testing. the desired

developmental on during
Space and

the

adapter

environment
.]. B. Alldredge,

boost).
Information "191, 392, and Systems 393," Division, July 23, "Con1965.

Change

Authorizations,

385, 387,

388, 390,

174

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATIt)N,

AND

TESTING

MSC section

defined tAGS)

for Grumman must both perform spacecraft during thrusting AGS and must

the during

functions earth

that orbital

tile

LEM's

abort

guidance

1965
July

flights: the AGS must it would IJEM of the of these itself vehicle, flights be able not, to

• When hold ever, was both the have manned, while LEM's

were coast itself.

nnmanned, or while or

23

attitude manned the

thrusting; not the

how-

to control

• During

missions, afford thrusting. guidance

whether Thrusting and

actually again would

closed-loop navigational

control phases

coasting

demonstrate

the section's

capabilities.

Tile it were AGS

basic and

lunar gravity

mission data the

program would moon. to meet
to GAEC,

still Finally, or this
Attn: requirements

would MSC earth
R.

be

used. the

False AGS that

position, as if the

velocity,

be inserted

to make

behave neither nor

flying hardware, must

around its

emphasized memory, orbital

permanent

"hardwired"

delivery

schedules
Letter, Abort July

be altered
Young, Section MSC,

capability.
"Contract earth orbital NAS 9-1100,

R. Wayne Guidance 23, 1965.

S. Mulla,my, during

operational

missions,"

During Gemini

a news Project

conference, Kenneth S. Kleinknecht, Deputy Manager of the Office at MSC, affirmed that, although no firm decisions had the concept of a circumlunar flight nsing a Gemini seriously studied. The mission wonld use Titan vehicles and would require (builder rendezvousing of the Titan), in earth and Corporation (which feasibility E. Webb our main V/Apollo
Times-Picayune, to James

26

yet been made, craft was being III-C NASA, General all were lunar launch

spaceII and orbit• AerojetIll-C) NASA circumdistances

Martin-Marietta Corporation studying the James "... Saturn
The

manufactured upper stages for the of such a flight. Later in the year, eliminated reliance system."
New E. Webb. Orleans, August July 26. 1965; letter, letter, V_rebl) U.S. to

Administrator mission, • . . is the large
Howard sentative September

the for

possibility operating

of a Gemini at lunar

Benedict, Olin 10. 1965.

RepreTeague,

E. Teague

18, 1965;

At

North

American's boilerplate

drop

facility, on

a malfunction land rather

in the than

release began

mechanism a recurinto behind incidents looking weeks

26

caused rence

1 to impact on August were

water.

After These

of this accident Drops delays

6, a team

of investigators their already findings.

the problem. aggravated schedule.

suspended test program,

pending which

in the

was seven

MSC,

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report,

August

5-12,

1965."

175

THE 1965 July 29

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A CHRONOLOGY

Failure lack lower version objectives of

of

the

Little

Joe

II

launch

vehicle

on

Mission and

A-003

and action of the

subsequent led controlled The test to a

positive than of

failure

cause confidence II to

identification level in the (see

corrective capability A-004 5).

desirable I,ittle Joe

the planned

accomplish set forth

mission.

for A-004

were

Appendix

Memorandum, Owen E. Maynard, MSC, to ASPO Manager, "WSMR test requirements anti their relations to the AFRM-002 Mission," sgd. R. W. Williams, July 29, 1965.

29

General Checkout ment, $1 382

Electric

((;E)

received

a supplement contract. progTam total value Total for of

to

its cost

ACE-S/C and parts fee and to for

(Acceptance the amendwas

F.qnipment-Spacecraft) which 600. covered This a reliability brought the

Apollo GE's

materials, $85.6

contract

million. Maimed

MSC, "Quarterly Activity Report for Otfice of tile Associate Space Flight. for Period Ending July 31, 1965/' pp. 25-26.

Admilfistrator,

3o

MSC switch of the

advised frotn landing

Grumman atttomatic approach to

that

tile

altitude control

at which ot: the ft).

the

LEM

crewmen during

would Phase II

manual

spacecraft

would

be 213

m (700

TWX.

R. Wayne

Young, MSC, to (;AEC, Attn:

R. S. Mullaney,

July 30, 1965.

3o

NASA

launched at As shroud. which and during had

Pegasus 8:00 earlier, This a.m. an

II1, EST, Apollo

third from

of (;ape

the

meteoroid Kennedy. (boilerplate the end

detection (See February 9) of the served Saturn

satellites, 16 as and the

as schednled May payload's gram, latmches 25.)

spacecraft marked had

flight

(SA-10) lifetime

I pro-

its seven-year contributed

achieved to American

10 straight rocket

successful technology.

immeasural)ly

NASA News Release 65--232, "Pegasus C," July 21, 1965; NASA News Release 65-253, "Pegasus IlI Launch Caps NASA's Saturn I Program," July 30, 1965; memorandum, George E. Mueller, NASA, to Administrator, "Pegasus Ili/SA-10 Saturn I Flight Mission l'ost Launch Report No. 1," August 16, 1965, with enclosure: Mission Operation Report No. R-725-65-03 M-931-65-10; "Apollo Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-40, p. 1; TWX, KSC, to Distr., "SA-10 Apollo Flash Report No. 1," sgd. E. R. Mathews, July 30, 1965.

3o

During

tile

preceding Directorate during

six

months, evaluated

officials the near To a nunaber

in ASP() performance the launch solve of this

and

the of

Engineering the launch

and escape

Development vehicle they North LEV had (LEV)

aborts was

on

and

pad.

That

performance, MSC in ordered both the

determined, to

inadequate.

problem, changes

American and

incorporate

design

the spacecraft:

Provide

the timer

capability and for

for manual

manual deployment

override of

of those

the

main

parachute (for both

deploytnent Saturn IB

parachutes

and

V flights)

176

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

• Provide (RCS) the

for dumping CM RCS dump). change capability

helium to permit But applied to cut already device

from rapid

the

CM's dumping oxidizer

reaction

control

system to

1965
July

automatically ° Modify the oxidizer

of its fuel must II CMs.) pitch control would not

(similar be dumped motor keep

existing • Provide

fuel out that,

and the while

simultaneously. Block launch I vehicles • Design escape

(This the (similar

only

to Block I.EV's on

on the

to that propellant

in Block

II spacecraft) the pad, above
pad of and D. (2000 Jr., and Space

a removable motor's
Owen

temperature
to Distr., 23, of Vehicle MSC, No. "LEV 1965; a 609.6 (LEV) to 397,"

70 degrees.
near Hodge, It) pad m abort (2000 MSC, to ASPO, abort Information to additional It) altitude Attn: constant Asst. Dir. main O.E. Systems

Memoranda, analysis altitude for chute July Flight and/or main

E. Maynard, required deployment,"

MSC, for

testing chute

implementation John m pad NAA,

a 609.6

April

Operations, "Apollo 1965; letter, "Contract

"Implementation June l,aunch J. Change 8, 1965; Escape B. Alldredge, Authorization

constant

deployment," 16,

Christopher

C. Kraft,

MSC, near-pad and

Maynard, Division,

capability,"

July 30, 1965.

ASPO recent some

Manager LEM confusion

Joseph schedule with

F. Shea changes regard

informed and

LEM

Subsystems review activities and

Managers had policies. had Where required to be led

that to Shea been this to folno

31

program subsystem with the

to schedule

requirements

pointed out that established which had occurred, lost and than had recover lowed, later tives

in some instances were inconsistent action Shea that 15, along investigated. by then waivers with Only the laid

delivery schedules overall program. Managers ground rules that Manager was rules be

prompt ground. requested August been

Subsystems down of these the specific

ground ASPO

submitted approve

a demonstration

reasonable would

alterna-

any waivers.
Memorandum, cation and Joseph Delivery F. Shea, MSC, July to LEM Subsystems Managers, "Subsystem Qualifi-

Schedules,"

31, 1.°,65.

At a meeting representatives, • That

hetween

representatives

of NASA

and

Public

Health

Service

31

it was agreed: the PHS had responsibility health Surgeon for for the from health of the nation and for

any potential threat to that from back contamination. • That NASA the ment and • That nation's of the the crops Agriculture into Office of the Administrator and

extraterrestrial PHS, deemed had importance would

life,

particularly to the for Departby PHS, to be

General, action

submit

a proposal animals would the matter

necessary. responsibility that made the action and

Department

of Agriculture of economic probably at the accept point

a similar

arrangements they considered

be brought

necessary. 177

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
July

James stated Sample of the

Goddard, Receiving personnel.
for

Chief

of

the

Communicable but there was

Disease quarantine no

Center activity

of of

the the

PHS, source

he was prepared

to staff any required

at the Lunar

Laboratory

discussion

Memorandum

the

Record,

Orr

E.

Reynolds.

NASA

lleadquarters,

August

17,

1_55.

During the Month

Two which

change brought

orders the
Activit)

were total
Report

issued

to cost
of p.

(;rumman and fixed

under

the

LEM

contract,

estimated
for July 31, Office 1965,"

fee to ,$57,8 246 377.
Administrator, Manned Space

"Quarterly, Flight, tot

the 25.

_'_ssociate

l'criod

Ending

Duri;Jg the Month

Several the LEM determine velope. with a precise
"Monthly

astronauts landing changes Studies manual landing
Progress

participated simulator involved in controls landing at 213

in landing to verify and m (700 data displays runs from

touchdown collected to improve an altitude time

studies in previous the the

conducted studies touchdown m (1000 could and

in to enft) select

of 305 pilot

takeover site.
Report

ft), at which

No.

30,"

LPR-10

46,

p..I.

During the Month

Crew suits

Systems submitted

Division completed evaluation of the three Block II space by Hamilton Standard, David Clark, and International the results of drop tests with

Latex. Also, the contractor presented to MS(" the LEM's support and restraint system. North KC-135 the the July American technicians at Wright-Patterson flight I space and test program suit restraints and

began installing a CM mockup aboard a Air Force Base. The structure would be used (scheduled crew the with to begin guidance within and a week) and navigation to evaluate with (See station. performance, interfaces

in a zero-g Block couch 19.)
Ibid., p. 5;

re mobility,

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report

lulv

8-15

1965."

August

NASA at its ment

announced Corpus included

plans a 9-m

to install Tex.,

Apollo

Unified

S-Band The antenna

System and

equipment equipenable

2

Christi,

tracking diameter types LEM.

station. parabolic

Unified

S-Band would

(30-ft)

handling vehicles, spacecraft; been keep on the

of seven different the CM and the command provide check and its

of communications The communications and voice confirm health; that with make conversation a continuous

with two different would: track the the command three had checks astronauts;

operations two-way on the

executed; a continuous spacecraft

astronauts' supply 178

continuous

its functions;

flow of information

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

from nauts

the and

Apollo

onboard

experiments; of the moon.
"NASA 2. 1965; to

and

transmit

television

of the

astro-

1965
August

the exploration
News Christi Release Slation." 65-250,

NASA Corpus

Install

Apollo Daily,

Unified At,gust

S-Band

Tracking

at

August

_pace

Busi_wss

3, 1965, p. 156.

NASA's Corporation engines. Marquardt
TWX,

office

at Downey, for the cost

Calif., of the

approved of Block fixed price

the

contract

with would

the

Marquardt system million.

proCurement the Block
NASA-l)owne), l)i_ision. August

II SM contract

reaction

control 1)e $6.5

Estimated

was supplying
Henry S. and Smith, Supply

I SM engines.
to NASA Headquarters, Attn: Director o1

Procurement

2, 1965.

Hamilton to Houston,
MSC News

Standard where
Release

shipped it would
65-68, August

the

first

prototype testing
S'pace

portable by the
Daily,

life

support

system Division.
p. 172.

nndergo
2, 1965;

Crew
August

Systems
5, 1965,

Bu._i_zess

MSC for the

informed scientific
R. Wayne

Grumman equipment
Young, MSC,

of

package packages
Attn:

dimensions

and

weight in the

restrictions LEM.

and

to be stored
R.S. Mullaney,

TWXs,

to GAEC,

August

2, 1965.

NASA and Surface

named Space-General

three

firms, Package

Bendix

Systems to design

Division, prototypes Each company

TRW of the

Systems Apollo would

Group, Lunar 000, select

Corporation

Experiments

(AI,SEP).

received MSC

a $500

six-month one of the
NASA Surface

contract. After delivery of the prototypes, three to develop the ALSEP flight hardware.
Headquarters Package," Release August of Contractors No. for 65-260, letter, Apollo "Three Samuel Lunar Firms Surface Selected

to Design

Apollo O.

Lunar Piland, Septem-

4, 1965;

C. l'hillips,

NASA, Experiments

to Robert Package,"

MSC, "Selection ber 10, 1965.

Grumman some and relief the

reported afforded increases replacing

the of fuel

status cells and similar about descent By the

of its program with as MSC to the end 45 stages attack on the

effort changes

to lighten (e.g., the of the month, lbs) from spacecraft. complete

the

LEM. velocity admitted

Despite budgets that matured. Improveused and in its about assured its reported

by recent resulted

revised contractor the

batteries), design approved, one that of the of the the

significant Grumman ment F-111 that 25 kg MSC Program

spacecraft Weight had company ascent Grumman vehicle,

recommended, (SWIP) program. trimmed from SWIP the had the aircraft

a Super company the the

S!,VIP that

kg (100

(55 lbs)

team's

inchtding

179

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
August

equipment, scheduled
ASPO, GAEC,

would be completed for late in the year.
"Minutes, "Monthly NASA/GAEC Progress Report

prior

to the series

of LEM

design

reviews

l'rogram No.

Management

Meeting, September

August p. 1.

3,

1965";

31," LPR-10-47,

10, 1965,

During to MSC

the to

next

10 months, the

200 Houston

employees staff for

of MSFC the

would

be transferred phase of the

attgment

operational

Apollo program. Completion of the first phase of the Saturn program (with the successful lamlch of SA-10) made it possible for Marshall to release qualified
Space

personnel
Business Daily,

to satisfy
August Changing

MSC's
9, 1965, Role

needs.
memorandum, Program," Wernher August yon 13, 1965. Braun, MSFC,

p. 187;

to Distr.,

"Marshall's

in the Space

During boilerplate

tests

of the (BP) EI.S

Apollo

earth

landing during

system damage a simulated

(ELS)

at E1 Centro, that pad

Calif., abort.

6A sustained performance

considerable

in a drop

was to have

demonstrated

apex-forward

Oscillating severely at the the spacecraft severed two that tion device. brake of the
"ASPO

time the auxiliary brake parachute was opened, of the electrical lines that were to have released ELS proper sequente operation BP-6A
August

Although prevented mains.

the

took landed

place

as planned, drogues and of about

the full 50

stillinflafps.

attached

of the

As a result,
Report,

at a speed

Weekly

Management

5-12,

1965."

The firing

Saturn by

V's booster, burning for

the the

S-IC

stage, in a

made 2.5 test

a "perfect" minutes at at

full-duration its full MSFC. the liters from The (537

static test 000

programmed thrust capability

33 360-kiloblockhouse

newton model

(7.5-million-lbs) demoustrated

conducted on command

its steering

after 100 sec had elapsed; the gallons) of kerosene and liquid
Space Bu,_i_es_ Daily, August

firing consumed oxygen.
p. 185.

2.133-million

9, 1965,

5--12

North design

American changes

developed through

a plan a Change

to process Control

NASABoard

and (CCB).

contractor-initiated Indications were plan with the

that the contractor's Apollo on August 19. Elevating the a standard technical program control
"ASPO

Program Manager level of management changes, of established

would implement the on the CCB, together was design to expected changes. a permit to improve In more

approach definition baselines

to processing and were documentation being

addition, informed

of technical
Weekly

requirements.
Report, August 5-12, 1965."

Management

180

The S-IC stage during static firing at MSFC. North American and MSC attended a design review at Ling-Temco-Vought on the environmental control system radiator for the Block I1 CSM. After reviewing design and performance analyses, the review team approved changes in testing and fabrication of test hardware.
Memorandum, Richard J. Gillen, MSC, to Chief, Crew Systems Division, “Trip to Ling-Temco-Vought, Dallas, Texas, on August 6, 1965, Block I1 ECS radiator,” August 20,1965; MSC, “ASP0 Weekly Management Report, August 26-September 2,1965.”

1965
August
6

Crew Systems Division (CSD) reported that changing the method for storing oxygen in the LEM (from cryogenic to gaseous) had complicated the interface between the spacecraft’s environmental control system (ECS) and the portable life support system (PLSS). Very early, the maximum temperature for oxygen at the PLSS recharge station had been placed at 80 degrees. Recent analyses by Grumman disclosed that, in fact, the gas temperature might be double that figure. Oxygen supplied at 160 degrees, CSD said, would limit to 2% hours the PLSS operating period. Modifying the PLSS, however, would revive the issue of its storage aboard both spacecraft. 181

6

At the left, the S-I1 stage captive firing; at the right, the S-IVB stage static firing.
1965
August

Seeking some answer to this problem, CSD engineers began in-house studies of temperature changes in the spacecraft’s oxygen. There was some optimism that Grumman’s estimates would be proved much too high, and MSC thus far had made no changes either to the ECS or to the PLSS.
Memorandum, Richard E. Mayo, MSC, to Chief, Systems Engineering Division, “ECS thermal control configuration for ‘battery’ LEM,” August 9, 1965; “ASP0 Weekly Management Report, August 5-12, 1965.”

9

Two Saturn milestones occurred on the same day. At Santa Susana, Calif., North American conducted the first full-duration captive firing of an S-11, second stage of the Saturn V. And at Sacramento, Douglas static-tested the first flight-model S-IVB, second stage for the Saturn IB. This latter marked the first time that a complete static test (encompassing vehicle checkout, loading, and firing) had been controlled entirely by computers.
TWX, Wernher von Braun, MSFC, to NASA Headquarters, Attn: August 11, 1965; Space Business Daily, August 12, 1965, p. 207. George Mueller,

10

MSC notified North American that, should one of the CM’s postlanding batteries fail, the crew could lower the power requirements of the spacecraft during recovery and thus stay within the capabilities of the two remaining batteries.
TWX, C. L. Taylor, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division, Attn: J. C. Cozad, August 10, 1965.

182

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

"rESTING

ASP() used

forwarded for snbmission AS Mission 206 207 503 504 505 506

to (;rumman of detailed

the following vehicle Test I,E M- 1 IrE M-2 I,EM-3 LEM-4 LEM-5 LEM-6

schedule

dates

which

should

be

1965
£ugu$!

test plans: Plan Schedule 9-1-65 12-1-65 2-1-66 5-1-66 7-1-66 11-1-66 to be be plans used on 8-15-65 Missions Current and 501 and dates 11-1-65, Date

Vehicle

10

When 502 for had 501

determination been and finalized, 502

of LEM test detailed

test articles dates test

plan vehicle

would

forwarded.

were

respectively.
TWX, Schedule R. Wayne Dates," Young, August MSC, 10, 1965. to (;AEC, Attn: R. S. Mll racy, "Vehicle Test Plan

Resident vestigating about NASA eventual contributed MSFC, Scheller of the this Hq

ASPO recent problem

quality failures had and

assnrance of titanium been MSC

officers tanks an

at at

North Bell Apollo tetroxide Systems, to find The had

American Aerosystems. Test at the that Boeing chaired on

began Concern Directorate time.

inat The was

12

expressed started in the Center, the

by the nitrogen

in July solution

investigation

(a change Research The to solve

specification) by the

to by North MSC, Langley Hq. was used of NASA

American, penstripe serious

Bell Aero and method problem. since Bell

Company, John people about interior

a committee cracks quality already

vessels

assnrance fabricated

viewed the failures 180 such tanks.
MSC, "Minutes of L. 1965;

as quite

Senior E. Day,

Staff

Meeting, to

August Melvyn

6,

1965,"

John

B.

Lee,

Recorder, Tank

p.

3;

memorandum, August randum, NASA Charles 18, Director, Historical H. King,

NASA Weekly

Savage, Report,

"Apollo August NASA Spacecralt:

N._O4 Hq,

Problems," memo-

"ASPO Apollo Office, Jr., May

Management

5-12,

1965";

Soyuz Test Project Engineering, "Volume III of The Apollo 7, 1973.

to Acting Director, A Chronology," sgd.

Samuel

C. Phillips,

Apollo of Apollo Design or during

Program hardware: Review the detailed

Director,

listed

the

six key checkpoints

12

in the development (1) conducted Preliminary before

(PDR)--a design

review phase.

of

the

basic

design

(2) Critical Design Review engineering drawings preceding, (3) Flight with Article of hardware specifications

(CDR)--a if possible, and drawings 183

review of specifications and their release for manufacture. (FACI)--a the validation comparison of acceptand

Configuration

Inspection

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
Augu_

ance

testing.

FACIs Also, this

could

be repeated would the

to ensure be conducted basic they design. met

that on Items

deficiencies every

had

been

corrected. that departed

inspection from

configuration passing Apollo each of in the that piece

significantly

successfully

the FACI were accepted, Configuration Management (4) Certification of

provided Manual. Flight

requirements (COFR)--to

Worthiness was

certify and qualified that the

vehicle stage hardware. (5) Design

or spacecraft Certification

module Review

a complete

(DCR)--to

certify

entire

space

vehicle was airworthy review the development systems. (6) Flight Readiness

and safe for manned flight. DCRs would and qualification of all stages, modules, Review (FRR)--a two-part review,

formally and subfor

scheduled

each flight, to determine that both hardware and facilities were ready. Following a satisfactory FRR, and when decided upon by the mission director, the mission period would begin of support forces around the world).
NASA OMSF, Apollo and Key Program Inspection, Directive Review. No. and

(which

would

commit

deployment

6,

"Sequence

and

Flow

of

Hardware August 12,

Development 1965.

Certitication

Checkpoints."

12

Grumman system that might with portable

received in the LEM. life And from

approval While support because for the one of the

from not the systems

Houston (PLSS)

for an all-gaseous any design be the changes, recharged in PLSSs the ascent could

oxygen MSC with the stage

supply desired cabin tanks off"

suggesting oxygen

pressurized. oxygen
Letter, Gaseous

pressure vehicle's

descent stage

be insufficient

final tanks

recharge, in the

be "topped

if necessary.
NAS 9-1100,

R. Wayne Young, MSC, to GAEC, Attn: R. S. Mullanev Oxygen Supply Configuration," August 12, 1965.

"Contract

12-13

MSC tion

rejected system

North in the

American's adapter. early

second (The in June.)

design contractor's These

concept first successive

for

a panel had

retendrawn largely

LEM verdict

proposal

an unsatisfactory on the tinuing

rejections,

basis of weight and vibration difficulties with the system. problems

factors, illustrated MSC "suggested" by attaching the

the company's conto North American cable directly

that it circumvent these to the skin of the adapter.
"Critical Design Review for

retention

the

Block

II

Spacecraft/LEM

Adapter,

12-13

August

1965."

18

At a third Scrape," "Scrape"

status an effort involved

meeting

on

LEM-1,

Grumman

put

into

effect 57 and

"Operation lbs). The

to lighten an exchange

that spacecraft of parts between 184

by about LEM-1

kg (125 LTA-3.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

former hand,
MSC, Young,

vehicle would
"ASPO MSC, Number pp. 28-29.

thus have

would the same

be heavier structural
Report,

than

the

latter; as LEMs
12-19, Progress

LTA-3, 2 and
letter,

on

the

other

1965
August

weight
August "Monthly

forthcoming.
R. 31," Wayne I Status LPR-

Weekly to GAEC, Three,"

Management Attn: August R. 30,

1965"; NAS Report

S. Mullaney, 1965;

"Contract

9-1100,

LEM No.

Meeting 10-47,

Owen

E. Maynard,

Chief

of

the

Systems

Engineering Program Maynard

Division,

asked

that

18

part of the IJEM Mission Programmer, deleted. The assembly was no longer mission requirements.
Owen E. Maynard, 18, 1965. MSC, to

the needed,

Reader Assembly, be said, to meet Apollo

Memorandum, sion Programmer,"

Subsystem

Manager,

LEM

SCS,

"LEM

Mis-

August

The sion The

preliminary Design Engineering Inspection AS-202, was held. This was a major program review board met on August 24 and the 30, 31, and
Carl

(DEI) for milestone formal dates).
"Comments

CSM 011, Misfor the mission. was conducted

18-24

DEI

August

September
R. Huss, JSC,

1 (see entry
to JSC

for those
Office,

Memorandum, of The Apollo

Historical June 6, 1973.

on

Volume

III

Spacecra]t:

A Chronology,"

The

Apollo

Resident

Office

at KSC

was notified

that

it was ASPO Panel be changes and

Manager established to Apollo

19

Joseph F. Shea's desire that a Configuration and chaired at KSC to consider and process spacecraft The the ASPO action. item and and associated hardware undergoing Plan authority was end
MSC,

Control engineering checkout was would

test

at

KSC.

Configuration The newly hardware the approval Apollo
William "Apollo M.

Management formed (including if the change of the hardware
Bland, Jr.,

being equipment in the

revised

to reflect to review of tests

CCP's

be restricted conduct the

of end changes) at KSC, change

ground contractor's

support mandatory plan at KSC.

configuration mandatory

to determine to specific

for making

items
to

Memorandum, Office, KSC,

Assistant Control

Head Panel at

of

MSC KSC,"

Apollo August

Resident 19, 1965.

Spacecraft

Configuration

MSC assigned two LEM test articles (numbers SA-501 and SA-502 missions. Prior to flight, fiirbished by Grumman, each vehicle.
MSC, "ASPO Weekly

10 and 2, respectively) the spacecraft would four to five months'

to the be rework on

19-26

which

would

require

Management

Report,

August

19-26,

1965";

"Monthly MSC, to H.

Progress Davis,

Report No. 31," LPR-10-47, "Use of LTA-10 for Facilities

p. 38; memorandum, Verification Vehicle,"

C. H. Perrine, August 31, 1965.

185

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CttRONOLOGY

1965
August 2O

Douglas Calif.,

Aircraft simulating

Company the shut down

static-fired for half an

the hour,

S-IVB mission. then

in

a test The

at Sacramento, was run for six for ahnost

workload

tff a lunar

stage

three minutes, minutes.

reignited

,4stronauties

and

,qeronautics,

1965,

p. 386.

21

Gemini

V, piloted

by L. Gordon Kennedy. of orbital

Cooper,

Jr.,

and

Charles

Conrad,

Jr.,

roared

into space performed evaluate A second the the crew early for another maturely), source essential

from Cape a number

During their eight-day flight and simulated rendezwms guidance and navigation mission was to evaluate Gemini experienced to use fuel feasibility (i.e.,
pp.

the astronauts maneuvers to the equipment. effects on as well during prebe

the spacecraft's rendezw)us principal objective of the of prolonged reason: part of the Gemini for the exposure although flight V was power. success the the (which first

in space. hardware threatened spacecraft

V was significant some cells troubles the mission

to terminate of fuel

as its primary cells would space flight.

of electrical

"The operational of long-distance

lunar)

manned

(;firewood.

et al., Project

Gemini:

A

Chronology,

209-211.

23

MSC

and

Apollo

spacecraft

contractors

were

in

process

of planning

and

implementing an extensive ground-based craft for flight. All possible efforts were experience gram. In mission, tion partial obtained of related spacecraft view of the similarities Jet Propulsion information had used such been in the programs.
Shea, MSC, 23, 1965. to NASA Resident

test program being made

to certify to benefit Apollo and by their

the spacefrom the test prothe LEM providing: qualificaand results vehicle

programs of the was

in planning the Surveyor mission asked to cooperate in which major and

Laboratory concerning performed, ground

(1) background test program vehicles from

the manner (2) the

complete

test programs,

(3) significant

Letter, Joseph F. programs," August

Office,

JPL,

"Surveyor

ground

test

23

Joseph

F. Shea,

ASPO and

Manager,

summarized equipment on be the for Block

ground Block II test

rules II

on

the

schedules

for qualifying • All on were Block • Any 102 must (North

delivering installed vehicles from

spacecraft: vehicle (2TV-1) and units 101, vehicles. needs. proor

components II flight changes be essential

must the must

production

hardware. of CSM with 103 North

(Prototype in 2TV-1, of those American's components,

unacceptable.) configuration specific some mission leeway 186 be compatible to the allowed requirements in installing

• Delivery American

schedules was

Top, an overall view of Mission Operations Control Room in MGC, Houston, during the Gemini V flight with the location of the spacecraft visible on the tracking display at upper left. Bottom, Astronauts Charles Conrad, Jr. (left), and L. Gordon Cooper, Jr., receive a congratulatory call from President Lyndon B. Johnson after splashdown.
187

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
August

vided

that

such

reordering

was

feasible

and

did

not

affect all

overall

checkout was

and delivery

schedules

for the vehicle.) scheduled tests must so that equipment for completion

• Qualification testing must be qualified before February 15, 1967. • Launch-constraining at least six weeks before Shea alone had authority ground that launch. to waive
Distr.,

be scheduled

these

schedule

rules.
and delivery schedules

Memorandum, Shea, for Block II," August

MSC, to 23, 1965.

"Subsystem

qualification

24

MSC requested that Grumman review ing dynamic environments to assure: tem attitude reference per second due to angular indicated 25 degrees angular would during environment,

the current LEM landing and (1) no loss of the abort guidance motion mission the exceeding phases; gyro its design and structural

docksysof

limit tolerances,

(2) a mission

acceleration not be realized.

exceeding

TWX,

R. Wayne

Young,

MSC,

to GAEC,

Attn:

R. S. Mullaney,

August

24, 1965.

26_September

2

Grumman capability originally batteries Grumman cause "It items balled": that appears," the

advised of been the

that

prelaunch for loads

heat anticipated

loads Freon from

on

LEM-1 That fuel-celled deleting LEM-I, onboard "that 900

exceeded boiler LEMs.

the had When

spacecraft's

prelaunch

boiler.

designed

replaced fuel cells, MSC had recommended had urged that the item be retained on spacecraft Crew boiler's would Systems required maximum have Division to be optional (CSD) on equipment reported, was about

the boiler; however, beat launch. of snowhour; number has per

the launch Btus

of equipment

[LEM-1]

at earth

capability

the spacecraft's heat load was estimated at something like 6000. "GAEC is presently investigating what can be done to reduce these loads," CSD said.
"ASPO Weekly Management Report, August 26-S_ptember 2, 1965."

26-September

2

Qualification
Ibid.;

testing

was
Joseph Helium

completed
G. Thibodaux, Pressurization

on

the
Jr.,

LEM's
"Quantity August

helium
gaging 19, 1965, for

storage
the Descent enclosure.

tank.

memorandum, Supercritical

l'ropulsion

S)stem,"

with

27

Owen drafted guidelines to some Mission with

E.

Maynard, pertained

Chief mostly dealt covered

of for with the solely from

the Apollo Block

Systems

Engineering and

Division While were

(SED), these

a set of guidelines extent section these they

developmental II development, I flights mission, LEM. rules" as well. (Maynard in

missions. These was rather

to Block overall to the "ground

so labeled, phases, to disbeing

Development careful than

Guidelines

as well that,

as specific

one

devoted guidelines

tinguish

188

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

mandatory and somewhat

requirements, of an

their envelope

intent

was not

"to

afford and

test fast

planning rules.") Apollo

a guide

1965
Augu_

. . . and

hard

SED was considering including these guidelines in the Master Test Plan when that document was next revised.
Memorandum, August 27, 1965. Maynard, MSC, to Distr., "Block II Development

Spacecraft

Mission

Guidelines,"

North engine service gimbal

American had angles been and propulsion

reported concluded. system

that had

ground Also, improved the weight
MSC, to Asst.

testing the of the
Manager, WSTF,

of the

the

service

propulsion ratio of the and 23.)

27

changing

propellant II SM.
"SPS Attn:

engine's Block
ASPO, to MSC,

performance (See July
engine R. SID gimbalR. Gilruth 62-300-41,

had reduced
E. Maynard, 25, 1965; 30, 1965; 8, 10. TWX, NAA,

Memorandum, ling and in stack," others,

Owen August August pp.

M. L. Raines, "Apollo Monthly

Progress

Report,"

October

1, 1965,

Several and

important of on (2) the "Super the the

activities new last for completion two storage made The helium

were reefing earth tank

noted line

during cutters 1965. LEM (3) the flight had was

the (The

reporting cutter tests had

period: satisfactorily been

(1) used at El airto

29-September

4

Qualification scheduled successfully Centro); successfully craft, Mojave the nant

progressing

in October landing for the and

system

conducted control

reaction Aero from the vital Van

subsystem new Calif., of airlifting "Preg-

passed Airfield,

qualification its Calif.

tests; new as well

Spacelines' Nuys,

Guppy,"

maiden aircraft

capability backup

spacecraft-LEM-adapter (;uppy"
"Weekly

as providing

for the

aircraft.
Report, August 29-September 4, 1965," Joseph F. Shea.

Activity

NASA's Mneller, had posals been

Associate informed adopted

Administrator MSC's Director for the Apollo by NASA and
August

for Manned Space Flight, George E. Robert R. Gilruth that an official emblem Program, a composite personnel. based on the best pro-

3O

submitted
Mueller

contractor
30, 1965.

Letter,

to Gihuth,

Spacecraft The The review Review

01 l's design combined Board

engineering structures,

inspection mission

was held (SA-202),

at North and ground assigned

American. support. to North

30-September

1

approved

55 changes

(53 of which

were

American).
"Apollo NASA, September Monthly 7, 1965. Progress Report," and SID 62-300M1, "Trip p. 4; memorandum, Report on Visit to C. H. NAA Bolender, Downey,"

to E. E. Christensen

S. C. Phillips,

189

The Apollo Program emblem. The large letter A is superimposed on the constellation Orion so that its three central stars form the bar of the A. The face on the moon represents the mythical Apollo.
1965
August 31-September 1

At an implementation meeting at MSC on the LEM’s guidance and control system, Grumman again made a pitch for its concept for the landing point designator (i.e., scale markings on the vehicle’s window). On September 13, the company received MSC’s go-ahead. Grumman was told to coordinate closely with both MSC and M I T on the designator’s design to ensure that the scale markings would be compatible with the spacecraft’s computer.
TWX, R. Wayne Young, MSC, to GAEC, Attn: R. S. Mullaney, subject: “Action Item L52, Requirements for Landing Point Designator (LPD),” September 13,1965.

During the Month

An explosion damaged a LEM reaction control system thruster being fired in an up attitude in altitude tests at MSC.
“Monthly Progress Report No. 31,” LPR-10-47, p. 1.

During the Month

Grumman completed an analysis of radiation levels that would be encountered by the LEM-3 crew during their earth orbital mission. Grumman advised that doses would not be harmful. T o lessen these levels even further, the contractor recommended that during some parts of the mission the two astronauts climb back into the CM; also, the planned orbit for the LEM (556 by 2500 km [300 by ’1350 nm]) could be changed to avoid the worst part of the Van Allen Belt.
Ibid., p. 40.

September 1

North American conducted another in their series of impact tests with boilerplate 28. This drop tested the toroidal section of the spacecraft (heatshield and equipment bay structure) in impact at high angle and maximum

190

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

horizontal velocity. The leaked into the vehicle, itself and the apex-down
Monthly Report, Progress

spacecraft but this attitude
Report,"

suffered no visible was blamed on the after impact.
p. 1; MSC,

damage. boilerplate

Some water structure

1965
September

"Apollo ment

SID

62-300-41,

"ASPO

Weekly

Manage-

September

2-9,

1965."

A LEM ing systems

ascent

engine Center

exploded (AEDC).

during that the

altitude failure

firings probably

at Arnold resulted

EngineerBell from Aeroraw

Development researchers

In subsequent

investigations,

conchlded

propellants heing accidentally forced into the engine at the end of the second run, thus damaging the injector. The explosion, which occurred at the start of the third run, in turn followed an uncontrolled flow of propellants into the engine. As a result Also, to those the cause.
Staff 13-14, Power Meeting, 1965," Division, September and "Trip Power to September 10, 16, Bell 1965," 1965; on p. 1; memorandum, on 30, trip 1965/' to Madyda, October A. L. to

of this accident,

Bell

made

several

changes

in hardware fabrication. under conditions similar try to determine
MSC, Madyda, Aerosystems, ChieL 4, 1965. "Minutes MSC, Propulsion

the company planned additional firings, at AEDC when the explosion occurred, to

exactly
of to Senior Chief, and

Propulsion

Division,

"Report memorandum, September

Bell

September

MSC the

advised Tulsa

officials panel

at North with authority

American's cables on to North the Houston's that

Tulsa adapter objections,

Division

that

their

concept While from and . . .

1-8

for external Downey Mechanics to redesign
"ASPO

retention agreed no

was unacceptable. because design. "continued of orders Structures apathy

people they had Division

change

the delay.
1965."

reported

American's

the system"
Weekly Management

threatened
Report,

a schedule
September 2-9,

MSC's

Flight

Operations

Division an

requested inoperative

an investigation S-IVB booster

of the feasibility on the AS-206

2-9

of performing an abort from unmanned LEM mission.
Ibid.; "AS-206 memorandum, Preliminary R. Abort W.

Lanzkron,

MSC,

to

Chief,

Systems

Engineering

Division,

Requirements,"

September

10, 1965.

NASA ing

Associate The

Administrator LEM

for Manned James radar

Space the system,

Flight status when Optical which

George of the had been needed Tracker in Optical

E. Mueller LEM under for trackdeflight System per-

summarized systems. velopment missions. offered formance. System

for Administrator

E. Webb

rendezvous

since 1963, was expected to be available Technical studies had shown that an weight and reliability Aircraft advantages Company radar.
Tracking Systems,"

with

no

reduction an

LEM

Hughes as a back-up
Mueller

was developing

Tracking

to the rendezvous
to Webb, "LEM

Memorandum,

September

3, 1965.

191

The “business end’ of the Saturn V launch vehicle’s first stage, showing the nozzles of the five F-1 engines, is seen at MSFC’s main assembly building. Only the center engine in this picture had the uncooled extension of the nozzle in place. The five Rocketdyne engines consumed 13.6 metric tons (15 tons) of propellant a second.

September

To aid in defining abort limits for the emergency detection system, MSC authorized North American to determine the ultimate strength of the spacecraft based on failure trajectories of the Saturn IB and Saturn V vehicles.
Letter, J. B. Alldredge, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division, “Contract Change Authorization No. 407,” September 3, 1965; memorandum, Owen E.

3

192

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Maynard, for Saturn

MSC,

to Chief,

Flight

Control

l)ivision,

"Range

Safety

Destruct

Time

Delay

1965
September 3

IB & V," Septemher

27, 1965.

MSC requested Grtmunan to review tile following surization system coniponents in the propttlsion compatibility sure and regulator: (5) qttad reports into with check from problems. to certain valve. variotts The programs of their this
to GAEC, Ascent and Nitrogen and oxidizer

ascent and sul)systeIn explosive relief

descent presfor materials valve; and (2) presburst disc;

propellants: solenoid

(1) helitmI valve;

(3) latching

(4) pressnre

Recent seeped and their

had I.EM

shown had

that recently

propellant causing revised

vapors portitms

had of

mid-portions

pressurization compatil)ility
Attn: Descent propellant R.

systems,

corrosion

leakage

SM and

programs
R. V_:ayne

incorporate
Young, with MSC, of LEM fuel and

requirement.
"Contract Subs)stem September NAS 9-1100,

Letter, Internal system cal

S. Mullaney, Propulsion vaporizer,

compatibility components Hydrazine

pressurization 3, 1965.

Hydrazine-Unsymmetri-

Dimethyl

Tetroxide,

respectively,"

William A. Lee, ASPO, pointed out to the that Grumman was engaged in a strenuous when thermal surfaces feasible on each feasible, control, to replace and that of was stage of the this also with requested developments.
William weight A. Lee, in MSC, the

MSC Thermo-Structures weight reduction effort changes. nse that weight was In the the the expected of inert gear an Grumman of etched would

Branch and that, area of was the aluminum

MSC

should thermal LEM. technique studying plastic that potential

accept was paint. In

the It

proposed was

Grumman approximately

investigating 11 kg (24 lbs) addition, to the landing of

change

be saved

investigating

applicability Grumman outer (185 heatshields. lbs). Lee these tact with

components. nonrigid and about in close descent 84 kg con-

substitution standoffs inert weight

ahlminum-mylar rigid would Branch ascent be stay

heatshield The

for current saving

Thermo-Structures

Memorandum, Jr., "LEM

to Thermo-Structures area of thermal control,"

Branch,

Attn: 8,

J.

A. 1965.

Smith,

reductions

September

Assistant Branch

ASPO of the

Manager Instrumentation

William and

A. Lee

told

the

General

Instrumentation Grumman

Electronic

Systems

Division

was preparing a proposal for use of the LEM vehicle as an electrical ground. The plan was to adopt a single wire system selectively for those circuits not susceptible savings to electrical of 27 kg (60 lbs) transients. in the ascent Lee said Grumman and estimated in the a weight descent 1 of stage 9 kg (20 lbs)

stage. The proposal was expected to be available and Lee had committed NASA to a decision within the plan.
Memorandum, Campos, "Use William of LEM A. Lec, vehicle MSC, structure to General as electrical Instrumentation ground

to NASA by October three weeks of receipt

Branch, return,"

Attn:

A.H. 8, 1965.

September

193

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT;

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
September 9-10

MS(: requested Grumman taking the guillotine that stage umbilical and using

and North Grumman it as well

American to study had developed for to sever the two

the the

possibility of LEM's interlinking the

umbilicals

I,EM to the adapter. In this manner, North these cutters might be eliminated; IJEM-adapter fied: and a significant monetary savings could impact.
MSC, "ASPO Weekly Ground 16, 1965. Management Test Report, September Meetit_g No.

American's interface be effected

effort to develop would be simpliwithout schedule

9-16, 4,

1965"; September

ASPO, 9 and

"Abstract I0,

of 1965,"

Proceedings, September

Requirements

9-16

Northrop-Ventura reefing lille rings ing into these of spacecraft.
MSC, "ASPO

canceled a parachute and the main parachute which,

test because of problems bags. North American would affect

with the was lookboth blocks

problems

it was anticipated,

Weekly

Management

Report,

September

9

16, 1965."

10

Because

of recent

changes

in the

design

of the

space

suit,

Motorola,

under the

its contract development
Letter, "Technical "ASP()

for suit communications antennas, began concentrating on of antennas for the back pack rather than on the helmet.
Richard Weekly S. Johnston, on SSC Management MSC, helmet Report, to R. E. Breeding, atltctma," 1(_23, 1965." Hamilton September Standard 1O, Division, 1965; MSC,

directive

mounted September

10

Owen

E. Maynard,

Chief F. Shea

of Systems of tile major

Engineering technical

Division, problems

advised

ASPO plaguing

Manager Joseph Apollo designers: • Spacecraft "by many a seriotts systetns

currently

weight margin."

growths--these, Pessimistically,

Maynard fie added unknowns

said, that

exceeded the

predictions of con-

performance precluded

was hut

"marginally

acceptable." involved

• Lunar landing criteria--the servative thinking on the LEM. • Integration of scientific meal" integration of experiments for many late hardware changes. design • Water margins • Land

experiments--Maynard blamed the "piecefor the lack of comprehensive planning and of the range landing of variables, rockets. control had the and yet present

landing criteria--because were questionable. landing--i.e., development

of the between

• Thermal design--conflicts existed attitude constraints for the spacecraft. • Propulsion performance--no achieved the specific impnlse which • Space meteoroid suit development--design and the portable life 194 garment

temperature reported, it. and of Maynard

unit, Maynard was required of of the suit, support system,

thermalsaid, had

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

"gyrated modate

violently, questionable

resulting space suit
to

in

spacecraft

design

compromises

to

accom-

1965
September

performance."
Manager, ASPO, "Apollo principal technical prob-

Memorandum, lems," September

Maynard, 10, 1965.

MSC,

NASA following
MSC 1965.

began

recruiting

additional

pilot-astronauts,

to

begin

training

the

10

summer.
News Release 65-79, "NASA to Select Additional Pilot-Astronauts," September 10,

Hurricane Samuel C. ministrator NASA

Betsy Phillips Robert and

hit

the

United

States

and

Apollo

Program

Director

12

presented C. Seamans, programs: Plant--all

an interim report to NASA Associate AdJr., concerning the effects of the storm on

property • Michoud

(Ira.)

of the buildings Saturn Damage storm and extent. by the

suffered hardware was due

moderate in process at weeks. and

to severe was not $2 repairs between

damage. damaged and would $4

So far as could to any million. probably appreciable Time affect

be determined, lost

estimated to cleanup or more

program

schedules

by two

With

the continued frustrations of fighting the weight problem on both the CM and LEM it was necessary that both NASA and contracting personnel maintain a sense of humor. The above was used in slide form at a meeting at MSC.

"1 WE

KNOW HAVE A

WEIGHT PROBLEM... "

i

|

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
September

• Transportation--the broke free and was beached. area was heavily damaged. • Production construction feet of water. • Reentry modification were hard it looked like of Liquid

barge

Promise

tied

up

at were

the

Michoud The plant

dock dock under nine under and dry; in Navy did four

Externally, Hydrogen--Air

no damages

visible. Inc.,

Products, reported

across the canal from Extent of the damage Ships at the aground. it could Huntsville Avondale The

Michoud was was unknown. and New

to be under vessels were were

Watertown--these Orleans. but had was battered

Shipyard, Watertown The

Both the were minor.

broke holds (30-ft)

loose gash

be salvaged.

Huntsville

a 9-m

the side plus three other salvage crews did not think • Cape Kennedy--damage of site cause a shutdown critical days.
Memorandum. 13, 1965.

holes. The engine rooms the vessel was salvageable. from activation the storm on was activities

flooded. The 34, storm costing

Complex

Phillips

to Seamans,

"Impact

of

Hurricane

Betsy

on

Apollo,"

September

13

ASPO weight their forces

Manager of Apollo proposals also would

Joseph

F. Shea Board

announced week, headed weight on the

a new subsystem by for way

plan

for

controlling would would the task Three force; rule

the report on task and

spacecraft. for meeting report task force.
MSC, "Apollo to

Every (WCB), the to the force;

managers which their systems.

to a Weight

Control

Shea,

target _VCB

to lighten reduction

spacecraft:

(1) weight

reduction task
Shea, enclosure:

(2) requirements

(3) an operations
Memorandum, 1965, with

Distr., Vv_eight

"Apollo Control

Weight Plan."

Control

Program,"

September

13,

14

As a result ordered (1) (2) (4) These
TWX, J. c.

of discussions changes of the

with

North

American propulsion seals

and engine: and

Aerojet-General,

MSC

several redesign

to the service ablation

chamber ground hub valve

the

flange

mountings

modifications dottbling

to permit of the nominal

purging opening time (from .3 to .6 sec). hardware.
Division, Attn:

(3) redesign

of the injection

changes
J. Cozad,

applied

to all qualification
MSC, to NAA, Changes Space and and

test and
Information

all flight
Systems

B. Alldredge, subject: "SPS

Engine

Checkout,"

September

14, 1965.

14

At a status welding schedule.

meeting problems,

at Grumman the vehicle's

on LEM-I, ascent stage

MSC was

learned about

that, four

as a result weeks behind

of

Memorandum, Meeting,

R.

A.

Newlander

to

W.

J. letter,

Gaylor, R.

RASPO-Bethpage, Wayne Young, MSC,

"LEM-I to GAEC,

Status Attn:

9/'14/65,"

September

17, 1965;

196

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

R. S. Mullaney, ber 21, 1965.

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

LEM-1

Status

Meeting

Number

Four,"

Septem-

1965
September 15

Flight adequate task (prime require training, training,

Crew training and

Support training in the

Division in the simulators crews), hrs each mission

defined Apollo required

the

minimum 36 hrs hrs;

time for each of the

required of two six

to assure part would mission crews) astronauts

crew

Mission

Simulators. each

Individual crews ground

backup

a total of crew

of 216

40 hrs

of crew

task training, integrated or a total would in other plus Apollo Mission

120 hrs of crew mission of 338 hrs. be operational programs. prior to the 29 weeks Mission 012 Simulator operational
Engineering September

specific

and nine

(with

a total of 169 hrs per crew that based the simulator would

It was estimated 30 hours ---one The a week, month needed on of simulator

on Thus, AS-204

an average eight training. No. kit months launch

of date

on experience verification were: with Apollo

availability of training dates January March

be required

for crew Simulator No. June

for simulators 15, 18, April 1966, 1966;

1, fully delivery in

operational complete 012

spacecraft to be fully
to Chief,

modification

2 delivery 6, 1966.
"Simula-

configuration
Memorandum, tor training

15, 1966,
North, to support MSC, the

Warren requirements

J.

Systems missions,"

Division, 15, 1965.

Apollo

MSC's

Assistant

Director Joseph

for Flight

Operations, postlanding

Christopher operational

C. Kraft,

Jr.,

16

told ASP()

Manager

F. Shea that

procedures

require that recovery force personnel into the interior of the CM through sary, he said, crew, if engineers Kraft such said such the so recovery and as spacecraft crew force for swimmers normal required,

have the capability of gaining access the main crew hatch. This was necescould crew heatshield provide immediate by data retrieval, char the upon aid to the recovery etc. reentry of the in main postlanding removal, might operations

shutdown,

compartment it difficult

a manner

as to make

to distinguish

outline

egress hatch. This potential problem and the necessity outward to free the hatch might demand use of a "crow ahlator Since covery requested be readily to preclude attaching and apply this would that the of a prying be force on the hatch. tool, basis requested tool--either it would or be carried onboard that by the have the

of applying a force bar" tool to chip the

a special

to be spacecraft the

distributed

to reKraft to by

forces

on a worldwide tool the He

ahoard design

the spacecraft. in a manner incorporate tool to

be mounted

accessible. loss

a method float or

designing

it to the spacecraft
Kraft to Shea,

by a lanyard.
"Apollo Crew Hatch Tool," September 16, 1965.

Memorandum,

197

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

! 965
September 16

Tile Assistant posed (;rununan and (IESD) timing vestigated and concurred

Chief for Electronic plan to repackage assembly the proposal. that Instrmnentation

Systems notified the LEM pulse had and

ASPO that the procommand modulated been discussed Systems and inDivision

electronic

(PCMTEA)

Electronic

with the

Following posed and liters a further (500

is the

impact

to

the

PCMTEA

as a result would result impact

of Grumman's from

pro-

changes:

(1) weight reduction PCMTEA (3) there

of the PCMTEA of 4.99 would would

be reduced

1.4 kg (3 lbs) repackaging; 8123 milliLTA-8, changes; repackag-

kg (11 lbs) would be reduced be no schedule

(2) volunle

of the cu in);

by approximately to LEM-I,

or the PCMTEA qualification test program because of the proposed and (4) no firm cost estimates were available but IESD estimated ing cost would be about $100 000.

Memorandum, to repackage

the

Leonard I,EM

E. l'ackham, MSC, PCMTEA," September

to Assistant 16, 1965.

Manager,

ASPO,

"GAEC

plan

16-17

North on the parties panel),

American and environmental agreed which upon would

its subcontractor, control system a backup be more effort

LTV, conducted a design review radiator for the Block II CSM. Both (i.e., could a narrower to thermal follow that selective changes of the in stagnation the spaceand

responsive design

craft. Testing of this backup still meet the design release.

prototype

Memorandum, system Weekly (ECS)

Frank attitude

H.

Samonski, constraints September

Jr., for

MSC, 16-23,

to

Gary

G.

Metz,

"Environmental 14, 1965;

control "ASPO

Spacecraft 1965."

012,"

September

Management

Report,

16-17

A design

review

on the

attitude

controller

for the

LEM

was held seemed

at Honey"highly

well. Flight Crew Support Division optimized functionally, operationally,

reported that the device and weight wise."

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report,

September

16-23,

1965"; 14;

GAEC, TWX, R.

"Monthly Wayne

l'rogYoung,

ress Report No. 32," MSC, to GAEC, Attn:

LPR-10-48, October 10, 1965, p. R.S. Mullaney, October 14, 1965.

16-23

Systems SA-4, siderable and/or scheduled and

Engineering 8, and damage. the tower shortly at

Division the This jettison TRW

(SED) thermal

reported coating was

that, of the caused

on the by the area North problem,

basis S-IV

of data suffered retro analysis

from conmotor was factors

9 flights,

spacecraft

degradation motor. SED coating. of any to look

advised the

that a thorough entire

into such 198

of thermal American SED said.

the performance

of ablative

However, thermal

refused The

to acknowledge

the existence

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

firm's

"continued

inactivity"

was described

as a "maior

obstacle"

to solving

1965
September

the problem.
"ASPO Weekly Management Report, September SM, 16-23, 1!)65"; memorandum, James Justification, Impingement, A.

Smith, MSC, and Plan of RECP 461,"

to Project Officer, C and Action for Instrumentation September 27, 1965.

ASPO, "Technical Evalnation, to determine effects of TJM

NASA provide Apollo year

and

the

Atomic: Surface surface.
Management to Chief,

Energy Experiments

Commission Package

(AEC)

agreed

that would

AEC power period

would each of one

16-23

radioisotope Lunar

thermoelectric

generators

which

for an operating

on the hmar
"ASPO Vale, Weekly MSC,

Report, Systems

September

16-23, 1)ivision,

1965";

memorandum,

Robert Thermoelectric

E.

Engineering

"Radioisotope

Generator,"

September

27, 1965.

Grumman the LEM newer design

established (both gear.
Weekly No. 32/'

the

final

design 9 and

parameters struts). 14 kg (20

for and

the

landing lighter

gear that

of this

16-23

primary would

and

secondary

It was anticipated 30 lbs)

be between

than

the earlier
"ASPO Report

Management LPR-10-48, pp.

Report, 10, 12.

September

16-23,

1965";

"Monthly

Progress

North mission, mined vehicle

American AS-204,

evaluated the first

the manned

compatibility Apollo flight.

of

spacecraft The most only

012

with

its

! 6-October

15

manufacturer

deter-

that, by using could remain

roll-stabilized aloft for about

attitude during 13_4 days. The

of the flight, the onboard expendsupply in the SM's offer a redundant

ables termed marginal were cryogenics and reaction control system (which, for added means of braking the vehicle
Monthly Robert and

the propellant safety, would

out of orbit).
Report," SID 62-300--t2, MSC, to Chief, Apollo for mission November Trajectory September 1, 1965, Support 14, 1965. p. 3; Office,

NAA, "Apollo memorandum, "Spacecraft

V.

Progress Battey,

systems

attitude

constraints

AS-204,"

The Flight tion,

basic

structure of the CM Sttpport

of Apollo crew Division and
Report,

CM

simulator would use be the

"A," built,

around was for

which delivered crew

a full-scale to MSC. familiariza-

17

mockup

stations

Crew procedures

would equipment
September

mockup

training,
Management

evahiation.
16-23, 1965."

"ASPO

Weekly

MSC's

Director,

Robert

R. Gilruth, of the

sent

a detailed Extravehicular

history

of actions Unit,

taken and

2O

in regard

to development

Apollo 199

Mobility

CM simulator “A’ in place at MSC. The simulator represented actual mission conditions and the internal and external environment (except for zero 9). Motion sensations were simulated by a visual system and realism was maintained through simulation of such activities as booster engine and thruster firings, pyrotechnic noises, and the injection of smoke into the CM to simulate electrical fires.
1945
September

recommended three changes not consistent with the overall procurement plan previously approved by NASA Headquarters: Amend the existing Hamilton Standard contract to provide for the development, qualification, and fabrication of the portable life support system and associated equipment only. This contract would cover delivery of all flight equipment for the Apollo flight program. Award a separate contract to International Latex Corporation for the development and fabrication of test and flight space suits and associated equipment. MSC would assume responsibility for total program management, systems integration, and space suit qualification.
a
0

Basis for the recommendations was (1) a comparative suit evaluation of space suits submitted by International Latex, Hamilton Standard, and David Clark Company in June 1965; (2) a reassessment of the capabilities of In-

200

ADVANCED DESIGN, FABRICATION, AND TESTING

ternational Latex; and (3) previous difficulties of Hamilton Standard in adequate total system development but recognizing their competence in the portable life support systems work. MSC planned to establish a resident engineer at International Latex to provide on-contractor-site management of the contractor.
Letter, Gilruth to NASA Headquarters, Attn: George E. Mueller, “Procurement plan for the Apollo Extravehicular Mobility Unit and EMU ground support equipment development and fabrication,” sgd. George M. Low, September 20, 1965.

1965
September

On the basis of studies by both MSC and Grumman on LEM landing criteria, Engineering and Development Directorate determined that contractor and customer alike favored reducing landing velocity requirements for the spacecraft. T h e two did not see eye to eye on how far these requirements should be reduced, however, and MSC would study the problem further.
Memorandum, James A. Chamberliu, MSC, to Distr., “Status of LEM landing studies,” September 20,1965.

20

A Grumman engineer tests the controls of a LEM simulator at the Grumman plant, Bethpage, N.Y. Sight reference of lunar landscape was visible on T V

screens through the simulator windows.

THE APOLLO SPACECRAFT: A CHRONOLOGY

September
21

A S P 0 Manager Joseph F. Shea decided that no device to indicate a failure of the secondary gimbal motor in the service propulsion system (SPS) was necessary on Block I spacecraft. Two factors shaped Shea’s decision: (1) procedures for inflight checkout of the vehicle called for gimbaling the service propulsion engine with both primary and secondary drive motors prior to SPS burns; (2) furthermore, all Block I (i.e., earth orbital) spacecraft would be capable of returning to earth by means of the SM’s reaction control system. This decision did not alter the requirement for such devices on Block I1 spacecraft, however, and North American was incorporating warning lights on those vehicles to indicate such gimbal motor failures.
Memorandum, Shea, MSC, to Assistant Director for Flight Operations, “Service Propulsion System (SPS) Secondary Gimbal Motor Fail Indication,” September 21, 1965.

27

NASA’s Administrator James E. Webb, Deputy Administrator Hugh L. Dryden, and Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., selected Ling-Temco-Vought from a total of 17 proposers for contract negotiations
MSFC marked completion of its first Saturn V S-IC booster September 26, 1965, with a brief ceremony in front of the assembly shop. A wide-angle camera caught this view as the ceremony was about to start with MSFC Director

Wernher von Braun at the microphone (left).

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

for

a one-year periods,

cost-plus-award-fee to provide

contract operational

with laboratory

options support

to extend services

for

two The and for

1965
September

one-year

for the

Apollo spacecraft prograxn selection was based upon comments of key officials

at the White the presentation ctmcerned.

Sands IN. Mex.) Test Facility. of a source evahtation board The Associate Administrator

Manned Space Flight was asked to issue appropriate instrnctions to ensnre that the contract negotiating teanl follow the negotiation objectives as presented to them.

Memorandum, Manned Support sgd. Earl Space Services

l)eputy

Associate

Administrator,

NASA, to

to

Associate

Administrator

for

Flight, "Selection of Contractor for the Apollo Spacecraft Program September 27, 1965.

I'ro_ide Operational at the White Sands

Lalmratory Test Facility,"

I). Hilburn,

North Block

American II CMs. pit The were

proposed Currently, this pane, meteoroid evaltlating to the

an additional both the North vehicle's blocks window American's weight.

pane could gToup No

of glass had during fail in such

for

the

windows pane. at add

on lunar about

22-29

of spacecraft

one

Should

meteoroids velocities. Division 10.43 quired
MSC, Progress

reentry and would protection

protection

Structures which added

Mechanics was re-

proposal,

kg (23 lbs) on Block
"ASPO

I spacecraft.
Weekly SID Management 62-300-41, Rcport, p. 5. September 23-30, 1965"; "Apollo Monthly

Report,"

Tim

Critical

Design

Review

(CDR)

of the

I.EM,

tentatively

planned

during

24

the week of reviews schedule

of September 27, 1965, beginning in November was to apply with five 8-11, and

at Grumman, was 1965 and ending teams participating Captain: Power, Team Electrical and

rescheduled in .January as follows:

as a series 1966. The Structures ComTeam

and Propulsion, November munications, Instrumentation, Captain: and ary tions, Radar, 10-13, January W. Speier; January Team 24-27,
Owen 24, 1965.

H. Byington; December 6-9, and

Stal)ilization 10-13, Team J. Loftus; Captain:
MSC,

Control, Mission

Navigation Crew Compatibility

Guidance, JanuOperaand

Captain: and

A. Cohen;

Systems,

Captain: Team

R. Battey.
to Distr., "Critical Design Review of LEM,"

Memorandum, September

E. Maynard,

MSC terials weight,

directed used and

Grnmman in the source habitable

to draw area

up

a complete LEM,

list

of all nonmetallic type, use,

ma-

27

of the

including

location,

of all such

materials.
"Contract Materials NAS 9--1100, in Habitable

Letter, Contract Area,"

.lames L. Neal, MSC, Change Authorization September 27, 1965.

to GAEC, Attn: John C. Snedeker, No. 136, Exhibit E, Nonmetallic

203

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
September 27

Officials Agriculture

from

the met

U.S. at

Public to

Health discuss

Service informally

(PHS) the

and

the Department of back

of con-

MSC

problem

tamination. They listened to briefings reentry heating rates; present thinking Lunar Sample Receiving antining the astronauts. James areas the aboard moon's These provoked agreed the PHS's in much PHS's a case, On that of level Goddard, of LSRS the concern: for both recovery were return, extended contamination would the Foreign those same crews be would Apollo Assistant Station (LSRS);

on the mission profile for Apollo; at the Center on the design of the and MSC's plans (none) for quar-

Surgeon and (3) in

General procedures

in PHS, and (2)

presented accommodations quarantine samples failure

three

broad inside facilities

(1) quarantine astronauts ships; and

technicians; the need detail. heated" not the MSC astronauts crews replied back entirely spacecraft's then

to gather MSC's discussions. avoid asked, were were. The

before atmosphere. to were plan

the for

surface matters "very

was contaminated discussed and and

by the astronauts some ideas on what

or the LEM's procedures hmar cabin, recovered

the astronauts'

Goddard's somewhat could inside

needed,

It was generally contaminants: although and that, low, what returned from in such

astronauts

nonetheless reaction

"significant." be if Apollo that Division not be alh)wed B. Hall, Gemini

hypothetically, representative

manner would

Quarantine

"emphatically" in the country. Quarantine summarized 27 meeting, "I believe," fully for is more

October

15, Lawrence

Planetary

Officer

in NASA's

Office of ministrator that "that of view latory craft such

Space Science and Applications, Hugh I,. Dryden the September informal discussions Spacecraft agencies not to face 29, 1965.]
NASA, to October I)eputy 15, Problems," Administrator, 1965, with undated.

for Deputy Adand recommended he aware the told Dryden, point reguSpace"rethe MSC's of the

continue. Center on this the problem." this

. . . the of the agencies Center's

Manned regulatory still do reluctance

matter. reasons

Unfortunately, Manned [To appreciate

understand

luctance,"
Memorandum, contamination felceltce on

see October
ttall, problems," Back Contamination

"Informal "Summary,

conference Informal

on

back Con-

enclosure:

27

North unified craft achieve about Manned (11 000 order

American S-band {)17) the 16 668 toni). to verify

evaluated system using

the reference

CSM's

communications published The the station a maximum altitude, was not to the with

capability the AS-501 trajectory altitude maximum was about

with selected at apogee range 20 372

the to of to a km 017, In com-

attitude conditions

data had this

(space-

preliminary desired km Since their entry (9000 Flight depended

trajectory.

nm).

At

Spacecraft

Network on the

(MSFN) S-band

a high-gain adequacy,

antenna directi(ms 204

installed MSFN

on spacecraft antennas. stations were

communications

omnidirectional

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

puted that about produced

and the three

system margins hours significant

circuit were

margins inadeqttate

were to

derived. support

North of the

American planned ships

conchided telemetry CSM for attitude per-

1965
September

high-bit-rate

of the mission. inlprovement proposed also

Modification (about a relocation

17 decibels) of range

in communications. to improve

The contractor formance.
"Apollo to NAA, Monthly Space

Progress and 017

Report,"

Sll)

62-300 Division,

'12, p. Attn:

3; J.

TWX, C. Cozad,

C.

I..

Taylor,

MSC, "Mission

Information Compatibility

Systems Evaluation,"

subject:

501/Spacecraft

September

27, 1965.

Representatives from MSC, David (:lark, Hamilton Standard, house met at North American, where they negotiated and the could interface have (1) canse (PLSS), control Of the a significant cnrrent not documents ICD's yet effect design accept incapable waste bag (ICD) imresolved, on hardware of the water ('M for the space two suit equipment. only design: environmental the portahle the PI,SS. involved

and signed and

Westingmost of associated that

28-30

problems

The

control life ASPO compatil)le was

system, must

be-

it could

waste

from

support

system decide with the to

was therefore CM's nrine Division.
Weekly to

of recharging system suit.

if the recharge (2) The capacity Crew Systems
"ASI'O MSC,

reqnirement

was to be kept management in the space

or eliminated. was not This problem assigned

of the

MSC, Taylor,

Management Space and Portable life '' October

Report, support 12, 1965.

September system

30-October Division, water (PLSS)

7, 1965"; Attn: recharge J.

letter, C.

C. L. Cozad,

NAA,

Information

Systems

"Contract ICD No.

NAS 9-150, MH01-06153_t16,

(functional)

Ralph vision,

S. Sawyer, Chief advised ASPO spacecraft: high gain not

of the Manager

Instrumentation and Electronic Systems DiShea of current problems with antennas

29

for the Apollo • CSM proposed

antenna--the mission

infrared requirements.

(IR)

earth On

tracker

originally 23, Sawyer

would

satisfy

September

reported, North American had ordered Dalmo-Victor to halt development of IR systems and to proceed with work on an RF tracker. • CSM S-band omnidirectional antennas--release of specifications was delaying subcontract award. North American might be unable to meet delivery for CSMs 017 and 020. • North American's in-house of qualified personnel VHF scimitar, S-band Ohio, facility. • LEM S-band models in California, flush mounted, high-gain would weigh

development

program--because

of a lack

North Amerk:an proposed to develop and C-band antennas at its Columbus, predicted 3 kg (6.83 lbs) that more prethan

antenna--Dalmo-Victor 11 kg (25.33 2O5 lbs),

production

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
September

the specification weight. study ways of lightening
Memorandum. Saw}er, September 29, 1965.

Grumman the antenna.
MSC, to Manager,

already

had

ordered

Dalmo-Victor

to

ASPO,

"Apollo

antemm

prohlem

areas,"

29

Apollo

Program

Director which of both

Samuel spelled

C. Phillips out the and launch
"Apollo 29, 1965.

issued vehi<le.

the

flight plan,

directive objectives,

for and

the AS-202 configttration

mission,

general

flight

spacecraft

OMSF Directive M-I) MA 1400.011, Apollo-Saturn 202 Mission," September

Program

Flight

Mission

Directive

for

29

The held The ment tions.

Critical November

Design

Review and

((;DR) and the

of the

Block 1965,

II CSM with the

was first 13-17.

scheduled phase

to being

he conducted

in November 15-18,

December second

phase

December

first phase activity would be a review specifications, weight status, interface specification The second phase of the Block would change of the II CSM. be conducted by review notices, review and

of drawings, schematics, control drawings, failure specification be a physical waivers inspection

procureanalysis, and deviaof the

proposed mockup The

would

review

teams

organized

in the

several

areas and headed by team captains, as follows: O. Ohlsson; Communications, Instrumentation, Speier; Crew Battey.
Memorandum, Review of Block Chief, Systems sgd. Engineering Harry I)ivision,

Structures and and Electrical and Navigation, and

Propulsion, Power, W. A. Cohen; R.

Stabilization Systems, J.

and I,oftus;

Control, and

Guidance

Mission

Compatibility

Operations,

MSC,

to

Distr.,

"Critical

Design

II CSM,"

W. Byington,

September

29, 1965.

29-30

The and was and tion:

Mission discussion held George The

Operations and M. Low. Mission for George

Organization 29 and Mueller, agreement Director Flight E.

had .lames would in all spaceflight

been C.

under Orleans, Elms,

continued La., R. Robert

review a meeting Gilruth, of operaAdwould for

on September General Operations Space Associate NASA to

30 in New was reached

between

on a method the areas Space

represent operational for Manned missions.

Associate and Flight

ministrator be responsible the The sense gram execution people

Manned to the of all

Administrator

manned the

responsive Program are:

Missions are

Operations responsible

Director to

(in

the

same Pro-

as (;enter Directors) • The

Managers

Headquarters

Director

of Launch for the

Operations

of the checkout,

Kennedy countdown

Space and

Center, launch

who

is responsible

preparation, 206

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

of tile space responsive the other Operations • The craft These flight Center, areas crew • The

vehicle.

In two

of these

areas,

preparation

and

checkout,

he

is

1965
September

to the Program Managers and two areas, countdown and launch, Director. Assistant who include and medical DOD Director represents flight for the operations for Flight Director and

Prograln Directors; whereas in he is responsive to tile Mission at the in all Manned Spaceareas. aspects who is of re

Operations of MSC the flight

operational

operational Flight,

operations. Maimed Space forces. to the

Representative

sponsible for the National Ranges and the recovery • The Program Directors, who are responsive tions Director insofar as the readiness of flight

Mission

Opera-

hardware

is concerned.

It was pointed from OMSF the to various

out

that elelnents

there

were and

multiple the Mission

and Spacecraft

sometiines Operations Center.

divergent organization

inpnts in

Program

Offices

at the Manned

It also

was

agreed and that

that

a better Operations flight

definition Directorate operational

of responsibility in OMSF areas MSC was

between required. prefer would

Program It was to have of conFlight area.

Office

Mission

agreed

for all

the Assistant Director for Flight Operations act as its single point tact. The Assistant Director for Flight Operations would represent Crew Operations and Medical Operations in the mission operations

Memorandum, Informal

George Memorandum,

M.

Low, M.

"Mission Low to

Operations Distr., October

Discussions," 15, 1965, with

October enclosure.

4,

1965;

George

Pressure in the stand the

loading Block ultimate during

and

thermal The stresses

tests (both

were inward abort.

completed and The

on

the their that

types the

of windows to withCM might at qualified reentry

30-October

7

I CM.

pressure

tests demonstrated outward) thermal anticipated

ability

encounter

an atmospheric maximum

simulations during

the windows for lunar velocities.

temperatures

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report,

September

30-October

7,

1965."

Flight Projects Division advised that, on the aft heatshield on Block I CMs must said about (SMD) on the orbital sensors that the this heat ordered hardware decay on 01 l's change sensors. would not affect Accordingly,

the basis of current be thinned. North schedules, Structures with 014 to the but and this (but would new felt

weight studies, American had some concern Division reduction that the The SMD

30-October

7

Mechanics weight ensuring

North American for spacecraft for Block would heatshield

to proceed 011, 012, and I manned be adapted 207

required

missions

still be met). thickness.

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
September

anticipated probably

that delay

these by about

changes four weeks

would delivery

cost

about

$500000

and from

would Avco.

of the 011 heatshield

"ASI'O ment Maynard,

Weekly Report, MSC,

Management September to Manager,

Report, 30-October ASPO,

September 7, 1965"; "Weight

23-30, memorandum, Reduction

1965"; for MSC,

"ASPO R. W. Block

Weekly Heat ASPO,

Manageand O. "Flight E. Shield,"

Lanzkron I Aft

October 8, 1965; memorandum, Joseph N. Configuration of SC 011," October 18, 1965.

Kotanchik,

to

Manager,

3O

Crew

Systems

Division

defined

the

survival snrvival

equipment sets would

that be

MSC needed

would for

procure for Apollo spacecraft. Fifteen Block I and 30 for Block II CMs.

Memorandum, and Block

R. II survival

E. Smylie, equipment

MSC,

to

Chief,

Crew

Systems

Division,

"Apollo

Block

I

procurement,"

September

30, 1965.

During the Month

Bell Aerosystems reported the first bipropellant-cooled Combustion to halt ablative was stable; testing after

on stability and ablative compatibility injector baffle fi)r the ascent engine however, only streaking 60 seconds on the injector face of operation.

testing of of the LEM. forced Bell

*'Monthly

l'rogress

Report

No.

32,"

LPR-10-48,

pp.

1, 11.

During the Month

Thirteen of those

flights flights

were were

made devoted

with

the

lunar the

landing lunar with were

research simulation

vehicle. system;

Two the system simula-

to nulling

remaining ! 1 flights in the rate command tion mode.

were devoted to research mode. Nine landings

the attitude control made in the htnar

()n drift

flight

1-34-94F was made

the in the

hmar

simulation more than one mode

mode minute for the

worked first

perfectly time on this

and

no The

was encountered

during

of hovering

flight.

landing

simulation

flight.

Letter, Landing 1965,"

Office sgd. l'aul

of

Director, Vehicle F. Bikle,

Flight progress October

Research report 14, 1965. No.

Center, 27 for

to the

NASA period

Headquarters, ending

"Lunar 30,

Research

September

September-October

(;rumman advised MSC of LEM's descent engine. These mixtures, Grumman testing). valves, combustion said could delay

major tronbles plaguing development included problems of weight, chamber instability, and throttle delivery of LEM 1 and the

of the erosion,

mechanisms (which start of qualification

"Monthly Report No.

l'rogress 33/'

Report

No.

32,"

LPR-10-*tS,

pp.

3,

ll;

GAEC,

"Montlfly

Progress

LPR-10-49,

November

10, !.965, p. 3.

208

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

At a Customer formally shipped
"Apollo

Acceptance spacecraft Sands.
Progress Report,"

Readiness 002.

Review The

at

North was

American, then demated

NASA and

1965
October

accepted to White
Montbly

vehicle

SID

62-300-42,

p. 1.

Homer tions,

E. Newell, notified

Associate of the

Administrator first

for

Space

Science

and for early

ApplicaApollo

Houston

two experiments

selected

landing flights: (1) a hmar gravimeter, which would measure variations in the moon's gravitational field; and (2) a seismic experiment. MSC informed Newell
Letter, Early Newell,

on

November
Newell, NASA, Lunar Headquarters,

2 that
to Landing

negotiations
MSC,

were
"Selection

being
of

initiated.
Investigations Director, MSC, for to

Director, November

Scientific letter,

Apollo NASA

Missions,"

October 2, 1965.

I,

1965;

MSC

informed for

Grumman the on

that

the

Center

had

awarded

a contract system for the

to AC LEM a

Electronics (as a possible final the tions decision LEM

development to the mode the of these which either requested

of an optical rendezvous navigational decision to use, Grumman

tracking radar). devices. should

alternative

Until

MSC continue

reached building Opera-

to accept paper.

Flight pending

Crew

Directorate

be deferred

evaluation

of

an operational
Letter, Item ment," "LEM

R. Wayne 3; Selection October Optical

Young, 1, 1965;

MSC,

to GAEC, Radar or

Attn: Optical Donald

R. S. Mullaney, Tracker K. Slayton, for

"Contract LEM MSC, Navigation to

NAS

9-1100, RequireASPO,

of Remlezvous Tracker," October

memorandum, 1, 1965.

Manager,

In

the

absence Robert system

of a firm C. Duncan, and in Block

requirement, Chief star of the tracker

and were (Block

because and being

of

limited from systems

utility, Division, the would

rethe still

ported horizon guidance contain

Guidance

Control

photometer the devices.)
Robert horizon

deleted

primary

I CSMs.

II guidance

Memorandum, tracker and

C. Duncan,

MSC, October

to Distr., 1, 1965.

"Apollo

primary

guidance

system

star

photometer,"

The

U.S.

Geological the Arizona. in the to make fitting and
James support

Survey

cooperated mobility CSD more meteoroid unit

with

Crew

Systems determined

Division lunar

(CSD) of

3--9

in testing at Flagstaff, deficiencies of changes as better

extravehicular thermal the more

under

simulated and

conditions a number a number as well

As a resnlt, garment

technicians garment, functional

recommended and more durable,

comfortable.
MSC, to Chief, Crew 1, 1965. Systems Division, "Report of trip

Memorandum. for USGS Apollo

H. O'Kane,

in Arizona,"

November

209

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
October 4

MS(; ordered Grumman to halt work Oll both linear-shaped charges and gasdriven guillotines as a method for severing the LEM's interstage umbilical. Instead, dual-blade the contractor device. should use two mild-detonation guillotines or one

I.ettcr, Contract October

James L. Neal, MS(;, to GAEC, Change Authorization No. 4, 1965.

Attn: John C.. Snedeker, "Contract 142, Mild Detonating Fuse Driven

NAS 9-1100, Guillotine,"

As

a result

of

a

design

meeting

tm

Septelnber hardware

2,

MSC

ordered in the

North CM up-

American righting
TWX,

to make a number of detailed system for Block I spacecraft.
C. L. "l'aylor, MSC, to NAA, Space and

changes

luformation System Meeting

Systems

Division, at

Attn: NAA

J. C. Cozad, subject: "Flotation..:Uprighting September 2, 1.%5," October 5, 1965.

Conducted

ASP() Samuel

Manager on

Joseph that mission

F. Shea AS-204,

recommended M-5A based on

to Apollo (Bioassays schedule

Program Body Fluids)

Manager not be from

C. Phillips

experiment

incorporated

impact

resulting

structural modifications necessary to support the Urine Volume System. Redesign and rework of existing spacecraft hardware a schedule impact of two to four weeks.
I,etter, Shca to Phillips, "Apollo In-Flight Experiments, Flight AS-204," October

Measuring would have

5, 1965.

MSC requested landing

that

Grumman for the

study LEM.

the feasibility Grumman was

of a "fire-till-touchdown" to investigate especially descent engine skirt, or hardware modifications

procedure

performance factors surrounding possibly jettisoning the skirt, and required
TWX.

crushing of the was to recommend

for this
R. Vv'ayne

landing
Young,

mode.
MSC, to GAEC, Attn: R.S. Mullaney, October 6, 1965.

7-14

MSC's because craft's

Reliability beryllium cabin, the

and metal

Quality thus

Assurance in the posed

Division humid

reported environment hazard

in August of the to the crew

that, spaceof Group, it was and at-

would

corrode

a toxicological

the CM. During subsequent and Guidance and Control agreed control mosphere
"ASPO

meetings with the and Structures and safety, to beryllium protect the coated

Health and Physics Mechanics Divisions, surfaces metal in the from guidance the

that,

because must

of crew be

system inside
Weekly

humid

the cabin
Management

of the spacecraft.
Report, August p. 1; Joseph 12-19, 1965"; MSC, "Minutes of Senior

Staff Meeting, October 7-14. Control ('ommand

October 1, 1965/' 1965"; memorandum,

MSC, "ASPO N. Kotanchik, prevent beryllium

Weekly MSC,

Management Report, to Chief, Guidance and inside the Apollo

Division, "Protective Module." Novemher

coating to 4, 1965.

corrosion

210

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

The the the VHF

Instrumentation LEM's surface contact miles. portions antenna kg [3 and antenna inflight of the with The

and VHF moon the VHF

Electronic antenna as well.

Systems

Division

(IESD)

proposed

that

1965
Octo[:_er

lnight be used as a link (I.EM connnunications the however, to meet to the IA'_M to study surface, The and spacecraft had been at a cost the coverage VHF suggested at

to astronauts on had to provide up only to three for the 1.36 and of the might three-mile

crew

outside and

ranges designed

7--14

nautical flight another 2.26 inflight thereby Also, signal curred power equipment from lowered studying
"ASPO

antenna,

of the mission, 5 lbs].) while IESD on

this communications and that

re(tuirement range the

was 1)eing added the lunar

of between

offered

ranGe requirement be obviated. IESD attended

might

be relaxed.

additional

antenna

a preliminary (SCE) to the

design

review

at

Autonetics

on

the

conditioning in several supply; bay

equipment modifications hermetic in Block sealing II CMs).

for the Block Block I design and of more even changes

If CSM. IESD con(adding a redundant repackaging the efficient North power American to fit the SCE's weight supply, was

of equipment; These from because the
7-1,t,

reduced

22 to 19 kg (47.5 its power ways
Weekly

to 41 lbs) and, lightening
Report, October

consumption

65 to 35 watts. SCE
19652'

of perhaps
Management

further.

Crew Systems Division the I,EM. This action subjects and Also, the at \Vright-Patterson engineers. CSD Apollo reported

(CSD) established followed the final AFB and

vii)ration limits I.EM vii)ration of the

for the crew o/ test with human by CSD

7-14

a review

test prod-am

Grumman in what

described suit that

as "the it had sent

start with an

of a long feld Apollo and suit

range launch

program operations,"

for

familiarizing Division Kennedy
Ibid.

technicians forthcoming

technician

to Cape

to take

part in the

Gemini

VI mission.

A drop

in the

boilerplate

6A

series,

using

flight-qualifiable

earth

landing (not a invited failure

system (ELS) components, part of the ELS) did not North American and to recommend
Ibid.

failed because the adequately stabilize

braking parachute the vehMe. MSC to explain the

and Northrop-Ventura corrective measures.

to Houston

Because Russian

of the moon

less-than-perfect probe, was

firing destroyed

of its retrorockets, on 211 impact. The

Luna craft,

VII launched

another four

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
October

days Russia's

earlier, attempt
Business

was

thus

the

third

failure,

Western on the moon.

observers

believed,

in

to soft-land
Daily, October

a spacecraft
11, 1965, pp. 190,

Space

194;

Astronautics

and

Aeronautics,

1965,

pp.460,463,

464-465,467.

A test model lunar an landings, altitude

of the was of 91

Ltmar flown m (300

Landing by ft). former Built

Research NASA by Bell

Vehicle, X-15 pilot Aerosystems

designed Joseph

to simulate Walker to fivesupwith under

Company that supported lift rockets that was controlled

contract to NASA, sixths of its weight. ported the remaining jets of hydrogen
Astronautics and

the research The pilot one-sixth,

craft had manipulated and

a jet engine solid-fuel attitude

the craft's

peroxide.
Aeronautical, 1965, p. 465.

12

On test the and

August static not was earth

26,

the

attachments on CM This system
N.

for 006. test, The the the

the

pilot fittings one

parachute had in been the interface

mortar redesigned limit load between

had

failed and the for CM

during

testing repeated.

final

series the

landing

system,

certified

structttral

the earth
Memoramlum, of SC 009." 1965."

landing
Joseph Octobcr

for the 009 flight.
MSC, "ASPO to Manager, ASPO, "Launch Report, configuration October 21-28,

Kotanchik, MSC,

19, 1965;

Wcekly

Management

12

To

ensure

compatibility for the on each in space
R. Wayne

with and and

the

spacecraft, visors. The

MSC from

specified two for

weight of which LEM, crew the

and

stor-

age details be carried afford operations
Letter, EMU

extravehicular mission

devices, the CM

would would during

transferred ultraviolet surface.
Attn: R.

to the

impact,

thermal,

protection

or on the hmar
Young, MSC, to GAEC,

S. Mullaney,

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

EV Visor

Assemhly,"

October

12, 1965.

14

NASA was negotiating with General Electric Company isotopic power generators for the Apollo Lunar Surface ages. The Atomic t)f the
and

to provide Experiment detailed

56-watt Packand

Energy unit

Comtnission based
1965,

wottld

manage of

design

development
+lstronautics

on
p. 't76.

LMSC studies

prototypes.

Aeronautics,

15

Owen ASP() craft. recovery

E. The

Maynard, Joseph CM must aids

Systems F. Shea float

Engineering the recovery apex-up

Division attitude,

chief, and etc.)

summarized for must Apollo be all of the

for space-

Manager

requirements

in a stable, system,

vehicle's operable

(uprighting

connntmications, 212

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

for 48 hrs after south crew with craft days. latitude, either tile CM ilad but

landing. the

In any and

water

landing

within Division

40 had would

degrees be

north

or the

1965
October

Landing be rescued this 48-hr afloat

Recovery

determined, in the the most, said,

would within

or recovery period. until

personnel ship

water spacefive

Thereafter, a recovery

Maynard arrived--at

to remain

Memorandum, merits," October

Ma)nard, 15, 1965.

MSC,

to

Manager,

ASPO,

"'Post-landing

flotation

require-

NASA Houston, tions after.

announced Texas, on the contract

that

it had

selected at more

Lockheed than

Electronics support at began

Company MSC. Negotiashortly

of there-

15

to provide (valued

broad

data-handling

$3 million)

MSC

News

Releasc Programming R. Gilruth,

65-93,

"NASA

to

Negotiate

with 1965;

Lockheed George

Electronics E. Mueller,

Co.

for

Computer to Robert

Support," MSC, October

October 15, 29, 1965.

letter,

NASA,

MSC

ordered

(;rumman LEMs. This upon

to discontinue action these followed Division metals.

use

of

zinc

and

cadmium l)y

on the effect

all Reof

18

production liability space and

performance that showed

studies a deleterious

Quality

Assurance

environments

Letter, The use

R. Wayne of Cadmium

Young,

MSC,

to

GAEC, in the

Attn: Apollo

R. S. Mullaney, Spacecraft,"

"Contract

NAS

9-1100,

or Zinc

Plate

October

18, 1965.

To ment CSD MSC also

solve

the

problem (WMS), rather the WMS

of controlling Crew Systems than

bacteria Division

in the (CSD)

LEM's

waste

managesome type

18

system described

recommended a germicide relied

of passive upstream began

control from

periodically techniques,

adding both collection

to the system. on chemicals suit). of the Grumman in the space

two such passive studying the

of which device own

(i.e., in the urine feasibility control

of this approach, in the contractor's

and ordered investigation

to evaluate

passive problem.

bacteriological

Letter, R. VCayne Young, MSC, to GAEC, Bacteriological Control for LEM Waste with enclosure.

Attn: R. S. Mtdlaney, "Contract NAS 9-1100, Management Subsystem," October 18, 1965,

A meeting lating Training Warren and Wayne Ron to the

was

held

at

Flight

Research Research

Center Vehicle

to discuss (LI.RV) and

several Lunar

items Landing

re-

19-22

lamar

landing

Vehicle (LLTV). North, and Joseph Decrevel and of Bell Arlene Ottinger,

Attending Algranti Johnson

were Dean (;rimm, Robert Hutchins, of MSC; Robert Brown, John Ryken, Company; of Flight 213 and (;ene (;enter. Matranga, Research

Aerosystems

THE APOLLO SPACECRAFT: A CHRONOLOGY

1965
October

T h e discussions centered around MSC’s needs for two LLRVs and two LLTVs and the critical nature of the proposed schedules; alternatives of assembling a second LLRV; clarifying the elements of the work statement; and preliminary talks about writing specifications for the LLTV. From a schedule standpoint, it was decided that both LLRVs would be delivered to MSC on September l , 1966. MSC planned to check out and fly the second LLRV (which needed additional systems checkout) with their

The new polycarbonate “bubble” helmet.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

crew training

and

pilot vehicle.
Internal

on

a nonintertereDce

basis

with

I,LRV

No.

1, the

primary

1965
October

NASA Manager, 26, 1965.

Memorandum held during

for tile

those week

concerned, of October

(;ene

J.

Matranga, to ll:e

LLRV LLRV,"

Project October

"Meetings

17 relating

The ing.

MSC The

Mission panel's

Constraints function and was then
V. Battey,

Control was to the

Panel resolve

(MCCP) all must mission
of

held once approve

its initial between the all

meetlaunch

2O

conflicts Also,

vehicle, reference changes.

spacecraft, traiectory These

operational issued,

constraints. MCCP in the
Distr.,

preliminary constraint

would
Robert Meeting,"

be included
MSC, 26. to

requirements.
1st Mission Constraints

Memorandum, Control l'anel

"Minutes

October

1965. with

enclosure.

To save weight, Crew three one-man liferafts
Memorandum, "Block

Systems Division and a composite
MSC, to Chief,

was studying set of survival
Crew Integration

the feasibility of nsing gear in Block I CMs.
Branch, Attn: J. Marshall,

2O

R. E. Smylie, kit study,"

I composite

October

20, 1965.

Apollo the and North

spacecraft and American.

009, back,

first

of the 009

type by inchtded

that NASA

wottld during a CM,

carry

three

astronauts ceremonies escape

to at

2O

moon adapter.
Astronautics

was accepted

informal SM, lannch

Spacecraft

system,

and

Aeronautics,

1965,

p. 485.

To tain

support mockups

studies of effort

on equipment the crew would be geared 101).

stowage, for the

North in the

American two blocks flight

agreed

to mainThe series

20--21

compartments

of CMs. for each

contractor's of vehicles
"ASPO

first manned

(spacecraft
Weekly

012 and
Report,

Management

October

21-28,

1965."

Samuel

C. Phillips, program launch

Apollo managers schedule

Program

Director,

notified

the

Center

directors

21

and Apollo that OblSF's based

in Houston, Hnntsville, and Cape Kennedy for Apollo-Saturn IB flights had been revised, 011:

on delivery

of CSMs

009 and 1966

• AS-201--January • AS-202--June Schedules 1967) were for AS-203

1966 through 205 (July and October 1966, and January

unchanged.
NASA, subject: to Kurt I)elms, KSC, Robert "Satt, rn IB Launch Schedules," Gilruth, October MSC, and 21, 1965. Wernher yon

TXVX, Braun,

Phillips, MSFC,

215

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A CHRONOLOGY

1965 October 21

MSC Division adopted hehnet had

announced (CSD) for was use smaller

that engineers in

the

bubble-type Robert Apollo

hehnet, I,..Jones and

designed James mobility

by O'Kane,

Crew

Systems had The by been new CSD

the and

extravehicular than earlier visibility, types;

unit. studies

lighter

extensive and don/doff

demonstrated MSC Ne_s

its superior Release 65-96, October

comfort, 21, 1965.

characteristics.

21

To MSC would MCC The type.

enable

MSC's

Mission that For

Control NASA's an

Center contract $80 use

(MCC) with IBM

to

handle for

Apollo

flights, systems

anmmnced be extended.

computer would support to an

additional would provisions

million,

IBM

convert techniques. incentive

the

to newer contract

equipment would contain

and

more for

advanced conversion

fee

MSC News Release

65-97, Octol)er

21, 1965.

21

North for 011, the

American Block 012), (at Weekly

completed I CM thus the (part of

static the

structural certification the

tests test

on

the

forward for

heatshield 009, when

network structural

airframes integrity

and

demonstrating start of the Report, earth

heatshield's landing ,1-_8, system 1965."

jettisoned "ASPO

sequence).

Management

Octol)er

22

NASA for major sites for

announced ()rbiter's of lunar and

that

it

had

selected during Most

10 1966.

areas These suitable--and

on

the

moon

as

subjects most

Iamar types

cameras terrain. Apollo

areas

encompassed potential--landing

were

Surveyor

spacecraft. Nelccts 10 Potential Photo Areas for l,unar Orl)iter,"

NASA News Release October '22, 1!)65.

65-335, "NASA

23-26

\Vhile at for

delivering Air

Apollo Force

SM Base, hi

009, Texas,

the

Pregnant for

(;uppy

aircraft days SM, the

was while incident was

delayed waiting was

Ellington an eugme

three-and-a-half delay and of Aero l)ut Beach, the

change, the engines nornlal air

view

of

the

reviewed to place on Letter,

during spare the

succeeding not only route

weeks, at from Houston, I,ong

Spacelines also at other to

requested loca-

strategic KSC.

tions

Calif.,

Edmund engine

F. O'Commr, change,

MSFC.

to MSC, Attn: Joseph

F. Shea, "Prcgnant

Guppy

emergent}

October

_3-,1_. 1965,'" November

18. 1965.

26

MSC provide

authorized for

North installation

Alnerican of a huninous

to

modify beacon

the

Block compatible

II

CSM with

design the LEM

to

216

The Pregnant Guppy aircraft, which was used extensively by NASA to transport spacecraft during all phases of the Apollo program.

tracking system. T h e CSM beacon could replace the rendezvous radar and transponder.
Letter, J. B. Alldredge, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Division, “Contract Change Authorization No. 455,” October 26, 1965; memo, Owen E. Maynard, MSC, to Project Officer, CSM, “Deletion of automatic actuation capability of VHF recovery beacon (Block 11),” October 8, 1965.

1965
October

At a meeting with Grumman, MSC agreed with the contractor’s basic design of the LEM’s descent-stage base heatshield and its installation and access. MSC asked Grumman to demonstrate accessibility, installation, and removal of the heatshield on the M-4 mockup.
Letter, R. Wayne Young, MSC, to GAEC, Attn: R. S. Mullaney, “Contract NAS 9-1100, Implementation o Action Items,” November 3, 1965, with enclosure, “Abstract of f LEM Base Heat Shield Review,” undated.

27

Owen E. Maynard, Systems Engineering Division chief, advised his branch managers of the U.S. Public Health Service’s (PHS) growing concern that Apollo spacecraft and crews might bring organisms back from the moon. (See September 27.) PHS feared that such organisms would be “capable of

29

2 17

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
October

multiplying

in

the

earth

environment

and

[that]

precautionary

measures Maynard its crew told must

must be undertaken to prevent his group, PHS believed that not that be allowed efforts to contact were already isolation

global exposure." Therefore, the CM, its environment, and environment. to tile define recovery the Maynard design ships

the earth's underway facilities for

further of were an being

advised isolation con-

facility, and templated.

As a result ASPO taken will

of soon

this that

strong the been

stand CM

by

PHS, what told been

Maynard spacecraft not CM assumed ordered will

said,

"It

appears are to the already

that being earth knew

be requested spacecraft," the opposite

to show environment Maynard had long

measures

to assure

be exposed environment to be subsystem part

atmosphere. as much--"has Actually,

The not much

his group--who

designed

to preclude

exposure." of normal managers to

operating procedures. review their individual • If their • What system could

Maynard therefore systems to determine: was potentially to confine a carrier such edict" could

of moon affect

germs the life and to prevent operation release

be done

organisms would be

• If a "strict of systems • How of organisms

no contamination

postlanding procedures from the spacecraft

(:hanged

Maynard obligated reply weight, look formed may with

cautioned to prevent "the prove cost, so that and

systems managers to "assume that any possible contamination of the answer that no changes can schedule limitations. can
to I'HS

ASPO earth," he said, all
from

is morally and not to present "our be first per-

standard

be made review

within must such
lunar

Admittedly," Nonetheless, be made
"Ear0_

to be insurmountable." recommendations
IVlaynard, October MSC, 29, 1965.

concerning
eomaminalion

systems.
sur-

Memorandum, face organisms,"

Branches,

During the Month

Seven

flights

were

made

with

the

l.unar The [our the

I_anding first three were for hmar
Center, No. 28 for

Research

Vehicle

at Flight of X-15 research.

Research conference Five

Center during October. activities, and the last landings
of

were in support attitude control mode.
Headquarters, ending October

of the
Letter, Landing 1965," sgd.

were
I)irector, Vehicle

made
Flight progress

in
Research report 2, 1965.

simulation
to NASA the period

Office Research Paul

"'Lunar 31,

F.

Bikle,

November

November 1

MSC's Sample

Engineering Receiving

and

Developnlent Office

Directorate as an 218 interim

established organizational

the

Lunar element

Laboratory

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

pending laboratory.
MSC

dex,'elopment

of

a

permanent

organization

for

operation

of

tile

1965
November

Announcement Office

65-140. " No_cmber

"Establishment 1, 1965.

of

the

E&I)

Lunar

Sample

Receixing

Laboratory

Bell Aerosystems Company reported that the IA._M ascent engine lant cooled injector baffle met all basic specification requirements, those for combustion efficiency, at)lative compatibility, and tonducted vibrated completed the maximum
(;AEC, letter, Bell "Monthl'y R. Wayne

bipropelincluding Bell been also set mission.
1, 13; 9-1100,

stability.

a successful firing with an engine that to silnulate launch boost and hmar descent. a duty cycle firing at AEDC with attainable
LPR-10-50, R. December

had previously The contractor conditions a
10, "Contract

hardware during
December 9, 1965.

to

temperatures
Progress Young, Contamination Report MSC,

believed
No. Problems." 34/'

hmar
1965, pp.

to GAEC,

Attn:

S. Mullaney

NAS

Aerosystems

MSC management Certification Test
Memorandum, Implementation,"

gave Grumlnan the go-ahead Plan effective October 25.
E. Mac, nard, 4, 1965. MSC, to l)istr., "LEM

to

implement

the

LEM

Owcn

Certification

Test

Program

November

In a letter R. Gilruth results and high interest Gilruth and Crew Gilruth said vehicle

to the said

Director that recent with

of Flight Lunar the activities the and recent

Research Landing at FRC. decision the

Center, Research

MS( ] Director Vehicle LEM (I,I,RV) had

Robert flight focused

problems

handling

qualities

of the

on the LLRV with

concurred MSC with Operations expressed

to assemble and personnel

the

second of the to the

LLRV second Flight

planned engineering

to support

assembly

checkout assigned

contractor

Directorate. appreciation for the effort expended by FRC to provide to contract in initiating drawings for Lunar

a three-month for a follow-on Landing
Letter, November

study contract with vehicle and indicated Vehicles
to Director,

Bell Aerosystems MSC planned 1966.
Landing Research

Training
Gilruth

in June
FRC, "Lunar

and

Training

Vehicles,"

,t, 1965.

MSC's translunar

Configuration flight time
Robert of Board transhmar Meeting

Control from
V.

Board

approved

the

reduction

of maximum

110 hrs to 100 hrs.
to Manager. November 4, 1965." ASI'O, 1, 1965; "Response MSC, to "Minutes, your question Configuration on

Memorandum, reduction Control

Battey,

flight No.

time,"

24, November

219

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT"

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
November 4-12

The design of the Block I space suit helmet finalized. Based on evahmtion of AFRM 007 mined flights. the suit Remaining terial, harness,
MSC, Monthly

ear cup and attachment was acoustic test data, it was deterwere adequate of for Block would for maDivision. visor drawings I Company The specifications Crew Systems

that

existing to reflect been

Gemini-type and and and revised

"soft" David

ear cups Clark

North had

American reviewed

be changed

requirements. approved approved microphones were

majority

by MSC's and

to be resolved and
"ASI'O Progress

selection earphones,

of helmet

installation fingertip

of helmet glove

communications

lighting

systems.
Report, November 4-12, 1965"; NAA, "Apollo

Weekly Report,"

Management SID 62-300-44,

January

!, 1966, p. 6.

NASA poration suit pressure garment. with tinned with

announced consisting

that of the

it would $10 liquid-cooled and Division time

negotiate contract

with

International the constant contract life wear

Latex Apollo

Corspace over-

for an estimated garment assembly, Standard and main

million

to fabricate

undergarment, $20 million Aircraft the of

garment,

thermo-micrometeoroid of United subjected

protective Corporation support stowage

At the same development

an estimated manufacture supply F).
November 5. 1965;

was negotiated for consystem soak

Hamilton a four-hour

portable

power

to a maximum

temperature
MSC R. E. News

of 328 K (130
Release 65-102,

I'WX. subject: "NASA Weekly

Richard "I'LSS to

S. Power

Johnstoq, Supply for Report,

MSC, Concept," Apollo

to

Breeding. 8,

Hamilton 1965; NASA November

Standard News 5, 1965;

Division, 65-346, "ASI'O

November

Release

Negotiate

Suit,

Support S)stem," 4-12, 1965."

Management

November

The development tnission straints for missions AS-206 constraints tion cation requirements to the objectives and mission far exceeded mission profile to be accomplished rules of the AS-207 preliminary

planning panel tnet to discuss and AS-207. AS-206 spacecraft were checked for compatibility. showed would that stage mission was developed within the launch profile

the general conand operational An batteries. enable the was investigapower mission A tentaestabA modifithe ascent

the capacity

of the ascent which I,EM

battery vehicle

capabilities. constraints

tive procedm-e lished between
"ASPO Battcy, 1965, for Weekly MS(:, with

for negotiating MSFC MSC and MSFC.
Management "Minutes Mission of the Report, Mission Owen with

Noxember Constlaints

t-12.

1965"; l'ancl MSC,

memolaudum, _4," Distr., to "Official

Robert November Method

V. 23,

Meeting 16, 1965.

enclosure;

memorandum, Constraints

E. Ma)nard, MSFC." November

Negotiating

9-12

Upon port

examination System/Emergency

of the discovered

airlock

gas connectors System Preliminary catastrophic '220

at

the faihtre.

Portable If an

Life

SupASPO

Oxygen

Design

Review,

representatives

a possible

astronaut

ADVANCED

DESIGN_

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

unhooked connected rejected ASPO be safety. by

the PLSS supply umbilical the suit would vent through the or preliminary to the the that design Crew be problem recommended

before the exhaust the PLSS. A request board another in spite that way Systems solved Division

line was for change of this the

diswas

1965
November

review

situation. connectors crew

modified

to preserve

Memorandum, Support PLSS./EOS, Office, 9-12

()wen Crew

E.

Maynard,

Systems Division, December

Engineering "RFC 7, 1965. 111-1,

Division, Preliminary

ASPO, Design

to

Apollo Review,

Systems 1965,"

November

North tractors

American to convey specific
"Apollo

conducted the current

an

Apollo and
SID

Program program support
62-300-43,

Review and to the
December

for

key

subconthe sub-

10

status

of the

to discuss

contractors'
NAA,

participation
Progress Report,"

program.
1, 1965, p. 3.

Monthly

A North men

American landing

layout

of the

volume

swept

by the

CM

couch areas

and where

crewthe

10

during

impact

attenuation

showed

several

couch and/or crewmen area of such interference about tem cause the explain
"ASPO to NAA Attenuation

struck the CM structure or stowed equipment. was that the center crewman's helmet could the volume the occupied side access on The the at North by the hatch. American's aft was portable The bulkhead PLSS

One overlap syswas bewith MSC to

four (PLSS) the couch

inches stowed original

into

life support stowage

beneath to this stowage

recently

changed

position envelope.

recommendation interfered by directed

position

attenuation

contractor

this situation.
Weekly Space Management and Infolmation Interference," Report, November 1)ivision, 4-t2, 1965"; J. TWX, C. Cozad, C. L. Tayh)r, subject: MSC, "hnpact

Systems November

Attn:

System

10, 1965.

The

Block

I service

propulsion

system

engine

successfully

completed

the

11

first altitude
MSC, "ASP()

qualification
Weekly

tests at AEDC.
Report, November 12-18, 1965."

Management

A manned Standard portable altitude bypass achieved source cedure was life valve by

lunar Division

mission altitude system 60 906

metabolic chamber (PLSS). the bottle bottle

profile using The ft), and programmed Oxygen and per oxygen

test the system the was

was was subject

run

in

the

Hamilton

11

development started adjusted rates from system. complete,

liquid-cooled at a chaInber the which an This liquid were proexternal

support

of over use used

m (200 000

to accommodate of a treadmill. the to 2068 PLSS because

metabolic supplied regulation was not psig).

through was limited

qualification

so pressure battery

kilonewtons

sq m (300 221

An external

TIlE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFI':

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
November

was used for power because the new batteries that change to the all-battery LEM were not yet available. port system including the porous plate sublimator

were required The thermal was completely

by the transselfrequire-

contained in the PLSS. All systems operated within specification ments and the test was considered an unqualified success.
"ASPO Weekly Management Report, Noxember 4-12, 1965."

12

The

portable

life support

system

Preliminary and

Design no major

Review discrepancies

was completed. were noted

The design was essentially during the review.
Ibid.

complete

12-18

MSC

and

Grumman

representatives

reviewed

(;rumnaan's

timeline

analysis

for the intravehicular LEM crew activities subsequent to lunar landing. This timeline was being rewritten for a test program to be conducted to determine what crew mobility problems existed within the LEM could be better evaluated at the Certification Design Review.
"ASI'O Weekly Management Report, November 12-18, 1965."

so that

they

12-18

MSC

directed areas

Ryan interest

Aeronautical weight the was power

Corporation c'ould be saved and on supply

to the

present the LEM possibility

to

RCA of its

and radar. over-

Grumman Of specific design.
Ibid.

in which

landing

15

MSC

instructed • Submit

North

American

to: of Block II CSM jettisonable from covers degradation system Block thermal II to

a preliminary CM

design

protect by the (RCS) CSMs.

the radiator and boost environment. preliminary heat plume

heatshield design of

thermal nonablative SM coating SM

coatings reaction

• Furnish

control on

protection the effect

to prevent on the

degradation LEM MSC Block

• Determine design design

overall

and

adapter

of coating degradation to a level changes or mission constraints for • Determine the effect on the SM to the constraints
J. B. Change Alldredge, Authorization

specified by Block I and RCS thermal

and to propose II CSMs. of coating changes design

design

degradation or mission
Letter, "Contract

level specified by MSC and for Block I and II CSMs.
MSC, to No. NAA. 't78," Space November and 15,

to propose

Information 1965.

Systems

Division,

222

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

The manned portion completed, evaluating maneuver maneuvers lation The tween control study accuracy, and pilot

of the coast and man-in-the-loop maneuver techniques time, satisfied Block for the in eight the results

maneuver capabilities and the

simulation and their attitude 012 more was

program effects and 950

was upon The transruns. be-

1965
Novemker

propellant midcourse including there equipnlent.
p, 6.

consumption. manned than compatibility

19

requirements was conducted analysis and of

I Spacecraft

mission.

phases, indicated control

Preliminary

the pilots
Monthl)

the maneuver
Report," SID

"Apollo

Progress

62-'R)0-44,

Christopher outlined landing. of probes aids probes landing The on during

C. Kraft, results of programs

.Jr., recent

MSC's studies

Assistant of the were

Director problems Lunar mission, mission. landing

for

Flight

Operations, with lunar of of deployment

22

associated Orbiter, and mission,

studied orbit on

Surveyor, hmar

a simulated hmar during

manned an hmar

deployment deployment

unmanned landing

the manned

The studies supported an earth launch window For this purpose,

the conclusion that it was of several days to give launch be necessary to have

still desirable to have opportunity flexibility. of longitudinally

it would

a group

spaced landing areas available. However, if there were a particular advantage, such as site certification, in being limited to one area and, consequently, one launch opportunity per month, this was considered to be acceptable. At least one launch opportunity per month would be required. Therefore, the certified area would have to be within the area available from performance consideration. feasible. Although successful entific not nor the This might mean a night launch, which was confirmed as

manned

lunar program,

landing information be expected

mission for from

ought Apollo the

not

to depend The

upon

a sciwas

Surveyor

as well

as general concept

information

should

program.

supported was the

that probes were idea of a separate

a necessary prerequisite probe mission approved.

to a lunar landing If the Surveyor

program failed to provide evidence of the suitability of at least one area and if the consensus favored gathering additional information from probes, the be feasibility fully of carrying probes on with the actual the lunar landing of mission aids to should real-time considered, together development

assessment.
Memorandum, "Problems Christopher associated with C. lunar Kraft, landing," Jr., M SC, November to Manager 22, 1965. of Special l)esign Efforts,

Little Manager

Joe

II Joseph

Program F. Shea

Manager that

Milton

A. Little

Silveira Joe

suggested

to

ASP()

22

if the next 223

II flight

test was successful

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
November

there Apollo one The

would

be no further Silveira to store a new cost to the

requirement said planning from storage ASP() remaining

for the had three

Little

Joe parts,

II to support with and should program suggestion the General tooling

the Dyfor closeon

program. in case estimated 1.

been vehicles,

made or NASA

namics/Convair year additional

requirement be small.

ASPO concurred

develop.

of one-year

compared

to normal with

out was December

Menloralldums, Silveira to Shca, "I,ittle J. Thomas Marklcy to Silveira, l)cccmbcr

Joe 11 pioglani 1, 1965.

close-otit,"

November

22,

1965;

23

North (RCS) suspected engines estimated

American test cell to have

informed during been

MSC caused by

of a fire test for overheating

in

the the

reaction 009. test cell

control The when

system fire the was 10 An cell Di-

a CM

RCS

spacecraft

were activated, approximately test delay of two to three

30 sec prior to test weeks, due to shutdown informed the

completion. of the test Program

for refurbishment, was rector that an investigation

forecast. MSC was underway.
to NASA 23. 1965.

Apollo

TVCX, ,Joseph I:.Mica, MS(.', sgd. William A. Lee. Noscmber

Ilcadquattels,

Attn:

Apollo

Program

l)irector,

24

MSC LEM xnon

notified would usage by

(;rununan be fired item with NASA
L. Ncal,

that by the the and
MS( j. to

all electrically Apollo standard would and

actuated initiator. be the

explosive This single wire

devices would

on the

be a comequipment.

CSM

configuration

developed
Lcttcr,,lamcs Contract No',cmbcr

provided
(;AI:.C, Attn:

as Government-furnished
John of _,i.glc C. Snedcker. Bridge "Contract Standard

NAS

9-1100,

Changc Autho_i/alion 24. 1965.

159. l'has,c-in

Al)ollo

Initiator,"

26

(;rumman logical the lunar

was directed control of the surface

by LEM

MSC urine

to provide containers prior

for the

disposition locating

and them

bacterioto so their

by off-loading

all containers

immediately

to I_EM ascent,

physical integrity would be assured during ascent stage launch. Incorporation of an appropriate germicide in all I.EM urine containers would effectively sterilize the internal part of the container and the contained urine.

Letter, R. Disposition

_V_I_'I|_d

_l'OIIIlg,

,_ISC,

and

Bacteriological

tO (;,_EC, Atln: R. S. Mullancy, Control of IA._M Irrinc Containers,"

"Contract NAS 9-1100, No_cmbcr 26, 1965.

28

Ordnance in a series

separation of four

tests were

on

the

first

three

spacecraft-LEM-adapters American's Tulsa SLA's facility. forward

(SLA) The panels

completed

at North

tests successfully demonstrated the in preparation for the first spacecraft
".\polh_ MSC, Monthl_ to Chief, Progress Systems Report." Engineering Sll)

deployment of the orbital flight.
fi2-301)It, p.

_;; mcmmandum, separation

Lvh' follow-up

1). White, report,"

Division,

"SLA

panel

2'24

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTIN(;

November MSC, "ASPO

8, 1965; Weekly

MSC,

"ASPO

Weekly Report,

Management November

Report, 25-December

November 2, 1965."

18-24,

1965";

1965
November 30

Management

Usage unit outlet be used support

of a muhiple (two per (two suit) inlets II space suit/umbilical

gas connector was deleted. gas connector and suits, two outlets Standard revision
MSC, gas

(/vlGC) Instead per

with of tile suit). control

the

extravehicular a separate Airlock, design and change the by

mobility inlet Inc., portable and would applied life change

MGC, This

manufactured

to all Block by means
Letter, 1)eletinn November

environmental

systems, agreement

systems.

Hamilton

was directed

to implement

of a negotiated
R. Wayne of 30, 1965. Young,

of a supplemental
Attn:

to its contract.
NAS 9--1100,

to GAEC,

R. S. Mullanev separate

"Contract Inc.,

muhiple

connector

(substitute

Airlock,

connectors),"

Apollo Mission Simulator No. 1 was shipped Precision, Binghamton, New York, to MSC.

from

Link

Group,

General

3O

Memorandum, Owen E. Maynard, MSC, to Manager, ASPO, Status," November 30, 1965; "ASPO Weekly Management 1965."

"Apollo Report,

Mission Simulator November 18-24,

(;rumman the LEM
"Monthly

completed abort guidance
Report

negotiations system.
No.

with

Thompson-Ramo-_Arooldridge

for

During the Month

l'rogvess

3,1." IA'R-10-50,

p. 19.

Ten were flights

flights were for attitude were made
of

made with the hmar control and handling in the hmar
Director, Vehicle F. Bikle, Flight In'ogress 1)ecember

landing qualities mode.
Center, No. 29 for to

research vehicle. All research. Landings

flights on all

During the Month

landing
Research report 14, 1965.

Letter, Landing 1965,"

Office

NASA period

Headquarters, ending

"Lunar 30,

Research sgd. Paul

the

November

A series reaction rosion nitric resume.
"Apollo

of tests control cracking,

were system

rim

to determine tanks. tetroxide exposed The

the

cause

of stress showed that

corrosion tanks

of the exposed

titanium tanks fail.

Resuhs (N._,fL)

During the Month

to chemically oxide

pure bnt not did

nitrogen

oxidizer containing testing

suffered small program

stress amounts would

corof soon

to N,.,(),

qualification

Monthly Test

l'rogress Program p. 3.

Rel)ort," Vqeeklv

Sll)

62-300-44, Report

p.

10; 15

NAA, November

"l'voject 1965

Apollo through

Spacecraft 21 No'_ember

Activity

(Period

1965),

NASA incentive

had

essentially contract.

completed Based

negotiations

with

North

American

on

the

December 2

on agreements 225

reached

with

the contractor

during

TIlE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT;

A

CttRONOLOC,

Y

1965
December

negotiations, Master chided Block I and Block II containing primary former

Development Schedule 9 was Block If spacecraft schedules, a tabulated

published, which SLA schedules, list of

inSM

structure schedttles, and and new schedule dates.

milestones

l_cmolandum. Manager, "New

C. NAA

L.

"fa',lor, Schedule

MSC, M1)S-9."

to

each

ASI'O

Branch 1965.

Chief

and

each

Subsystem

l)ecembm-'_

Maj.

(;en.

Samuel

C. Phillips, I_EM TM-5 the following

NASA

Apollo

Program

Director,

approved

the deletion of the that MS(: consider

from the ground recommendations: drop scale on

test program.

He requested

• A I.angley Research Center as part ot the LEM test program. • Expansion of the one-sixth symmetrical landings • Planning of timelines. • Investigation tests.

test program model ITFA-3 tests

using in

a full-scale the areas of to

LEM nontheir

and soil landings. mechanism tests

with

attention

of use of the

I.TA-3

or LEM-1

for

structural

elasticity

()n December reconnnendations:

23,

ASP()

Manager

Joseph

F.

Shea

replied

regarding

the

• I,angley test program sixth gravity to cover

had

been

requested

by

MSC

to support LEM models of LEM would on

the the

LEM Langley

ground one-

by conducting tests simulation test rig. tests of one-sixth landings.

of a simulated LEM drop that

• Additional

would landing both

be conducted performance analysis and

nonsymmetrical

Evaluation

in soil was starting at MS(-: in a program experimental studies. of tests as a • MSC felt that the landing gear and the [,angley fi_rther means * An analytical on I.EM

include

sufficient demonstration would be provided tests. The ETA-3 of demonstrating study to evaluate performance

by drop

of the mechanism capabilities the planned dynamic tower tests, however, would be used

the mechanism's functionability. the structural "elastic spring-back" was being conducted by Grumman.

effects

landing

If evaluation of this stndy showed the need for experimental testing, the use of the I.TA-3 for elasticity tests would he investigated. The use of a flight article, such as LEM-1, for such tests was not considered desirable because of the possibility of structural damage.

TWX, I)ecember Gen. I)eceml)er

Maj. '2, Samuel 23,

(;en. 1965; C. 1965.

Samuel letter, Phillips,

C.

l'hillips, F.

NASA Shea. of TM

Headquarters, MSC, 5 to from NASA LEM

to

MSC,

Attn:

J. Attn:

F.

Shea,

.Joseph "Deletion

Headquarters, Ground Test

Maj.

Program,"

226

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

MSC LEM (CSD) limited

was

considering attempt in January

the

use of both by

water tests by the

and surface. what

air

bacteria Crew

filters

in the Division to begin

1965
December 3

to reduce would testing

contamination would be 1{)66.

of tile hmar trapped

Systems hoped

to determine

perceutage CSD

concentration

of inicro-organisms

filters.

At an MSC I.aboratory would be hmar lithium support dumped completed.
Memorandum,

meeting

attended it

by ASP(),

CSD,

and

Lunar

Sample

Receiving

representatives, sent to (;runnnan: contamination, canisters and lunar

was decided (1) In order should descent all lunar

that the t:ollowing directions to prolong the prevention of be made and mol)ility surface to store (2) the items exploration urine should had and life 1)e been stage: portable

surface

provisions in the after

hydroxide systems onto the

associated sttrface

extravehicular

Robert

V.

Battcv.

Chief.

S}stems of

Opmations Lunar Stnface

Branch,

ASPO,

to

Chief, I)eccm-

Systems Engineering ber 3, 1965.

Division,

ASPO,

"Status

Contamination."

The Sands

Flight Test

Readiness Facility. Subsequent

Review The

for board

Mission concurred review,

A-004 in the

was

conducted with of analysis

at White launch the autowas relaunch. of con(See Janu-

proceeding

preparations.

to the

failure

pilot subsystem revealed loose solder scheduled for December 15, froln the The launch was later scheduled for tinued problems with the autopilot,

connections, and the latmch original December 8 planned December 18: then, because until January.

was scrubbed

ary 20, 1966,
"Project Flight

entry.)
Abstract Review, of Proceedings, 3, 1965, Mission at the A-004 White (CSM Sands 002/LJ Test II 12-51-3) Chair-

Apollo, Readiness

December

Facility,"

man, F. J. Bailey, Jr.; MSC, "ASPO Weekly Management TWX, Manager, ASPO, MSC, to NASA Headquarters, Office, December 22, 1965.

Report, December 2-9, 1965"; Attn: l)irector, Apollo Program

The moon and

(LS.S.R. December scientific normally. that "the

launched 3. The research. Luna were

Luna

VIII,

an were 1552

unmanned to test a soft kg (3422 one and a soft at all

spacecraft, hmar the lbs),

toward landing spacecraft

the system was

3-7

objectives Weighing

following tioning were that cept

a trajectory

close VIII

to the calculated impacted instead of making normally

the equipment December landing. stages

was func-

on the moon

7. Indications Wass reported landing ex-

it was destroyed systems touchdown."
and Aeronautics,

functioning

of the

the final
Astronautics

1965,

pp. 536,

542.

Gemini from

VII, Cape

the Kennedy

fourth

manned

mission 4 with 227

of

that

program, pilot Frank

was

launched and

4-18

December

command

Borman

: . ..

..
,

*:n
I

y:: ...
-'$j

..

At right, Gemini VII is shown just after liftoff at Cape Kennedy. Below, Gemini VII Astronauts Frank Borman, left, and James A. Lovell, Jr., happily relive part of their mission in the recovery helicopter after splashdown 14 days later.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

pilot ate VIA

James the

A. Lovell, objectives (see

Jr.,

as the crew. of providing 15-16 reentry during their than flight six

Their

primary (14

objective days) target

was to evaluflight for the on man. Gemini

1965
December

physiological spacecraft

effects included: December

long-duration entry),

Secondary

a rendezvous

conducting

20 experiments, rendezvous The crew the other, on Depoint.

and evaluating was successfully established and finally cember both

the spacecraft's accomplished first flew little with more

guidance capability. The the 1 lth day of the mission. spacemen suits mi from as first one, The planned the then removed.

another 18, was

for American

landing, landing

Grimwood, 1969, pp.

Hacker, 224-226.

with

Vorzimmer,

"Project

Gemini,

A

Chronology"

(NASA

SP-4002),

Hamilton to meet planned

Standard requirements for more

successfully of the than three lunar

tested

a life-support suit. The

back system

pack

designed as the

surface inside

functioned while

hours

a vacuum

chamber,

test subject walked naut on the lunar supplied oxygen,

on a treadmill terrain. The pressurized

to simulate the metabolic load of an astro29.48-kg (65-1b) portable life support system 25 510 newtons per sq m ('_.7 lbs and water suit. circulated through it the to and relative humidity, The pack pumped cooled

to a minimum

psi), controlled its temperature through the suit and helmet. tubing purify of the undergarment trapped for reuse.
Aelolmulic% 1965,

for cooling carbon

inside dioxide

the and

pressure other

A canister

of lithium

hydroxide

air contaminants

the oxygen
arm

Astronautics

p. 540.

George notified E. Webb Lockheed

E. Mueller, NASA Associate Administrator MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth that and Associate Administrator The Robert Martin Aircraft Corporation,

for Manned Space NASA Administrator C. Seamans, McDonnell

Flight, James Aircraft

Jr., had selected

Company,

Corporation, ments Pallet each would

and Northrop Procurement. be valued at about

Corporation for Phase I of the Apollo ExperiThe contracts would be for four months and $375 000.

Letter,

Mueller

to Gilruth,

I)ecember

6, 1965.

The can, CSM

Block Downey,

II CSM Calif.

Critical The

Design specifications Review to meet North in

Review and Item

(CDR) drawings Dispositions

was held were were

at North reviewed written

Ameriand the against

6-17

mockup where

inspected. it failed CDR for use

the design As a result of mockup

the requirements. American flights 229 would at update the configuration AFB. The

of the 27A

zero-g

_Nright-Patterson

On December 5, 1965, the last scheduled Little Joe 11-Apollo boilerplate was apparently ready for its scheduled December 8 launch at WSMR. Troubles were encountered and the launch finally took place January 20, 1966.
1965
December

flights could not be rescheduled until MSC approved the refurbished mockup as being representative of the spacecraft configuration.
MSC, “ASPO Weekly Management Report, December 16-23, 1965.”

7

ASPO Manager Joseph F. Shea informed North American, Grumman, and Bell Aerosystems Company that NASA’s Associate Administrator for Manned

230

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Space the

Flight, Apollo

(;eorge ProgTam,

E. this

Mueller, alloys to be 21.

had and done

requested nitrogen at the

a presentation tetroxide NASA and Senior its

on

the

inOll

1965
December

compatibility Council In light Apollo might urgency. A preliminary cember 16 and tractors cember and meeting

of titanimn

impact

Management

on December faitures when in

of recent ProgTanl be

of almost flight,

all titaniuln the matter

tanks was

planned under to

for use in the which utmost be of

exposed

to nitrogen

tetroxide

conditions

encotmtered

deemed

meeting was one responsible it would

scheduled at representative requested 1)e necessary

NASA fronl to be

Headquarters each of the Prior organization

on prime to the

DeconDe-

sul)contractors tasks: and analyze

was

present.

16 meeting,

for each

to coinplete

the following • Tabulate tests. and

all

tank

tests

to date

and

all

related

materials

• Establish a format for presentation of the etfects of time, teinperature, stress levels on failure. • Obtain the best correlation between actual tank tests and related tests. limits of operation and confidence flights. in inventory levels and for all current costs and relate these to all planned all titanium tank hardware and manufacture and recommend early flights using

materials

• Establish titanium tanks • Tabulate of development • Consider problems and for

complete would minimum flights

of this hardware to (late. a course of action which existing a course future present ground and hardware of action action with for

alleviate cost and

schedule impact. • Consider and

recommend impact. for materials, in

future coatings, weight

indicate cost and schedule • If recommendations preparation, or alternate increase. changes possibility overall spacecraft • Consider time of tanks • Consider pressurization • Review and thermal nitrogen
TWX, Bell

inchide

surface and

component rules

increase

mission of venting

which

would and

decrease impact on

under

pressure. repressurization weight, cost and schedule. and present pressurization of all Apollo titanium

system design, all missions environment

times, tanks

stress which

levels, contain

tetroxide.
Joseph Aerosystems F. Shca, Company, MSC, to 1). Myers, 7, 1965. NAA; J. Gavin, Grumman; and J. Piselli,

December

MSC's

Deputy

Director that

(;eorge

M.

Low

told

Willis

B.

Foster had

of

NASA

Headquarters

tile standing

cotninittee 231

appointed

by him

performed

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
December

an

invaluable we are

service in the

to the Lunar

Center

in

identifying members the

the of that

requirements Low said, committee engineering

to l)e "Addifor prophase

incorporated tionally, viding detailed just ended." Low noted

Sample inputs

Receiving during

Laboratory. preliminary

indebted specialized

to individual

that

the

committee Report Standing revealed

had

prepared

a report,

"Review

of the

Pre-

liminary Engineering tory (LSRI,) by the nation detailed conceived I.ow bility would outside facility.
Letter, Sample

(PER) of the I,unar Sample Committee of I,SRL." He that the committee the scope had

Receiving Laborasaid that an examiaddressed itself when to a Foster

of this

report

review task which far exceeded the idea for such a committee. that the cotnmittee to the facility design forward to providing briefings

envisioned

suggested relating look

be "discharged and ctmstruction." Foster and and reports his

of any further He added staff, as well and

responsithat MSC

as interested on the

scientists,

periodic

of status

progress

I,mr to Receiving

Foster, "Manned Space Laboratory," December

Scicn{c 8, 1965.

Standing

Committee

for

the

Lunar

An 889-kilonewton on a new Saturn liquid the J-2 test stand S-IVB oxygen engine

(200 000-1b) at MSFC.

thrust The J-2

J-2

engine engine

was captive-fired would he used

for 388 sec to power the

stage for the Saturn V. 'l'en tests of the powered rocket engine had heen conducted test facility
at.l Acrom_utics,

liquid hydrogenat MSFC since

was put
1965,

into

use in August

1965.

Astronattti_s

p. 5t"1.

The 385

service sec flight

propulsion time.

system Previously

burn the

time plan

for had

AS-502 called "l'his

was

confirmed of 515 required

to that

be all

for a total action

sec--

310 set: for SPS-1 and 203 set: for SPS-2. mission plans be restudied and revised.
Memorandum, of Tkc ,4poll_ Carl R. Huss. Jsc, to,]SC Historical lunc

Ot[ice,

"Comments

on

Volume

llI

S'lmcecralt:

A Ck rm_ology,"

6, 1.q73.

9-16

Investigations AS-502 mission

were

continuing

of

the The

best

alternative

for

resolving from system were: SPS engine for

the the (SPS)

incotnpatihilities.

incotnpatibilities

resulted

restriction of the ttsable life of the Block I service propulsion engine to 385 to 400 sec total burn time. The alternatives • Retain the current time mission the protile Block by burning was the

for in

500 set:, the minimum ground tests.

I engine

to be qualified

'2:_'2

ADVANCED

DESIGN_

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

• Decrease the AS-502 The flight. • Plan increased some requiring

the flight

burn time

time would

to about well above result

385

sec and

permit dispersions

the

apogee at reentry, during

of

1965
December

mission

to increase

the planned in increased guidance stayed the 020.

16 668 km (9000 dispersions tile 400-see reentry of the II,

nmi).

means

to lye found AS-502 did engine rework engine above for the mission not

to decrease which achieve on CM

a primary

within

burn

time limitation for the heatshield • Put changes probably would

and which test. IISPS

desired Because I and

conditions numl)er this would that of

a Block SPS mean

in the

subsystenl

between

Block

Block 020

an extensive engine firing over the and

of the 020 SM. specifically 500 Block sec. for the This would spacecraft mean a dead-end

• Develop permit developlnent Fhe necessary

modifications

I requirements. a decision among those alternatives

information

for reaching

was being
MSC,

collected.
"ASPO Weekly Management Report, December 9-16, 1965."

The can. meal visions

Block Methods

II Apollo The of the

food

stowage were

problems resolved Melpar,

were to allow Inc., with

explored rework and

at North of and by the North the

AmerimanPro-

9-16

of restraint assemblies MSC

accessibility

assemblies. man-meal Office

contractor,

would Ottice

reposition Crew American

mockup

to conform Apollo

suggestions

Support

representatives.
Ibid.

Nine review (struts).

review Six

item were The had

dispositions the on two earth most

were landing

subnlitted system one on were:

at the and installation (1) the

Block

II critical

design system and Block drawings two II

9-16

concerning

shock

attenuation drawings, contract defining for

specifications, awarded had not and and

on capability. parachutes were strut
Ibid.

significant

not been tolerances

consequently released but

top installation the strut

not yet available loading

for review;

(2) specifications

crew drawings

couch had.

been

Preliminary cated driving would the pressure exceeded; that the exceed

results shock 1789

of wave

the into

"fire-till-touchdown" feasible. nozzles. was The The high of the the

study engine base enough foot

by might

Gruinman be exploded

indiby of

9-16

this maneuver

was not

heatshield to melt pads.

temperature portions allowable would be a "POG()" The

K (5000 (ausing

F), which destruction

structure,

possibly

on the nonstructural elements of the base heatshield and the descent engine flow field would tend to cause 233

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT_

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
December

effect cutoff.

which

would

cause

landing

instability

and

could

prevent

engine

As an outgrowth longer (137.1 to 304.8 moved the cm from the

of the study, the landing 187.9 cm [54 to 74 in] with manual false cutoff). tip of the probe to the reading

probes would with automatic The which probe

have to be made cutoff, 228.6 to switches dynamics. would be from

[90 to 120 in]

base, due

was objectionable

standpoint

of a possible

to probe

MSC,

"ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report,

December

16-23,

1965."

I0

At-sea craft

operational 009, were except

qualification completed. for the All the during antennas was

tests, recovery first the were

using

boilerplate system light. cycle, in two erect a fly-by

29 to simulate components Test results

space(1) upantest

mechanical flashing mission second, in the with when before analysis

performed were:

satisfactorily,

uprighting system--during righted in three minutes, tenna started. marker recovery deployment--the Communication

the vehicle was minutes; (2) VHF position plane; when ('4) the the

achieved

sea dye

canister deployed as expected flashing light was deployed Post-test

the HF was erected; and (4) the the test started; when switched indicated a water-short in the

on the light did not flash. wiring installed by MSC.

MSC,

"ASPO

VCeekly

Management

Report,

December

9-16,

1965."

15

Grumman posal be at MS(" based including applicable

was invited four by the close on supporting to LEM-11.

to provide LEMs of business on

NASA the

with following similar

a cost-plus-incentive-fee with The LEM-11 the in proposal all day. to proposal

produe should respects,

to provide

subsequent

to LEM-11,

a vehicular

configuration

activities, contractual provisions, and The required shipment dates for the 13, 1968, February 11, 1969, April 11, 1969,

specifications four vehicles and June I0,

would be December 1969, respectively.

TWX,

James

L. Neal,

MSC,

to GAEC,

Attn:

J. C. Snedeker,

December

15, 1965.

15

NASA (;enter the ments

Associate had been

Administrator MSC selected hmar was Principal that

for an as a space

Space

Science

and

Applications by Lunar Ames for, if Surface experiment,

Homer Research possible, Experithe as

E. Newell

informed

experiment science of the of with the

proposed investigation Apollo Jerry proposed

first manned Package.

landing

as a part investigator

magnetometer, associate.

C. P. Sonett

ot: Ames

Modisette

of MSC

234

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

The the

Apollo funding
Letter, Program December

Program of flight
E.

Director hardware
NASA of

was

being

requested

by Newell

to authorize

1965
December

for this experiment.
Headquarters, Apollo Lunar to 1)ircctor, MSC, Attn: Field Experiments Investigations,"

Homer Manager,

Newell, "Selection

Science

Magnetic

15, 1965.

CSM limit loads core directly

ultimate load were

static

testing simulated at room and

began.

A failure

occurred

at 140 percent Saturn inspection of the V boost.

of the The a

15

test which applied

the end temperature. upper tank

of the first-stage Preliminary separation supports. where tim and etc. radial shell. two These

revealed aft bulkhead

compression beneath faihtre and fuel

failure both was tanks for

face sheet

SM oxidizer also observed the

A second oxidizer outs were were made

beams The inches. tests

between t)ulkhead No

the close-

joined a distance repairs,

bulkhead

peeled 012.

of approximately test schedule,

decisions constraints

regarding

were

on spacecraft
MSC, "ASPO

Weekly

Management

Report,

l)ecember

9-16,

1965."

Gemini Gemini Astronaut Thomas the keeping capability, A coelliptic

VI-A, Program, Walter

the

fifth

manned

flight

and

first

rendezvous

mission

in

the

15-16

was launched M. Schirra, pilot. spacecraft, other three

from Cape Kennedy on December Jr., serving as command pilot and primary secondary evaluating objective and objectives spacecraft included reentry

15, with Astronaut with stationguidance

P. Stafford, VII the and with

Their spacecraft,

was to rendezwms

Gemini

performing

experiments. 3 hours and 47 minutes after latmch;

manettver initiation were started was

was performed

the terminal maneuvers rendezvous craft orbits began while

was performed an hour-and-a-half at 5 hours and 50 minntes into accomplished maneuvers 1)y as much
A Chronology, MSC Fact

later; braking the flight and The two and as .3 in.
VI, [Ivan D.

technically

six minutes which continued

later.

spacea half

stationkeeping they were
et al., Project

for three as little

separated
Gemini,

as 100 m and
1969, Sheet p. 227;

Grimwood Long Ertel].

Gemini January

VIIGemini 1966

DurationRendezvous

Missions,

291-D,

The MSFC,

NASA and

Director KSC mission that

of Mission the support

Operations

notified satellite for
and 16, tor

the

Directors 30, 1966.

of

MSC,

16

communication was scheduled

operational

capability

for Apollo
l.ctter, E.

September
MS(;, 1965, Support Attn: with of

E.

ChristeJ_scn. Satellite

NASA,

to Status."

KSC.

MSFC. I)('ccml)er Satellites

Directors. enclosure: lhoject

"Com"ComApollo,"

municati<ms muni_ations November

Plamling I))

Service 30, 11t65.

CommunicatiollS

235

At right, Gemini VI-A takes a picture of Gemini VII

during rendezvous and stationkeeping activities on December 15 at an altitude of 257.5 km (160 mi). Below, the Gemini VI-A spacecraft, with the crew still inside, is hoisted aboard the recovery ship
U.S.S.

wasp.

1965
December

16

Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips said the Apollo Weight and Performance management system, jointly developed by the Apollo Program Office and the Centers had proved itself as a useful management tool. H e considered that the system had matured to the point that changes in organiza-

236

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

tional 1965,

responsibility to complete • The focal the point

were

needed.

He

set

a target

date

of December

31,

1965
December

following for tile

actions: work had been in Apollo Phillips was Program transferring provide report Program directed to Control. this a

Since

it was

a systems

engineering

function,

responsibility • The quarterly

to his Apollo Systems APO Directorate of weight and performance

Engineering organization. Systems Engineering would report for and material and a monthly to the had

summary Apollo been

on an integrated program basis. • MSC would be responsible Office Apollo the weight and Control. performance

provide which

Program

Phillips acknowledged that Performance management growth) contract weight tinuing assessment to the growth need effort Apollo analyses for had (;E been

an important element system had heen the performed t)y (;E Control a (;enter in this Office. responsibility, area

of the Apollo Weight and prediction analysis (weight Support Phillips and the since Division, felt, there however, was under that no conanalysis

Apollo

Program were to perfornl established.

prediction

methodology

Phillips told ASPO Manager Joseph F. Shea that if he wished to continue to use (;E's service in this area, he would support his request with the stipulation personnel.
Letter, Phillips to Shea, l)ecember 16, 1965.

ttlat

(;E's

predictiou

analysis

operation

be

supervised

by

MSC

A working group was formed at MSC to determine the effects of lunar soil properties on I,EM landing performance. Various potential sources of ltmar surface information, including Surveyor spacecraft, would be investigated in an effort to evaluate size and LEM shape landing on performance in a hmar in soil soil. The effect of footpad wotfld also be studied.
MBC, "ASPO Weekly Management

16-23

landing

performance

Report.

l)ecember

16-23,

1965."

The track phases Master

requirement to use the LEM rendezvous radar for surface and for tracking in the cooperative mode during powered I,EM was End deleted Item from the Grumman Technical Specification Specification.

or skin mission and the

16-2 3

Ibid.

The tronics:

following

responsibilities responsibility

were

transferred Block

from I and

MIT

to

AC

Eleccom-

16-23

(1) design

for the 237

Block

II eyepiece

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CItRONOLOGY

1965
December

partment: which were responsibility
Ibid.

(2)

responsibility

for

all

Block or space base.

II

and

LEM

system and

coatings (3) design

exposed to the spacecraft for the I_EM navigation

environment;

17

The MSC velopment following on a Saturn information mission

Systems Flight reasons:

Development Instrumentation (1) LEM-3

Bran(h (DFI) would

rejected a proposal that on LEM-3 be deleted first full-weight I.EM

the for

Dethe

be the

launched

V vehicle. This would be the only _ hance of obtaining necessary about the responses of LE.M during launch. (2) The AS-503 offer the only opportunity of obtaining IA-M and DFI were information on the CSM prior considered to attempting the minimum planning impact

would

tharacteristics of a fully loaded, mated a lunar landing. (3) Three LEMs with number acceptable in the program the

to provide

flexibility 1 or 2 without

in flight a major

and ability to accommodate on the program.

loss of I,EMs

Memorandum, Chief, Systems lJevelopment "DFI on LEM-3," December 17, 1965.

Branch,

MSC.

to

Bob

Williams,

MSC,

19

Apollo dent him pleted curate Phillips vember

Program of North in examining their task

Director American the "in

Samuel Aviation, Apollo sufficient

C. Phillips Inc., detail that and

informed he and S-II the stage

J. L. Atwood, team working had programs

Presiwith comac-

Spacecraft

. . . to

formulate these North

a reasonably

assessment of the current and a task torce had 22, 1965.

situation concerning started this study at

two programs." American No-

Phillips added: "I am definitely not of either program and am convinced in substantial near future. improvement

satisfied with the progress and outlook that the right actions now can result in both programs in the relatively

of position

"Inclosed

are

ten

copies

of the

notes

which

we compiled in our briefing

on

the

basis are

of our

visits. They include for your consideration

details not discussed and use.

and

provided

"The due NAA and

conclusions consideration

expressed of hopeful could rather to you

in our signs, quickly

briefing I could I believe verify the 238

and not

notes find

are

critical. group of our

Even basis drawn

with for from

a substantive

confidence might

in future be useful

performance. in setting

that

a task

at large

the course

substance

conclusions,

for improvements.

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

"The gravity of the situation the end of.January if possible,
Letter, Phillips to and Hear Apollo Atwood,

compels me to ask that you let the actions you propose to take...
15, 1965; Hearings hefore tile

me "

know,

by

1965
December

Decemher

Committee Congress, Contractor 4, 1967.

oil First to

Aeronautical Session, "To NASA in the

Space Sciences, L'nited States Senate, Officials of North American Axiation, Program," Apollo Accident, l'art 5, pp.

Ninetieth Inc., l'rime 414-415. Ma_

Robert vealed tor for

C. Dtmcan, Chief of MSC's that recent discussions between Manned F. Shea systems had Space resulted the into Flight (;eorge

Gnidant:e himself, E.

and NASA

Control Associate and both It

Division, reAdministraManager and optical agreed

2O

Mueller, phase.

ASP() radar was also

Joseph tracking

in a decision hardware and hardware being assigned

to continue homework to Robert

development

that some hardware analytical

specific analytical action items were action items

must be done. The A. Gardiner and the

to Donald

C. Cheatham. develop, and prodttce would work, Dtmcan which takes type laboratory the process reached of best it might rendezvous said; second, advantage
1

The primary objective was to design, sensor hardware that was oil time and that the The testing "we must have of the difliculty flight. This a rendezvous rendezvous in

strategy sensor

of

capability greatest for

(whichever operating in not

)e).

"

reducing had

equipment packaging the in either

into and radar

operating

spacecraft tracker "We

hardware milestone programs. want to set

occurred

been

or the optical Duncan said,

up

a 'rendezvous

sensor

olympics'

at

some

appropriate from both olympics tests, ment the would which to do," after test, be will

stage . . . when we have flight-weight equipment available the radar contractor and the optical tracker contractor. This should such consist vibration exposure." be clear "If will systems of exposing and which If one the or the program hardware other would to critical and be equipment environmental the and equipwhich failed to survive thermal-cycling, to operate continued

particularly it would

canceled. be chosen If both said.
Robert Chief

both successfully be based largely fail the olympics,

pass the olympics, the system upon the results of the analytical it is clear we have lots of work

effort ....

Duncan

Memorandum, Attn: Project December Assistant

C.

I)uncan, for

MSC,

to

Engineering Development and optical

and

Development and Assistant system for

1)irectorate, Chief the for

Engineering of

and radar

Management, 20, 1965.

"Competition

tracker

LEM,"

Robert sttt:c_eding

C. Seamans, Hugh I,.

Jr.,

was

sworn who

in as Deputy died 239 Deceml)er

Administrator 2. Seamans

of NASA, would also

21

Dryden

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
December

retain period NASA had Johnson number

his

present

position

as

Associate

Administrator

for

an

indefinite

of time. Administrator had accepted post.
1965, and p. 546; TWX, NASA Headquarters, Offices, December 21, 1965. Public hfforma-

James

E. Webt) Tex., on

administered 10, that that

the Seamans

oath be

of office. Lyndon named

He B.

announced

in Austin,

December

President

his recomInendation

to the

two NASA

Ast_omtulics tion Office,

and Aeronautics, to all NASA Centers

3O

Because boilerplate be

earth

landing failed during

system landing,

qualification that notified MSC

drop

tests

on

boilerplate aids that

6A and would not certain

19 had

to demonstrate

Block North

I recovery American must RF

damaged

existing by actual included: deployable: existing signed that the

interim configuration recovery hardware capahle of fulfilling two sea launch Block redesigned VHF escape I tower bolts antennas; swimmer system bolts, and North tower including covers American did one marker,

aid mockups test requirements. light; should one be covers, the with nondeployable.

be replaced The hardware antenna, In by nonredeof the plan addition,

flashing uml)ilical, leg bolts

replaced to performance a total

protective not degrade was to reply

demonstrate change

earth landing system. by January 5, 1966.
'['WX, J. B. Alldredge,

MSC,

to NAA,

Attn:

J. t-:. Cozad,

l)ecember

30, 1965.

30-January

6

As

a result

of joint compartment

efforts was extremely

by

the

Resident t)y skins

ASPO forward North magnetic used on

and American

MSFC and which

Resident CM to The sent would

Manufacturing ilmer-crew MSFC 1)e compatible for use

Representative, in developing to the

a simulated fabricated a head thin for the

bulkhead hammer the

for the

compartment.

need h)r the inagnetic hammer arose from the fotmd after welding on the forward bulkhead. hammer
MSC,

"canning" A tryout the first

and "wrinkles" for the magnetic week
6, 1966."

on
"ASPO

the simulated
Weekly

hulkhead
Report.

was scheduled
l)ecember

in January.

Management

30, 1965-Jaimar_

3G-January

6

A potential and the Engineering mentation requirements. detail MSC.
Ibid.

problem associated Division of an SLA possible

still

existed

with

the

boost (SIVA)

environment thermal

for the coating.

LEM impleSLA in with

spacecraft-LEM-adapter

Systems

authorized North American to proceed with thermal coating to meet the currently understood would impact review on the the I,EM North and American would negotiate

(;rumman adverse

study

for

240

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

Grumman launch heat The were
Ibid.

and cooling

MSC

reached was

agreement By changing with this

to continue to a different minor changes Freon expected for

with Freon to had

Freon the flight

for

pre-

1965
December

of LEM-1. support

additional hardware. to Plans LEM-3.

sink ground

capability the

obtained but

equipment prelaunch

for supplying was not cooling capability

to be modified and

30-January

6

increase

flow capability, the same

to be difficult. LEM-2

to use

NASA Apollo gun with flights withstand bracket
Ibid.

Headquarters flights. would and have could To

had meet to be

directed this modified without pressure.

that

crew

water the

intake

be recorded capability. VI and

on

all

30-January

6

requirement to include flown change

Government-furnished a metering Gemini CM Gemini could

water A gun VII if it could require

this capability the higher changes

was successfully be used water

on the in the

and

LEM

Incorporation

of the gun

in the CM and

the LEM.

The

SM

reaction failures.

control

system

engine

qualification

was

completed

with

31

no apparent
Ibid.

During devoted vehicle check participate at Flight

the ntonth 16 flights were to concluding the handling attitude out a new control pilot, system. Lt. Col.

made in the LLRV. qualities evaluation The other five flights of the E. E. Kluever

Of these, 11 were of the rate-command were Army, required who to would

During the Month

in the remaining Research Center.

research flight On December would make

testing performed 15 the craft was the pilot display

on the LLRV grounded for and controllers

cockpit modifications which more like those of the LEM.
Letter, Landing 1965," sgd. Office Research Joseph of 1)irector, Vehicle Weil, Flight progress

Research report 19, 1966. No.

Center, 30 for

to the

NASA period

Headqvarters, ending December

"Lutmr 31,

,JamJarv

MSC from and trol

and

Grumman

completed

negotiations points LEMs

to convert fee. In

the addition

LEM to

contract schedule cost conprogram.

During the Month

cost-plus-fixed-fee

to cost-plus-incentive

performance incentives, bonus during FY 66 and FY 67. Four

would be awarded for were also added to the verification vehicles)

LEM mockup-3 would be used article-2 and LEM test article-10 first A two flights total of had 167 of the Saturn contract issued

as the KSC (refurbished vehicle.

vehicle; LEM test wotfld be used in the

V launch change

authorizations 31. 241

((;(;As) Negotiation

to

the

Grumman proposal for

contract

been

by December

of the

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT"

A

CHRONOLOGY

1965
December

the conversion and CCA 167 were procedures.
Ibid., pp.

to a cost-plus-incentive-fee dated and would before

included December 9.

all CCAs Proposals

through to contract

No.

162, 163-

amendments in process

for CCAs

be subnfitted

according

change

1,22.

During _he Quarter

ASPO Samuel

Manager C. Phillips

Joseph

F.

Shea

reported

to weights:

Apollo

Program

Director

on changes

in spacecraft

4954

• The CM control weight kg (10 920 lbs), up 126.55

was 4989 kg (11 000 lbs) and kg (279 lbs) from September.

current

weight

• The SM control weight was 4591 kg (10 122 lbs), down

was 4627 kg (10 200 lbs), and current weight 44.45 kg (98 lbs). The total amount of usable lbs), and current and kg weight current lbs) lbs), lbs), and

propellant, control weight, was 16 642 kg (36 690 was 16 468 kg (36 305 lbs), up 53.98 kg (119 lbs). • The weight and and and the was • The • The current • The current • The current LEM 14 333 control kg weight lbs), was down control 1624 kg (3580 14 515 81.65 lbs), kg kg up (31 599 was

(32 000 (180 was 22.68

lbs) lbs). 1724

spacecraft-I,EM-adapter weight

weight

(3800

current

kg (50 lbs).

total spacecraft injected control weight weight was 42 422 kg (93 526 lbs), up launch weight total

was 43 091 kg (95 000 77.11 kg (170 lbs). kg (8200 lbs),

escape system control weight was 3719 3741 kg (8245 lbs), up 20.41 kg (45 lbs). launch control weight (101 771
to Data NASA

was lbs),

46 811 up 97.52

kg kg
Attn: 1966)/'

(103 200 (215
Maj. January

weight

was 46 163 kg
Joseph F. and Shea,

lbs).
(;en. Samuel 22, 1966.

Memorandum, C. Phillips,

MSC,

Headquarters, (January

"Weight

Performance

Submittal

1966
January 3

An

OMSF

memorandum to prevent for

spelled investigated Manned

out

operational the area Flight on

constraints operational at the request E. George experience

for problems.

Apollo The Asand in the

experimenters author, sociate

experiment-generated Space based

E. E. Christensen, Administrator

of NASA Mueller gained

developed some general conclusions, Gemini experiments program.

Christensen said the following items should be considered: (1) The experimenter should be required to produce all hardware and paperwork on schedule to a later or resign flight. himself to the fact that the experiment be would be deferred hard(2) Training hardware should identical to flight

ware except for flight certification documentation. (3) should be informed that control fuel and power resources the spacecraft and his requirements should specify minimum experimenter are definitely should limited be informed that recording and he should provide for 242

The experimenter are limited aboard usage. (4) The facilities of data

and telemetry alternate modes

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TESTING

collection. possible, MSC tion

(5) The detailed

experimenter operational in the flight problems.

should requirements, plan and (6) The design. be made

be requested including to allow experimenter data requirements (7) The might would be

to submit, timeline time to should experimenter generated every effort

as early data,

as to

1966
January

for inclusion of operational and some that

a maximum

for soluboth mission should be but and a

indicate allow

minimum planners informed that take certain

optimum latitude every effort mission In this

experiment in mission would event

to fly assigned make

experiments, in flight to reassign

prime

requirements NASA

precedence. experiment that flight

deleted formed

to a later mission. crew prime mission

(8) The experimenter time demands can

should be inbe exacting and may ob-

that experiments reqniring have to be compromised jectives. Christensen guidance mission indicated potential Human Particles lection. suggested that

conscious efforts on so as not to interfere

the part of tile crew with primary mission

NASA

Headquarters

could

assist

by

providing on each He contain M9A, Trapped Col-

to MSC regarding the assignment of experiment priorities and the extent of allowable degradation of experimentation. that he felt the following experiments appeared to operational problems: $5, Synoptic Terrain Photography; Otolith Function; S14, Frog Otolith Function; S16, Asymmetry; S17, X-ray Astronomy; and S18, Micrometeorite

Memorandum, Apollo

Christensen

to

Director, January

Apollo

Program,

"Operational

constraints

for

experiments/experimenters,"

3, 1.°66.

MSC section side

directed to inside: 1.5-mil

International One layer

Latex of six-ounce with dacron

Corporation the A6L thermal Nomex mil two

to cloth;

use

the

following garment, layers and

cross out-

of materials

in fabricating starting

meteoroid seven mylar

of H.R.C. alternatneoprene

super-insulation, ing with rip stop nylon
TWX, TWX, Richard Richard

one-fourth spacers; with

aluminized layers

unwoven

of seven-ounce

(one side coated
S. Johnston, S. Johnston, MSC, MSC,

neoprene).
Latex Latex Corporation, Corporation, January January 3, 1966; 20, 1966.

to International to International

Contractor with life activity support

personnel within systems Evaluations The areas

began the ran LEM.

an exercise Subjects various exercise Critical continue of the

to identify using during cockpit the Design

problem procedures week and

areas suits and in gather scheduled

associated portable the LEM on 10, using data to be

pressurized

through of the

mockup. astronauts. problem held

would

of January

purpose in support

was to identify Review

at Grumman
MSC, "ASPO Weekly

in late January.
Management Report, December 30, 1965-January 6, 1966."

243

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT"

A

CHRONOLOGY

1966
January 3-7

]'he Preliminary Design was held at International
MSC, "ASPO Weekly

Review for the Block I,atex Corporation.
Report, Jatmary 6-13,

II pressure

garment

assembly

Management

1966."

3-14

The Design

I,EM

landing

gear

subsystenl and (;rumman.

was

reviewed q'he

during

the

I_EM no lunar and

Critical delanding thermal and

Review

at MSC

review

disclosed included: structm'al

major

sign inade(luacies of the performance, structural analysis, overall subsystem conformance
MSC, "ASPO

landing gear. q'he review and mechanical design, test program gear design
Report,

including

results

of tests to (late,

of landing
Weekly

to I,EM
January

spe(:ifications.
20-27, 1965."

Management

The

Apollo

Joint

()perations

(;roup

(J()(;)

was

disestablished

by

its

co-

chairlnen. JOG had date status information for their solution.

been established on operational

in February problems

1964 to exchange up-toand to provide a means

Subsequent view tions lished. Board

to the

establishment Group and satisfied

of J()(;, ()perations the

responsibility Program requirements and Director, of Executive

for Group both

the and

Panel the were the the

Reestab-

was transferred activities

to the Apollo

OperaApollo opera-

Management Those

Program l)irector and Mission Operations Director tional problem status and solution (apability.
Letter, Al)olh) (h()Ul),'" horn ,Joint sgd. ChairmctL ()l)V1:.)tions Samuel C. Al)ollo (;voup, Phillips and Joint opmalion_ (;_OUl), ol ,Janu,ny thc to

provided

Permanent Apollo 5, l(.)(i6. Joint

Membership, Operations

"l)iscstal)li_hmcnt E. t'2 (:hlislci_Scll.

6-13

Ihe 500-second limitation for the Block I service engine qualitication program was increased to 600 altitude qualification tests. The spacecraft 020 required a 310-second Engineering 1)ivision support a full-duration requirement prohibited
MSC, "ASI'()

propulsion system (SPS) seconds for the last three SPS mission duty cycle

lmrn and indicated S-IVB be modified.

a 205-see(rod burn. Discussions with Systems that the long SPS burns were needed to mission and there was little likelihood the The Bl()ck in time
l,mua))r (;
I _

could obtaining
Weckb;

II

engine

delivery spacecraft

schedules 020.

a Block
Man,lgemcn)

I I engine
Report.

to support
,

I(.P66. ''

6-13

Apparently ing material
)

the

only

available would N()rth schedule million cost meet

spacecratt-lA'iM-adapter the slips, emissivity (lulsa. respectively, A meeting requirements American impact. 244

(SI,:\) for ()klahoma) for the first would

thermal I,EM two was

coatflights II

which gold. 10-week a S10-12

was SLAs

,t-(a_at and and

predicting Block at Tulsa

18-week

be held

ADVANCED

DESIGN,

FABRICATION,

AND

TFSTING

1966 January 17 between North American, the course of the action to 1)e taken.
Ibid.

Grumman,

and

MSC

to determine
January

George

M. Low,

Deputy

Director

of },IS(;,

outlined

the

general

purpose

and

plans for the Lunar Sample Receiving Laboratory versation with ()ran W. Nicks, NASA Director Progq-ams: • The sent where l_aboratory would prepare the sample

during a telephone conof Lunar and Planetary

boxes

which

would

be

to the moon on Apollo missions for the collection of samples. • These boxes with enclosed samples would he returned to the they • The could facility be opened could in the desired vactutm for low environment. level radiation

facility

provide

a capability

cottnt-

ing and other urgent exatninations. • Samples wottld be prepared in the facility for distritmtion to scientists arottnd the country and abroad who would have previously been selected to conduct analyses. • The facility its personnel would of who would a(t serve as as a repository for facilities the for the samples be sample and available purposes section material, scientific for use and data by

curators

generated. • A modicunl guest investigators • The sample

I_al)oratory wished

would

to study

santples

for special a quarantine

at },IS(;. to prop-

facility

would

incorporate

erly assay the hmar earth. In addition, tions would
Memorandum, xersation tory,",|amlar', with

materials, and it was probable to the
at_cl on

to ensure preventing contamination on that astronaut quarantine accotnmodacurrently conceived
Progranls. l(,)6fi, l'e IAHlar to

be an adjunct
lli_cctor. Mr. 10. (;corgc 1966. Lunar l,ow

facility.
Distr., Salnplc "Telephone Receiving Conl_al)<na-

Iqanctary 7,

Januar}

The

first

fuel

cell

system

test

at \Vhite were:

Sands (1)

Test

Facility the

was capability

conducted of the

8-11

successfully.

Pritnary

objectives

to verify

ground support up, operate and fuel cell
TWX, Fuel Cell

equipment shut down during
Raiues. at

and operational a single fuel cell cold gimbaling
MSC January WSqF, 11, 1966.

checkout power pl,tnt: of the
to MS(;,

procedure to start and (21) to evaluate propulsion
Report,

operations
Martin S_,stcm L.

service
"Prclimi,mry

engine.
First

Manager IVSTF,"

Test

10

Soviet to use

life-support a sodium

systetns superoxide

used in Vostok and Voskhod spacecraft appeared compound as a source of oxygen, A. W. Petrotold three 245 Missiles a?M l¢ockets. Petrocelli times more basic research papers

celli, (;eneral estimated the

Dynamics Russians

(',orporation, had published

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1966
January

than

U.S. scientists

on these

materials

and

were

continuing

efforts

to improve percarbon

life-support systems by studying oxides, and ozonides. He also dioxide absorbers.

compounds such as new superoxides, said they were searching for better

Missiles

and

Rockets,

p. 33, January

10, 1966.

13

A decision made at a Program Management Review eliminated the requirement for a land impact program for the CM to support Block I flights. Postabort CM land impact for Saturn IB launches had been eliminated from Complex 37 by changes to the abort mode. The Certification Test Requirements
MSC, "ASI'O Weekly

sequence timers in the launch Test Specification and related the new
January

escape system Certification requirements.

would

reflect

Block
20-27,

II land
1965."

impact

Management

Report,

1_20

Mission

requirements

for

AS-503

were

reviewed

to determine at

if the

LEM

test objectives which caused the crew to be in the LEM (3704 to 12 964 km [2000 to 7000 nm]) could be deleted. keeping the crew out of the LEM at those might be exposed to a total radiation dose flying a later lunar mission.
MSC, "ASPO Weekly Management Report, January

high altitudes The reason for they from

altitudes was the possibility which might prevent them

13-20,

1965."

13--20

The 515 pected

service sec for An

propulsion Mission

subsystem AS-502, due to the

(SPS) of Block

maximum 385 sec. I testing burn

total The time

burn higher

time limit and

was set at was exto

instead loading

to be attained

being

extended the

600 sec.

SPS propellant

of 16 783

kg (37 000 lbs)

515-sec

burn limit which was Trajectory.
Ibid.

had been included in the publication

in the Apollo Mission Data Specifications, cycle for support of the AS-502 Reference

1_20

The made

LEM

electrical ground and would through return

power Engineering

system and

use

of after

the

primary personnel.

structure presentations The

as

the were

electrical

was approved

Grumman

to ASPO

Development

descent-

stage batteries current flow The ture would

not use a descent-stage structure the pyrotechnic interstage nut

ground to preclude and bolt assemblies. to primary addition, other This strucseveral change

ascent and descent stage batteries would in the near vicinity of the ascent-stage manually remain operated solenoids to the would grounded "single-point" 246

be grounded batteries. In ground. vehicle All

selected

subsystems

ground.

]'HE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

1966
January

would would
Ibid.

be implemented effect a weight

by savings

Grnmn_an

with

no

cost

or schedule

impact

and

of approximately

7.7 kg (17 lbs).

13--27

Hamilton 2.27-kg that weighed (3.2 lbs)
MSC,

Standard (5-1b) 2.44 and
"A,SPO

Division for the saving
Management

was directed flight hardware mission. resulted the
Report,

t)y Crew if the The and CSM
20-27,

Systems power on weight of 5.44

Division inputs order saving

to use a indicated currently of 1.45 kg

battery meet a total
Weekly

all

it would

four-hr This on

battery

kg (5.4 lbs).

in an inert

I,EM

kg (12 lbs).

January

1965."

14

'l'he

(;rumman

contract

revision, The period

converting c_f the

the contract

contract

to

cost-plusthrough

incentive-fee, was signed. December 196!).

was extended

"Quarterly

Progress

Report

No.

1," LPR-10-52,

p. 2.

2O

Apollo Range. craft at

Mission This and the

A-004 was the sixth Primary and

was successfully first test flight

accomplished

at White Block

Sands I type

Missile space-

test utilizing .kpollo were:

the Apollo CSM to (1) abort the

final

test of the

development demonstrate

program satisfactory

_,VSMR.

objectives

launch escape vehicle performance for an boundary region: and (2) to demonstrate launch boundary (5-ton) nificant abort. escape unmanned anomaly vehicle The airframe Ifittle for Joe II an region.

in the power-on, tumbling structural integrity of the in the power-on, boosted two the tumbling 4536-kg vehicle

abort launch

spacecraft to a 24-kin (15-mi) recorded was loss of RF telemetry

altitude. about

The only sigseconds after

TWX,

White

Sands

Missile

Range,

New

Mexico.

to

l)istr.,

"MSC

Apollo January

Mission '2'2, 1966;

A-004 MSC,

(LJ II,SC 002) ttight status," "ASPO X.Veekly Management

sgd. John l.obl) Report, January

fol Joseph F. Shca, 20-27, 1965."

248

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX l mGLOSSARY ABBREVIATIONS

OF

AEDC AFRM AP ASPO Btu
Clll

Arnold airframe Apollo British
centinleter,

Engineering Press

Devel()pment

Center

Associated

Spacecraft Program thermal units
centimeters

Office

CM CSM
('ll In

command command cuhic

module and service cubic system modules meters

meter,

DOD EI£ F fps ft g GAEC (;E HF IBM in I TT JPL

Department earth landing Fahrenheit

of Defense

feet per second foot, feet specific gTavity Grumman Aircraft General Electric high frequency International inch, inches Telephone Laboratory Center and Telegraph Corporation International .let Propulsion Johnson Kelvin kilogram, Kennedy pound pounds Lunar excursion module Research Vehicle Space scale Engineering Corporatiol_

Business

Machines

Corporation

jsc
K kg KSC lb lbs LEM LI,RV LTA m MDF mi MIT MSC MSFC NAA NASA
nm

kilograms Space Center

Lunar Landing LEM test article meter, meters

mild detonating mile, miles Massachusetts Manned

fuse Institute of Technology

Spacecraft

Center

Marshall Space Flight Center North American Aviation, Inc. National nautical Office Aeronautics miles of Manned Space 251 Flight and Space Administration

OMSF

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CtlRONOLOGY

psia RCA RCS RF SID SM sqm SSC VHF WSMR WSTF yd

pounds per square Radio Corporation reaction radio control frequency

inch average of America system Systems Division (NAA)

Space and Information service module

square meter, square meters space suit communications very high V_qlite frequency Missile Test Range Facility Sands

White Sands yard, yards

252

APPENDIX

2--SPACECRAFT
SEPTEMBER

WEIGHTS
1964-DECEMBER 1965

BY

QUARTER

September Item Control Weight, kgs (lbs) Command Module Service Module SM Useful Propellant S-IVB Adapter Lunar Exc. 4990 (11 000) 4627 (10 200) 17 468 (38 510) 1724 (3800) 13 281 (29 500) 42 638 (94 000)

1964 Current Weight, kgs (lbs) 4576 (10 090) 4559 (10 050) 16 894 (37 244) 1678 (3700) 13 250 (29 4311 40 057 (90 515) Control

December

1964 Current _Veight, kgs (lbs) ,t568 (10 070) 4581 (10 100) 16 869 (37 190)

Weight, kgs (lbs) 4990 (11 000) 4627 (10 200) 16 894 (37 244) 1724 (3800) 13 281 (29 500) 42 189 (93 010)

1678 (3700) 13 236 (29 181) 40 919 (90 211)

Module Total Spacecraft Injected

March Command Module Service Module SM Useful Propellant S-IVB Adapter Lunar Exc. 4990 (11 000) 4627 (10 200) 17 468 (38 5101 1724 (3800) 13 281 (29 500) 42 189 (93 010)

1965 4695 (10 350) 4527 (9980) 17 227 (37 980) 1553 (3425) 13 768 (30 354) 41 771 (92 089) 4990 (11 000) 4627 (10 200) 17 468 (38 510) 1724 (3800) 13 281 (29 500) 43 091 (95 000)

June

1965 4658 (10 270) 4550 (10 030) 17 309 (38 1601 1556 (3430) 13 972 (30 802) 42 140 (92 902)

Module Total Spacecraft Injected

253

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT_

A

CHRONOLOGY

September Item Control Weight, kgs (lbs) Command Module Service Module SM Useful Propellant S-IVB Adapter Lunar Exc. 4990 (11 000) 4627 (10 200) 16 642 (36 690) 1724 ('_800) 14 515 (32 000) 43 091 (95 000)

1965 Current Weight, kgs (lbs) 4833 (10 654) 4683 (10 324) 16 474 (36 320) 1610 (3550) 14 420 (31 791) 42 474 (93 639)

December Control Weight, kgs (lbs) 4990 (11 000) 4627 (10 200) 16 642 (36 690) 1724 (3800) 14 606 (32 200) 43 091 (95 000)

1965 Current Weight, kgs (lbs) 4953 (10 920) 4591 (10 122) 16 468 (36 305) 1624 (3580) 14 333 (31 599) 42 423 (93 526)

Module Total Spacecraft Injected

254

APPENDIX 3--MAJOR SPACECRAFT COMPONENT MANUFACTURERS

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: lii!ii!!ii::ii::ii!::::i!::::iNortronicsiiiiii::i::i:#:!::!::i::!::i::i::_ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I Pitch motor L_ O ball| L_ Toweijettisonmotor J

I

Launch escape system

I_ _"_V \ _1

_

/

"/_] /

Launch escape motor

I

li!i iiii::i::i::!i!iil;:#:iii::ili i i ii?::::i:::::iiI NAAi::i:: : : i I "Command module I_

lii!iii!i::iiiiiiiiiiiii::ii r® ::::::::::iiiii::i::ilili!i::J iliN0 rt h :i : i Re'covery's'Ystem ]

I

_

r"''"E'n'vironmenta :oniro ............ X I

X

,_ _v _

/ / ........... j /

=================================== shi;:i:d ........... :::::::::::::::] rd _ii!iiiii;!!::_::;::i;i;;Marqua t;;i_3;;_i;;_;i l / / [............................. SiMRCS ...................... I Ii!i;i!!_::!i!::il;!:iiiii;i! ................... NAA:;!iii;;i!i_!_!_;i!;!i;il;i_!;i_!!!;!;_ Service ._iuie .......... I __J_i!!!!!!ii::Aerojet-Generai ::::::::::::::::::::::]

[ iii !!iii I..................Aeronca :i;i:;:i!:i:i:;:E:i:;:i:;:!:!:;: _ ,,_ ;.......... . ';::::_.................,_ \ ::1 I rloneycomopanels I _,X_'_

[::i::iii::iiii!::i and whitney :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Pralt _NX' _ I ....... Fuel ell ......... c 1 \',¢'_ ................... NAA::::!ii!H

-/

_ _

,

/'--t

. (-"

.............................
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: [ LM RCS --

r
_ -_i_;L- = /

/

I............ gi_i';_gin; ....................... I

J

"-" --

--

NAAIRocketdyne "liiiiiiiiiiiiiiii::i!-_ -oce Tech L_ iiiii;iil I liii::ii:::.:::.i:.i:: ="'_ S_'= iiii::;iiiii;::iil...-.,_ ! I LM descent stage pr°pulsi°n J Communications, ................................ instrumentation, "_ VHF !_. it/"" _

_ Y S- ,r_/_ll I _1, t _/ _[::r__Z___ _ 'L'_I \_ I

LM asc, ' / L LM guidance I l

,i:.i:_i:_i:.i:.:#::.i:.ili:.::i::jj#:i::jii,liiilAC servo Inertial measuring unit,Plugi,!,i,iiiii,lii,::ii,ili,::,iiiiiiiiiii Spark power as:y. ground support, system assembly, [test, nerta, reference integrating gyro

I transponder power amp, VHF transmitter, [omnidirectional, erectable antenna, TV, I personnel (extravehicular)

'H()neywellComiJany
,,,._.,,...., ........ ,.,.,.,.,,, ....

::::::i::i::i::::::Coiinsi_acl ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: i::::::i::::::l}eec-h--Ai rcraiiii::ii!ii::i ::::iiBeiiAerosystems::iiii::
..... ............. ......:,:,: .::...::..::: .......... ,..,.,.............. _.:.:.: ....................... ,........_..,. ........................... .....

Stabilization, contro Telecommunications

Spacecraft mission simulators

Supercritical gas storage

RCS positive expulsion fuel tanks

i::!iiAIlison and Airiteli::.,ii::i::i:::Radiation i::i::i::iiii Inc. ] Simmonds Pre_isi_nf!_::ii:_:::!i:_:i_ii::!i::i.RCA_!i::::!i_i!_i[i::_ii_::_i::_¥::;_;_iiwestingh_use::[:_::iiii::ii:_ ;;i;:.i;i;i;!:.;i Products :ii:.i:.i:.ili:.i:.i:. Telemetry data Fuel components !!i!::!::i::!i!::!i!:: Products!!::i::ili::i::;::i::!T:_:ca:meras":ma:_n E :::: :::::::::::::::::: ':':':':']ii::::iiiii •, . :, ,:.:,..:,, , :':':':':':':':': • .......... communications antenna Static inverter

processing for Apolk Propellant mixture S-TI" stage controls

E!gin Nat_9n_a_`w`1i_;_h_::::::_::::i::i::::_:::::_:::::::_i::RCAii_i::i::i::i::iii::!iii:_i_iii_i::_:_::i:::_::i::i_:_::i_i_iiiM_T :::::::::::::::::::::::::jjj:::::::: :;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::#::::: nstrumenl sman Sequencer Radar. engineering services Associa:e primeguidance, navigation Computer Optics

*STL named sole contractor January 1965. 255

,,,-,

r_

-.X--

=[-'

= _

;>.,
_D

_ "- "_
,...,

_v
v ,_J

,.

©

_bg ¸ 0 ©

E
0

.]
:.j

0

m

Z

v

._

_

_

_

"_

_._.

_
_ .-'_.. _"

257

ea_

o e_

o

>
= -z-. _

e,.

""

t:Z '_: ,._

_

,._

©

C'4

o,<

I

z

v

o o

.<
O4

%
258

J

_n

_n

cn

0

0 0

0

°,-_

v

<

Z.
*,,,4 0 0 0

E_

.< _._
°_,_ 0

°_

©

0

<

©

0

._ °_

0

,_

0

0

<

C',,I

<

©

259

APPENDIX
Apollo Mission First OrdeI (1)

5--APOLLO
A-O02 (December

PROGRAM
8, 1964)

FLIGHT

OBJECTIVES

Objectives: satisfactorily and system the Apollo launch boost limits. boilerplate escape spacecraft to the desired conditions for demonstrapressure launch protective region escape cover with vehicle and performance the abort utilizing the canard in the

Demonstrate subsystem detection

to verify conditions

capability

maxinnmi-dynanlic

approximating

emergency

(2)

Deliver tion

of the

vehicle.

Second (1)

Order

()bjectives: the performance region. satisfactorily subsystem limits. canard deployment, finward flight launch stability escape prior vehicle to turnaromld launch escape launch pressure escape region vehicle power-on stability for abort in of the launch escape vehicle in the maximum-dynamic

Determine pressure

(2)

Demonstrate the detection

maximum-dynamic

with

conditions

approximating

emergency

(3)

1)emonstrates dynamics, subsysten_ and

satisfactory main jettison. satisfactory from the satisfactory reefed the dual

heatshield

(4)

Delnonstrate tective cover Demonstrate system using

separation of the connnand module. operation drogues. pressure pressure loads, and

launch

escape

system

plus

boost

pro-

(5)

performance

of

the

emergency

landing

(6)

Determine

connnand dynamic 19, 1965)

including

possible

phnne

impingement,

in the
Apollo First Mission Order (1)

maximum (May

system.

A-O03

()bjectives: satisfactory the upper launch limit for escape the vehicle performance at an altitude ap-

Demonstrate proximating

canard escape

subsystem. vehicle to a main heatshield forward

(2)

Demonstrate attitude. Deliver tion the of the

orientation

of thelaunch

(3)

Apollo launch

boilerplate escape

spacecraft

to the

desired

conditions

for demonstra-

vehicle.

Second (1)

Order

Objectives: the damping of the launch escape vehicle oscillations with the canard

Determine subsystem

deployed. jettison entry. 261 of the launch escape system plus boost protective cover after

(2)

Demonstrate high-altitude

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

Pad

Abort First

Test Order (1)

2 (June Objective:

29,

1965)

Demonstrate subsystem and

the

capability

of the

launch cover,

escape to abort

vehicle, from the

equipped launch pad

with and

a canard recover.

a boost

protective

Second (1)

Order

Objectives: and stability characteristics cover and control weight dynamics of the launch of the command escape launch module. escape

Determine the performance vehicle with boost protective Determine the turnaround canard deployment. Demonstrate protective Demonstrate recovery. A-O04

(2)

vehicle

following

(3)

satisfactory separation cover from the command proper event sequencing

of the launch module. during abort

escape

subsystem

and

boost

(4)

from

the

launch

pad

and

Apollo First

Mission Order (1)

(January

20,

1966)

Objectives: satisfactory tumbling the an abort the Apollo launch escape region. integrity power-on to the of the tumbling desired launch escape vehicle airframe strucvehicle performance for an abort in the

Demonstrate power-on

boundary structural in the

(2)

Demonstrate ture for

boundary conditions

region. for demonstration of the

(3)

Deliver launch

spacecraft

escape Objectives:

vehicle.

Second (1)

Order

Demonstrate stabilize abort. the

the

capability escape

of the vehicle

canard

subsystem forward

to satisfactorily after a power-on

reorient

and

launch

heatshield

tumbling

(2)

Demonstrate to withstand Demonstrate to satisfactorily by the tower

the the the

structural capability launch environment. capability of the

of

the

production

boost

protective

cover

(3)

command heatshield

module after

forward the tower

heatshield has been

thrusters jettisoned

separate the forward jettison motor. static loads on the

(4)

Determine sequence. Determine

the

command

module

during

launching

and

abort

(5) (6)

the

dynamic dynamic

loading loads

on and

the the

command structural

module response

inner of the

structure. service module

Determine the during launch. Determine conditions the and

(7)

static launch

pressures escape

imposed motor

on plumes

the

command

module

by

free

stream abort.

during

a power-on

tumbling

262

APPENDIX

6reFUNDING

Fiscal

Year

Funding

Breakdown

(Dollars

in Thousands)

1965 (Original ing Fiscal mental) budget Year request 1964 includsuppleNASA: Apollo: $4 523 000 2 818 500 CSM: LEM: Gttid. Integ., (Fiscal with mental) budget Fiscal Year appropriation 1964 suppleNASA: Apollo: 4 270 695 2 614 619 8: Nav.: reliab, g: checkout: $577 834 242 600 81 038 24 763 83 663 40 265 262 690 964 924 166 300 170 542

Spacecraft Saturn I: Saturn Saturn Engine Apollo IB: V:

support:

Development: mission support:

1966 (Original supplemental Year) budget for request--No prior Fiscal NASA: Apollo: $4 575 900 2997385 CS M: LEM: Guid. &Nav.: reliab. support: & 34 400 95 400 800 274 185 1 177 32O 134 095 210 385 $615 000 310 800 115 000

Integration, checkout: (Fiscal budget appropriation-for prior Fiscal NASA: Apollo: 4 511 644 2 967 385 Spacecraft Saturn I: Saturn Saturn Engine Apollo
Compiled by F. B. Hopson, Administration and Program Support Directorate.

No supplemental Year)

IB: V: Development: mission support:

263

APPENDIX
()ctober

7reORGANIZATION
1 , 1964, through January ..0, ')

CHARTS
1966

265

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

m • c_ z Z_-._ _ c_ L" I I

_

I

r

--_

_1 _ cc :_ t-_j I I [-i $ m --_--J I-_: _ x_ • _:c _ I

I I

I

I

u_w_ m

z_

K

I

Z 0

: i?1
m _az-

4=

g_.

i.

,

1

r..t3

Z

.< .<_-_

J
z o . D --_.a.

Z"

- _ _!

a.i--

x_

< Z © < Z © < Z

r1
o<,': •c

_z_
O•

ZZ

Z_-m

z_
zz

__
t_

_81

_

_ _ I

-1
266

__ -_,

APPENDIX

7

Z C <

Z

<

_

<

<_-_

Z

< Z

O
m_-

z

_

< < z
© < Z
_z_ _ _

_z

_

267

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

r .......... i f I I

:
........ q

1
_

o.

I t i i I

.......

_

_

_u

_u

u.

I t L ......... r .........

J _

I ...... ] _ i i

i

k ........

J

p--

_u Iz

v_

<_

z_
....

©

_w

i

V_

_z

I I
I

_E_ _
_u-

_
=

I

r .........

z

_

u,I z z

268

APPENDIX

7

o:

I o a_

q

z

z

¢..a

_
t

z

a=

o

w

_ w hz

.

ua ca

I

I-z_ z)< _ _a _z __ .< _ !

z_

:r _z

z z

m

o

.'Z.
m ::,, ua _

w t_

269

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

<

i

_-q _.x.q,...,

m

=E.--, a:wwa z ca

.<:

z_a

_ca

Z Z .<

o: w.w_

u_ .,a
a.

,<ua

z __

.<< z

270

APPENDIX

7

J

u. ou_

<_.__ _<_z

<_

_

-J u.

.a u.

_u m Oi Z z Z_Z I

z

__=zz
_z-_

_z_
c= c3

z_

=

=

Z

-a

_..z _c.a IU... z z w

22
=

_

.<-

z w ca

w_ >. _a _laa _z c_z_

_-mc:

g_>

Z Z .<

:=o

z

u

_z _=_ u. ua i._¢a <,';¢au. ..H ° _ua

u_z Zo

>_ :_z _0

_o

Zz
c:o

g_

z>_
Z w

m

>Z_ (.9 L" Z

z<_. 0 • .1{

_-, _____1 271

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CIlRONOLOGY

m

_jmo

._uu

I--c_

m z

_ .. .

c_zz • z _ _ ,.- ,,_ [

----v-Z
go g! gge
mz z,"_ m I

[.

z

i u,_z z<_

z_ iw

Z <

_

N
-_z
mo _w

_>_

ua

---z_ z_z m

m o_z

z_ o_

l
z

_

$_;

272

APPENDIX

7

c_z<E

___212
¢[3: _z ,,_-z _ _z wz _.

i

z

z

<i: r:"

zW<

_

<_

_ _

_ I _

_

_m

o

IZ')

<
_

o
lIE a: a

<

<
m

;

o-

0 <
<_oZ
I-'< z

.
+
j :+_

iii+
+
:+®

_o a: 6-

m

"-+ I_

I ,m.,g

z

z

_>+_.,m
zN z 1.-. I.._ cmzz

:_-_ <>_

_

i _z _

< .+,
--I--

-7--

_

-7_:;

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

! I

*.u 0<[ u.'_

ii., !i
<[ .._z <[¢:= := t.) z < t_. a

--

uJm

z

w i _ _tn mo to a:

"/
_-z c_u z

_m _m

•,a z

_a

oz
mm

I

1

!

?-m._

._c

..a tu

I<:

I_
_--I_

l'_

I-_
'

i

1.1.1 ..=.
ll,,l •__' (.o <C (._ <C _-z =it:l_ m a:z._ t_ _t: • "z • i-I: to tl . u. o. t... m -_t t..c_ ,.u <[ _: t t:l to

=

i---

,I

:_

_

-

©

_ I

_-®

c

m fi
m <(

.< © o

<
w 1.0 )U

=I
<c

z_ __c_

_:<

_

_o

_

.)

l_

_

0

!

_:

I

)

_

--_

---_

I--

< z_-< z
z u_

i..

Z

_

' _
iqcm

z i

i_

- _[_--_

274

APPENDIX

7

MSC

'WSMR [September

OPERA'-I'IONS 16, 1964]

OPERATIONS MSC WSMR

1

]
PROGRAM CONTROL OFFICE

I
AFFAIRS OFFICE SAFETY OFFICE

[
QUALITY ASSURANCE INSPECTION OFFICE AND

/
FLIGHT TEST OFFICE

I
PROPULSION ENGINEERING OFFICE

I
ENGINEERING OFFICE SUPPORT I

[
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT OFFICE

OPERATIONS BRANCH TEST I

ENGINEERING BRANCH TEST

FACILITIES OFFICE I

RESOURCES MANAGEMENT BRANCH

PROPULSION BRANCH

PROPULSION SYSTEMS BRANCH AND CQORDINATION RANGE BRANCH SU_ORT AND 1 CONTRACTS ]

BRANCH PROCUREMENT

ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS BRANCH

ENERGY AND CONTROL SYSTEMS BRANCH BRANCH LABORATORIES r

SECURITY BRANCH

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS BRANCH

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS BRANCH DOCUMENTATION BRANCH SERVICES SUPPORT BRANCH J

SYSTEMS INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEMS BRANCH ] BRANCH DATA l

GROUNO INSTRUMENTATION BRANCH

275

THE

APOLLO

SPACECRAFT:

A

CHRONOLOGY

z

_

,

_

_

gg] g_
c Qc i

-_< g_g

I v--

ua z i-- z

I
<

___ [
u. m m I

<

c:J

--r---"
_>" _-_ z_

F

v-m

_z
trio,) --t,w c:ta:

B:
tnt.u -zw -

a: ta o. o

<,,_

I

---T--

m

z_
t_ t.u zz _ >zz

z_
_uJ -uJ_.

!!
it:>ua ¢,,_ z w _ F

g

m

276

INDEX
A
Abbott, (;corge A., 172 Ablestick, 17 AC Electronics, 209, 237-238 AC Spark Plug. See General Motors Corporation. Ad Hoc Sttrw:yor/Orbiter Utilization Committee, 155 Adkins, E..Jim, 1,12 Adwmccd Spacecraft Technology Division. See Manned Spacecl aft Cellter. Aero Spacelines, Inc., 189, 216 Aerojet-(;enelal Corporation, 46, 175 AFMR (airframe) 006, 84 AFMR 007, 112, 226 AEMR 008, 67, 124 AFMR 009, 83, 98-!t9, 114, 119,216 AFMR 011,216 AFMR 012, 67, 88, 121,216 Aircraft C 135. 45 KC-135, 43, 57, 172, 178 NASA X 15,212,248 PrcgtmT_t (; u[@V, 189, 216. 217 "Super Guppy," 189 "I"-38, 19 AiRescarch Coil)oration, 67, 102 Airite Products, Inc., 7 Aldrin, Edwin E., .lr., 73 Algranti, Joseph, 213 Alilnando, Alfred l'., 52 Alldredge, John B., 75, 78. 82, 88, 89, 106, 119, 125, 126, 138, 139, 151, 157, 174, 177, 196, 217 ALSEP. See Apolh) Lunar Surface Experiment Package. American Bosch Arma Corpocation, 7 Arma I)ivision, 7 Ames Research Center (ARC), 15, 43, 44, 82, 229 wind tunnel texts, 43, 44, 82 Anders. William A., 73, 133 Anderson, Flank W., Jr., xiv Andrews. (;ouhl, 18 Apollo Experiments Pallet procurement, 229 Apollo Joint Operations Group, 244 Apollo I,unar Surface Experiment Package (ALSEI'), iv. 83, 87, 149, 179. 199, 212, 234 design, iv, 87 radioisotope generator, iv, 27-28, 83, 87. !12-127. 153, 173, 199,212 Apollo (spacecraft), iii Block I, 4. 13, 15, 34, 85, 99, 123, 148, 203 Block II, 4, 8, 31, 34, 125, 148 mockup review, xiii, 21 (101, 46, 100 002, 144, 148, 153, 166, 209 002A, I 13 006, 107, 126, 212 007, 113 008, 126 009, 106, 117. 126-128, 148, 166. 185, 189, 207, 011, 106, 117, 166, 185, 189, 207, 208, 215 012, 66, 126, 133, 174, 197, 199, 207,215, 222 014, 66, 88, 126, 152, 174, 207 017, 119, 126, 137, 161, 204 //20, 126, 137, 161,233, 244 101,67, 88, 126, 152, 186 102, 67, 88, 126, 152, 186 103, 67, 126, 152 104, 67, 126, 152 105, 67, 126, 152 10ft, 67, 126, 152 107, 67, 126, 152 108, 67, 126, 152 109, 67, 126, 152 110, 67, 126, 152 111, 67, 126, 152 112. 67, 126, 152,215 2H-I, 126 2TV-I, 126, 186 boilerplate spacecraft (BP) BP-I, 90, 99, 133, 175 BP-6A, 180, 211, 240 BP-9, 176 BP-14, 13,87, 88, 118, 141 BP-16, 72 BP-19, 127, 143,240 BP-22, 86, 125, 127, 134, 144, 168 BP-23, 17, 32, 38, 86 Mission A-002, 38 BP-23A, 124, 140, 161 BP-26, 137 BP-28, 21, 23, 63, 64, I13, 119 drop test, 18, 190 BP-29, 234, 239 Apollo Mission Planning Task Force, 14, 26, 27, 113 Apollo missions, 39 A-003, 134, 135, 163, 168, 176 A-004, 58, 163, 176, 227,248 AS-201 (Apollo-Saturn 2011, 43, 57, 94, 132, 215 AS-202, 43, 57, 94, 185, 206, 215 AS-203, 43, 215 AS-204, 50, 57, 76, 116, 125, 197, 199,210, 215 AS-205, 50, 125,215 AS 206, 57, 18!1, 191, 220 AS-207. 183,220 AS-501,57, 183, 185 AS-502, 183, 185,232,233 AS-503, 57, 183, 238, 246 AS-504, 57, 183 A:%505, 183 AS-506, 133, 183 PA-2, 160-162 SA-4, 198 SA-8, 137, 198 SA-9, 72, 198 SA-10, 176, 180 SA-201, 65, 94, 153, 185, 189 SA-202, 65, 94, 153, 189 SA-203, 153 SA-204, 88, 153 SA-205, 153 SA-206, 26, 108, 153, 183 SA-206A, 140 SA-207, 153, 183 SA-208, 153, 183 SA-501, 4, 23, 164, 183, 185,204 SA-502, 4, 23, 164, 183, 185,246 SA-504, 164, 185 Apollo program flight objectives, Appendix 5,261-262 Apollo-Saturn Crew Safety Panel, 65 Apollo-Saturn Electrical Systems Integration l'anel, 26 Emergency Detection System Design Sttl)-l)ancl, 26 Apollo Site Selection Board, 155,165 Apollo Spacecraft Program Office approved LEM/S-IVB separation, 60, 61 ASPO Manager, 21, 22, 26, 32, 39, 51, 54, 67, 78. 80, 90. 95, 98, 100, !10, 118, 127, 128, 138-140, 143, 151, 176. 193, 198,212, 221,224,227,246 Coniiguration Board established, 80 Conliguration Management Plan, 185 Contract Engineering Branch, 115, 124

208,

215

277

INDEX

cost reduction, 114 Crew Integration Branch, 75 CSM Project Officer, 114 Fligltt Crew Support Division, 103 Flight Projects Division, 108, 151,207,208 G&N/ACE Contract Engineering Branch, 129 LEM Environmental Control Systems Office, 21 LEM Project Office, 14, 40, 77, 100, 116, 119, 217, 221, 240, 244 Mission Planning l)ivisinn, II Operations Planning l)ivision. 15, 42, 50, 52 l'rogram Control l)ivision, 30, 114, 115 Project "Squeeze," 114, 115 radiation reliability goals established, 65 RASPO, Bethpage, 35, 105, 118, 136, 140 RASP(), KSC, 185 Configuration Control Panel established, 185 RASPO, NAA, 41, 183 Systems Engineering I)ivision, 4, 9, II, 23, 25, 26, 34, 36, 51, 68, 70, 76, 82, 97, 98, 108, 109, 115, 116, 120, 124, 125, 134, 138-140, 153. 158, 161, 164-167, 185, 188, 189, 191. 194, 197-199, 206 Apollo q'rajectory Support Office, 23 ARC. Sec Ames Remarch Center. Aruohl Engineering I)evelopment Center (AEDC), 32, 43. 98. 114, 191,219 CM wind-tunnel tests, 171 HA-4 rig, 171 service propulsion system faihnes. 152 Arnohl, James P., 170 ASPO. See Apollo Spaceclaft Program Office. Astronaut Office. See Manned Spacecraft Center. Atlantic Ocean, 96, 136, 145 Atomic Energy Commission, 18, 92, 153, 199, 212 Atwood, J. I., 238-239 Autonetics, 11 Avco Corpolation, 16, 46, 83, 118. 207

Borman, Frank, 227, 228 Brady, A. L., 55 Brady, Hugh, 157 Breeding, R. E, 127,220 Brown, B. Porter, 47 Brown, Robert, 213 Bryant, J. P., 59 Bullard, R., 157 Burbank, Paige B., 29 Bureau of the Budget, 45 Button, Robert. 24 Byington, Harry W., 70, 203

C
Campos, A. H., 193 Canl)erra, Australia, 78, 172 Cape Kennedy, Fla., 3, 74, 94, 211,227, 228, 235 Carbee, R. W.. 4

135,

136,

143,

164,

176,

186,

B
Back contamination, 128, 166, 177,204 Bailey, F. John, Jr., 58,153, 163-164 Bassett, Charles A., 73 Battey, Robert V.. 199. 203,206, 215, 219 Bean, Alan L., 73 Beech Aircraft Corp., 101, 114 Beeler. De E., 36, 104 Belew, L. F., 32 Bell Aerosystems Company, 34. 36, 92. 97, 108, 163, 173, 183, 191. 208, 212 I.EM ascent engine, 55, 102, 105, 1,tl, 145, 191,208, 219 hmar flying vehicle. 173 hmar landing training vehicle study, 92, 93, 117,230 Bell, P. R., 170 Bellcomm, Inc., 8, 13, 14, 20, 39, 104. 105, 125, 126, 153 Belyayev, Pavel I., 90 Bendix Systems Div., 179 Bethpage, N.Y., 26, 32. 71, 173,201 Bikle, Patti F., 36, t04,142,208, 218 Bland, William M., 58, 153, 164. 185 Blasiugame, B. P., 9 Blount Brothers Corporation. 60 Boeing Company, The. 114, 183 Bolender, C. It., 156, 189 Boosters and rocket s Antares, 135 Atlas-Agena B, 74 Atlas I), 135 S-IVB, 191 Titan II, 125 Titan Ili, 125

Center Medical Programs Office. See Manned Spacecraft Center. Cernan, Eugene A., 73 Chaffee, Roger B., 73, 149 Cbamberlin, James A., 58, 153, 163, 201 Chao, E. C. T., 169 Chauvin, Leo T., 83 Cheatham, l)onald C., 239 Chicago Bridge and Iron Company, 60 Christensen, Ew_rett E., 47, 189, 225,242, 244 Chrysler Corporation, 78 Clark, David, Company, lnc., 48, 61, 78, 111, 114, 140, 154, 167, 178 Clark, Lorin, 169 Command module (CM; see also CSM), iii, 215, 242 Block I, 5.51, 72, 90, 146, 148, 207,215,216, 237-238 Block II, 51,82, !t0, 92, 146, 148, 177, 233, 238 Cohen, Aaron, 10, 39. 165, 203, 206 Collins. Michael, 71, 73 Collins Radio Company, 11, 20, 78 Configuration Control Board, 54, 80, 129, 155, 219 Configuration Control Panel, 33, 155, 185 Congress, xiii, 43 Conrad. Charles, Jr., 186, 187 Contract Engineering Branch. See Apollo Spacecraft Program Office. Coons, D. Owen, 133 Cooper Island, Bermnda, 108 Cooper. L. (;ordon, Jr., 186, 187 Corpus Christi, Tex., tracking station, 178 Cozad, J. c.. 29, 30, 54, 88, 106, 112, llg, 132, 140, 143, 145, 148, 151, 156, 157, 170, 196, 205,210, 221 Craig, Jerry w., 46 Crew equipment (see also Space suits, LEM, and CSM) boats, 76 extravehicular mot)fifty unit, 17, 18, 20, 29, 53, 62, 76 external thermal garment, 29, 45, 53, 76, 146 gloves, 76 portable life support system, 15, 20, 24, 29, 42, 48, 49, 81 batteries, 42, .18, 49, 81 redesign, 15 pressure suit, 146 liquid-cooled-garment test, 69 sm_ival kit, 17,208. 215 flashlight, 17 liferafts, 215 Crew Integtatinn Branch. See Apollo Spacecraft Program Office. Crew Performance Settion. See Manned Spacecraft Center. Crew Station Branch. See Manned Spacecraft Center. Crew Systems Division. See Manned Spacecraft Center.

278

INDEX

CSM

(command and ._rvice modules) airlock, 126 antenna, 46, 60, 158, 205,206 battery charger, 20, 107, 173 hioinstrumentation, 48, 53, 75 biomedical experiments, 67 Block I aivlock, 70 environmental control system, 4, 5, 6, 34 fuel cell, 131 guidance, 209 reaction control system (RCS), 63 Block II, 174 container design and survival kit stowage, 9 Critical Design Review, 229, 232 display and keyboard, 27 electrical power requirements, 6, 76 electrohnninescent lighting. 6 environmental control system, 48, 97, 184, 202 food storage, 40 fuel cells, 172 gui<lance, 209 louver equipment bay, 40 reaction control system, 63, 174, 177 boost protective cover, 124, 125, 148, 162 cabin atmosphere, 66 canards, 17, 32, 35, 82 caution and warning system, 27 co,mnunications, 39, 89, 126, 132, 134, 140, 148, 156, 204, 212 contract, 13 couches, 121, 122, 172, 221 crew safety, 129, 166, 210,212, 214 crew selection, 121 Critical l)esign Review, 78, 97, 120, 184, 203, 206 data storage system, 11 Design Engineering Inspection, 145 docking aids, 24 docking system, 52, 233 earth landing systems, 41-42 tlotation, 212 new landing device, 130 paracht, tes, 127, 176, 194, 233 deployment, 52 main, 127 rocket landing, 130, 142 shirlslee_e environment, 90, 121 testing, 87. 88, 124 water impact tests, 99, 133 X-band radar, 106 earth reacquisition, 57, 144 emergency detection system, 20, 90, 192 entry monitor system, 5, 12 environmental control system, 5, 13, 15, 21, 34, 51, 67, 82, 167, 198 flashing light, 23 flight attitude indicator, 5 flotation characteristics, 61 fuel cell, 6, 11. 12, ll0, 113, 152, 172 guidance and navigation, 50, 209 guillotine nmbilical cord cutter, 55 hatch, 51, 126, 146, 170 heatshield, 16, 17, 21, 23, 28, 44, 55, 64, 118, 130, 132, 143, 161,207, 216, 222 hydrogen tanks, 114 instrumentation, 43, 81 Interface Control Documents, 111, 112 launch escape system, iii, 15, 32, 35, 36, 50, 55, 72 76, 248 q-ball, 20 manned co,_trol vector, 106 simulator, 107 meteoroid protection, 169 milestones, 112, 152

mission constraints, 137 nuclear particle detection system, 26 "Operation Scrape," 184 optical sight, 106 pop-up antenna, 3, 79 potable water supply, 63 Program Management Review, 246 propellants, 38 radiation shielding, 4, 26 reaction control system, 5, 40, 43, 63, 86, 146, 172, 222, 224, 225 recovery aids, 3, 79, 212 rendezvous and radar, 8-10, 21, 32, 33, 62, 104, 217 deletion, 75 transponder, 10, 12, 75, 158 S-I)and high-gaiu antenna, 53, 54, 57. 60, 61, 126, 139, 144, 156, 204, 205 omnidirectional, 132, 137, 144, 204, 205 scanning telescope, 10 sextant, l0 stal)ilization and control system, 3, 5, 8, 10, 22, 31, 42, 50, 54, 57, 58, 13!1. 174, 194 static testing, 235 subsystems testing, 64 survival equipment, 208,215 television camera, 139 testing, 23, 112, 212, 213 thermal control, 33, 57, 62 waste management system, 73, 74, 117,205 weight, 68, 69, 76, 92, 126, 139, 198, 211,242 windows, 47, 52, 203, 207 CSM-006, 107, 141,212 CSM-008, 126, 141 CSM-009, 118, 128, 148, 166, 212,215,216, 224, 234 CSM_ll, 166, 185,207, 208, 215, 216 CSM-012, 66, 76, 126, 174,207, 215,216, 223, 235 CSM-014, 66, 76, 126, 152, 174,207 C8M-017, 76, 126, 137, 161,204, 205 CSM-020, 76, 126, 137, 161,205, 233 CSM-101, 126, 150, 186, 215 CSM-102, 186 CSM-103, 126, 150, 186 CSM-112, 126 CSM Conliguration Control Panel, 31 Cunningham, Newton x,V., 82 Cunningham, R. Walter, 73

D
Dahuo-Victor Company, 21, 39, 43, 53, 61, 156, 205-206 l)andridge, M., 32 David Clark Company, Inc., 48, 61, 78, 111, 114, 140, 154, 167, 178 Davis, H., 185 Day, LeRoy E., 183 Debus, Kurt H., 47,215 Decrevel, Ron, 94, 213 Deep Space Instru,nentation Facility, 95 DeHavilland, 79 Dell, M. E., 124, 157 Dennett, Armistead, 26 Department of Agriculture, 91, t77, 204 DeVos, Francis J., 29, 45,146 Disher, John H., 161 I)odson, Joe W., 124 Donnell, James w., 58 Douglas Aircraft Co,npany, Inc., 37, 110, 111, 157, 164, 182, 186 Downey, Calif., iii, 8, 18, 26, 35, 51,68, III, 114, 151,221 I)owns, _._. R., 70 Draper, C. Stark, 50 Dryden, Hugtl L., 121,202, 204, 239

279

INDEX

Duncan, Durrett, Dynatronics,

Robert C., 6, 50, 57, 84, 164, 209, 239 t,V. R., 58 Inc., 45

G
Gallagher, L. P., 164 G&N/ACE Contract Engineering Branch. See Apollo Spacecraft l'rogram Office. Gardiner, Rohert A., 16,t, 239 Garriott. Owen K., 163 Gates, Sally D., xiv Gavin, J. A., 32 Gaylor, W. J., 196 Gemini Ill, 73, 95-97 Gemini lV, 73, 143, 144 Gemini I", 73, 186 Gemini VI, 211,240 Gemini VI--.4, 229, 235. 236 Gemini 17l, 227,228, 235,236, 240 Gemini program, iv, xiii, xiv, 21,85, 86 Gemini Program Office, 20 General Dynamics Convair Division, 111, 134, 168, 224 General D,,namics Corporation, 245 General Electric Company, 4, 26, 46, 70, 71, 80, 92, 118, 127, 134, 142, 169, 176, 212 Apollo Support Department, 157, 237 General Instrumentation Branch. See Manned Spacecraft Center. (;encral Motors ('(npolalion AC Spark Plug Division, 8, 50, 82, 132, 157 amended contract, 22, 31 Allison I)ivision. 57, 117 General Precision, Inc., Link Group, 35,225 Ordnance Division, 69 Gibson, Edward G., 163 (,illen, Richard J., 181 Gihnore, Jerold P.. 8 Gilruth, Robert R., 42, 43, 62, 94, 125, 149, 155, 163, 165, 189, 199, 201,206, 213, 215, 219, 229 Goddard, James L., 178, 204 Goddard Space Flight Center, 39, 79, 108, 149 Goldstone, Calif., 78, 94, 172 Goodrich, B. F., Company, 90 Gordon, Richard F., 73, 137, 163 Graveline, I)uane E., 163 Graves, Wallace D., I07 Grimm. Dean, 103, 163, 213 Grimwood, James M., xiv, 97, 143, 186, 229 Grissom, Virgil I., 95-97 (;rnmman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, iii-passim Guidance and Control Division. See Apollo Spacecraft Program Office.

Eagle-Pichcr Industries, Edwards Rocket Research

Inc., 8, 80, 122, 130, 164 l,aboratory, 33

Eggleston. John M., 48 Eisele, Donn F., 73. 127, 141, 149 El Centro, Calif., iii, 38, 68.69, 127, Ellis, J. C., 146 Ehns, James C., 206 Emme. Eugene M., xiv Engineering and I)eveloplnent Spacecraft Center. Engineering Simulation Branch. Center. Engines CF-700, 142 F-I, 112, 192 H-I. 104 J-2, 232 Enviromnental Physiology craft Center. Epoxylite, 17 Erb, R. Bryan, 83 Ertel, Ivan D., 97 Experiments, Extravehicular 88, 89, 126, 209, 210, activity, 90

143, 189

l)irectorate. See Manned

See

Manned Spacecraft

Branch.

See

Manned

Space-

234,243

Faget, Maxime A., iv, 4, 20, 32, 90, 169, 170 Farmer, Norman, 40 Feltz, Charles. 99 Feoktistov, Konstantin P., 7 Ferrier, Leonard D., 142 Few, D. D., 106 Fields, Edison M., 153 Fitzgerald, Paul E., 86 Flight Control Division. Flight Crew Operations craft Center. Flight Crew Center. Operations See Manned Directorate. Division. Division. See See Manned See Spacecraft See Manned Manned Apollo Center. SpaceSpacecraft Spacecraft

H
Hacker, Barton C., 49, 97,143, 269 Hackler, Clarke T., 66 Haines, Charles R., 24, 132 Hall, Lawrence B., 91. 170, 204 Hamiltou Standard Division, 12, 15, 48, 49, 53, 57, 61, 68, 90, 92, 111. 114, 116, 130, 132, 140, 146, 149, 153, 154, 167, 178, 179, 200, 201, 205, 220, 221, 227, 248 Hartman Electric Company, 136 Hays, Edward L., 71 Health and Physics Group. See Manned Spacecraft Center. Hess, Harry H., 39. 163 Hilhurn, Earl 1)., 203 Hodge, John D., 177 Honeywell, Inc., 12, 198 Hornbeck, J. A., 13 Houston, Tex., xiv, 45, 211,216 Hughes Aircraft Company, 132, 191 Electronic Products l)ivision, 136

Flight Crew Support Program Office. Flight Dynamics Flight Operations Center. Flight Operations Flight Projects ()ffice. Flight Research 213, 218, 219

Branch. See Directorate. Division. Division. Center,

Spacecraft Center. Manned Spacecraft Center. Program 143, 208,

See Manned Spacecraft See Apollo Spacecraft 36, 62, 103, 104, 142,

Foster, Willis B., 169, 170, 231 Freeman, Theodore C., 19 Frondel, Clifford, 169 Frost, l.eRoy P., 142 Frutkin, Arnold W., 172 FTA-1 FTA-2, Funding. (LEM 145 flight test article), 6, 263. 145

See Appendix

28O

INDEX

Huntington Beach, Calif., 110, 111 Huntsville, Ala., 104 Huntsville (recovery ship), 196 Hurricane Betsy, 195 Hurt, J. B., 168 Huss, Carl R., 43, 50, 57, 145, 185 Hutchins, Robert, 213

Instrumentation and Electronic Systems Manned Spacecraft Center. Integrated Mission Control Center, 42, 43 International Business Machines Corporation, International Latex Corporation, 69, 90, 200, 201, 243, 244 International Telephone Federal Laboratories Irwin, R. G., 46 Itek Corporation, 132 and Telegraph Astrionics Center,

Division.

See

12, 177, 216 154. 167, 178, Corporation, 20 20

Jarvis, Calvin R.. 142 Jenkins, L)'le M., 60 Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), 13, 14, 64, 94, 95 Johnsen, Irving A., 32 Johnson, Arlene, 213 Johnson, President Lyndon B., 3, 187,240 Johnson, Lyndon B., Space Center, iv, xiv Johnston, Richard S., 26, 47, 62, 71, 99, 109, 114, 220, 243 Jones. Curtis, 47 Jones, David M., 20 Jones, Robert L., 25

Lake, Michael K., 166 Lambert. C. Harold, 32 Landing and Recovery Division. See Manned Spacecraft Center. Lang, David D., 145 Langley. Robert D., 170 Langley Research Center, 16, 66, 77, 118, 163, 166, 183, 226 Lunar Landing Research Facility, 162, 163 Lanzkron, Rolf W., 99, 108, 191,208 Leach Corporation, 11, 18, 34, 35 Lee, Arc F., 78 Lee, John B., 183 Lee, William A., 15, 50, 59, 62, 77, 79, 90, 127, 129, 138140, 150, 155, 156, 193 LEM (lunar excursion module), 18, 24, 29, 83 abort guidance system, 8, 41, 46, 155, 175, 225 active vehicle during lunar rendezvous, 38 "all battery" system, 68.80, 83, 220, 222 antenna, 7, 39, 43, 46, 136, 211 ascent engine, 98, 102, 105, 108, 141, 191 injector, 37 ascent stage, iii, 22, 56, 58, 61 attitude translation control assembly, 44, 48 auxiliary battery, 3, 4, 40 backup for service proptdsion system, 69, 171 battery charger, 49 Block II mockup, 36 cabin layout tests, 154 caution and warning electronics assembly, 7.27 communications -and instrumentation, 5, 9, 39, 54, 149, 161 computer, 9, 10, 50.53, 109, 155, 190 contract, 178,241,248 controls, displays, and lighting. 5, 128 cost reduction, 142 crew provisions, 5 crew vibration limits, 211 Critical Design Review, 222. 243 data storage electronics assembly, 34, 35 descent stage, iii, 5, 42, 48, 60, 62, 81, 98, 102, 123, 203 design, iv design review, 180 display and keyboard, 27 display panel design, 27 docking, 7, 24 electrical power system, 3-4, 5, 27-28,246 electroltnninescent lighting, 6 environmental control, 5, 18, 98, 116, 122, 181, 225 experiments package, 173, 179 flight engines, 22 delivery schedule, 32 fuel cell, 3, 15, 24, 41, 89, 91, 94, 109, 179 gaseous oxygen storage system, 91, 128, 165, 166, 181, 182, 184 ascent stage, 91 descent stage, 91 storage configuration, 147 ground development tests, 32 ground support equipment, 16 guidance and navigation, 8, 32, 48, 82 guillotine umbilical cutter, 95, 194, 210 heatshield, 123 heavyweight LEM, 52, 55 helium tanks, 7, 81, 102 landing gear, 3, 22, 29, 41 landing simulator, 178 lunar abort, 22 hmar contamination, 267 lunar geological equipment, 170, lunar landing problems, 223

127,

153,

K
Karegeanues, Carrie, xiv Kaskey, B., 125 Keller, Michael D., 163 Kelly, Thomas J., 4, 68 Kelly, William R., 78 Kendrick, Darrell, 167 Kenned),, President John F., xiii, 52 Kennedy Space Center (KSC), 26, 33, 47, 122 Launch Complex 16, 35 Launch Complex 34, 65, 164, 196 Launch Complex 39, 64 Kerwin, Joseph P., 163 Kincaide, William C., 146 King, Charles H., 183 Klein, Jonathan, 170 Kleinknecht, Kenneth S., 58, 175 Kluever, E. E., 241 Knaff, P. R., 20 Komarov, Vladimir M., 7 Kotanchik, Joseph N., 32, 82, 98, 152, 208, 210, 212 Kraft, Christopher C., Jr., 4, 43, 57, 147, 148, 177, 197, KSC. See Kennedy Space Center. Kniper. Gerard P., 75 223

76,

78,

99,

110,

179

281

INDEX

lunar

touchdown maneuver, 174 landing gear, 87, 174 probe, 87,217,234 milestones, 22, 32 mission, 186, 191 optical training system, 131,201,217, 239 orbital rendezvous, 24 power system, 87. 104, 116, 246 batteries, 87, 91, 94, 104, 115, 122, 123, 241 descent stage, 87 primary guidance system, 5, 50 program development program, 170 program review, 141, 143, 170 propellant dispersal. 11, 117, 122, 188, 193 propulsion stage, iii, 52 radar, 3, 5, 6, 9, 32, 62, 100, 129, 174, 191,209, reaction control system, 116. 152, 189, 190 reliability and quality control, 5 rendezvous, 3 reshaped portable life support system, 149 S-band radar, 21.54 S-band transponder, 101, 126, 134 schedule, 170, 183 scientific equipment, 5.27.28, 30, 64, 83 stabiFzation and control, 5, 80

LTA-10, 12, 22, 117,241 Luna I:, 128 lmna I:1, 146 Imna VII, 211 Luna VIII, 227 Lunar Excursion Module.

See LEM. 142, 143, Panel, 163, 62,

130,

149,

222,

237

Lunar landing research vehicle, 84, 102-104, 208, 212-215,218, 219, 225,241 Lunar Landing Research Vehicle Coordination 84 Lunar landing training vehicle, 213, 214, 219 Lunar module, xiii Lunar Orbiter program, 13, 216, 223 Lunar Receiving Laboratory, iv Lunar Sample Receiving Laboratory, 47, 91, 232, 245 Ad Hoc Committee, 48, 169 Technical Working Committee, 149 Lunar Sample Receiving Station, 204 Lunney, (;lynn S., 94 Lynn, Mass., 142

149,

169,

178,

M
McCartv, McDivi/t, McDonnell McMillion, McMullen, McNamara, Madrid, Madvda, Malllck, Bill J., 169 James A., 143 Aircraft Corporation, Lee N., 83 William G., 156 Robert S., 45 Spain, 78, 172 Alexander L., 191 Donald L.. 62, 142

stowage, 18 structure and landing gear, 5, 29, 46, 115 Super VCeight Improvement Program, 179 test program, 118,226 thermal control, 83, 87. 152, 193, 198 up-data system, 109, 127 VHF radio, 167, 211 waste management system, 21 "¢ weight, 6, 30, 40, 43. 62, 79, I00, 101, 134, 139, 153, 156. 157, 172, 191,193, 195,222, 248 LEM-I, 40. 101, 140. 147, 148, 151, 170, 173, 183, 184, 196, 198,208. 226, 238,241 LEM-2, 40, 101, 148, 170, 183, 190, 238, 241 LEM-3, 40, 101, 148, 170, 183, 190, 238, 241 LEM-4, 170, 183 LEM-5, 170, 183 LEM-6, 170, 183 LEM-7, 170 LEM-8, 170 LEM-9, 170 LEM-10, 170, 185 LEM-I 1, 170, 234 LEM Environmental Control System Office. See Apollo Spacecraft Program Office. LEM Project Office. See Apollo Spacecraft Program Office. Leonov, Alek_'y A., 90 Lewis Re_,arch Center, 32 Phnn Brook Station, 60 Ling-Temco-Vought, Inc., 27, 48.99, 181, 198, 202 Little Joe II, iii, 15, 134, 135, 163, 164, 176, 223, 224, 230, 247 Littleton, Orval P., 169 Lobb, John D., Jr., 248 Lockheed Aircraft Corporation. 50, 229 Lockheed Electronics Company, 213 Loftus, Joseph P., Jr., 76, 203,206 Long Beach, Calif., 216 Lovelace, W. Randolph, 18, 91 Lovell, James A., Jr., 228, 229 Lovell, Sir Bernard, 128 Low, George M., 52,201,206. 207,231,232,245 LTA-I (LEM test article), 118 LTA-2, 22.76, 24 l LTA-3, 71. 184, 185,226 LTA-4, 145 LTA-5, 123, 145,226 282

85,229

Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC) Advanced Spacecraft Technology Division, 4, 31 anechoic chalnher, 67 Apollo Support Office. 233 Crew Provisions Office, 233 ASPO. See Apollo Spacecraft Program Office. Astronaut Office, I1, 39, 71 Center Medical Program Office, 63 Crew Integration Branch, 24, 75, 215 Crew Performance Section, 108 Crew Station Branch, 54 Crew Systems Division, 17, 18, 21. 24, 25, 34, 36, 40. 45, 47, 48, 52, 53, 71, 76, 79, 85, 86, 90 92, 105. 109. 117, 120, 121, 124, 127, 128, 132, 134, 140, 146, 149. 153, 154. 165-168, 178. 179, 181, 182, 188, 205, 208, 209, 211,213,215,216, 220. 221,227 Engineering and Development Directorate, 168, 169, 176, 201. 218, 219,239, 246 established Lunar Sample Receiving Laboratory Office. 218 Engiqeering Division, 149 Engineering Simulation Branch, 66 Environmental Physiology Branch, 66 Experiments Program Office, 145 Flight Control Division, 94, 158, 159, 193 Flight Crew Operations Directorate, 90, 168, 197, 199, 209 Flight Crew SUpl)ort l)i',ision, 84 Flight D'_namics Branch, 94 Flight Operations Directorate, 90, 109, 126, 127, 145. 19l Gemini Program Office, 54 General Instrumentation Branch, 193 Guidance and Control Division, 117, 132, 134, 209,210,239 Health and Physics Group, 210 Instrumentation and Electronic Systems Division. 20, 21. 39, 48, 49, 60, 67, 106, 156, 161, 193. 198. 211

198,

142,

169,

17. 205.

INDEX Landing Recovery and Division, 213 Lunar opographical T Simulation Area,
89, 103 MSC Experiments Center. Program OffÉce. See Manned Spacecraft

Meteoroid Technology Branch, 17 Mission Constraints Control Panel, 215 Mission Planning and Analysis Division, 49, 57 MSC Florida Operations, 47 NASA Technical Services, 46 Procnrements and Contracts Division, 78 Propulsion anti Power Division, 23, 34, 46, 92, 117, 123, 126, 167, 191 Range Safety Coordinator, 94 Reliability and Quality Assurance Division, 210, 213 Space Enviromnent Group, 48 Space Medicine Branch, 48 Spacecraft Control Office, 54 Structure and Mechanics Division, 18, 21-23, 32, 46, 56, 63. 70, 79. 81--83, 85, 86, 92, [17, 98, 115. 117, 120, 125, 127. 152. 169 Systems l)evelop,nent Branch, 238 Thernlo-Strn_tures Branch, 193 Manned Space Flight Network, 8, 9, 34, 39, 45, 54, 88, 101. 138, 147, 152,204 Markley, J. Thomas, 124, 151, 152, 155, 156, 166, t67, 224 Marquardt Corporation, 135, 179 Marshall, John C., 215 Marshall Space Flight C_'nler (MSC), 26, 76, 104, 110, 114, 149, 153, 181, 192,232 Planning and Tool Engineering Division, 41 Martin Company, The, 229 Martin-Marietta Corporation, 175 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), 14, 50, 57, 70, 110, 134,237,238 Instrumentation Laboratory, 3, 8 Mathews, Edward R., 73 Matranga, (;erie J., 142, 143,213, 21.5 Maynard. Owen E., 4, 6. 17, 20, 51, 55, 70, 79, 81, 83, 98, 106, 109, 113, 115, 116, 118, 124, 130, 132, 148, 150, 153, 158, 161, 165, 167, 170, 176, 177, 185, 188, 189, 192, 193, 194, 203, 208,212,217, 219, 221 Mayo, Richard E., 182 Mechanical Products, Inc., 136 Melpar. Inc., 233 Mercury program, xiv, 21 Merrick, E. J., 71 Merritt Island, Fla., 53, 110, 122 Meteoroid Center. Technology Branch. See Manned Spacecraft

MSC Florida Operations. See Manned Spacecraft Center. MSC Manned Spacecraft Criteria and Standards Board, 58 MSC-MSFC Flight Mechanics, I)ynamics, Guidance anti Control Panel, 10, 55 MSC-MSFC Flight Mechanics Panel, 124, 125 Guidance and Control hnplementation Sub-Panel, MSC-MSFC Mechanical Integration Panel, 60 MSC Range Center. MSC MSC White White Safety Samls Sands Coordinator. Missile Operations, Operations, 56 See Manned 56 Spacecraft 28

MSFC. See Marshall Space Flight Center. Mueller, George E., 14, 18, 42, 43, 51, 52, 58, 90, 108-110, 112, 125, 126, 134, 145, 162, 165, 176, 182, 189, 191, 201, 206, 213,227,231,23!t, 242 Mullaney, R. S., 6-9, 14, 15, 20, 24, 28, 30, 34, 38, 40-42, 54. 56, 57, 67, 71, 75, 87, 98-101, 115, 116, 118, 120, 123, 128, 132, 13,1, 136, 140, 146, 147, 151, 156-158, 167, 170, 173, 174, 179, 183-185, 188, 190, 193, 197, 198, 209, 212, 213, 217,224, 225 Myers, l)alc 1)., 123

N
Narmco, NASA. tion. 17 See National Aeronautics and Space Administra-

National Academy of Sciences, 163, 166 Atl Hoc Committee on Scientific Scientist-Ast ronaut s, 163 Space Science Board, 39 Life Sciences Connnittee, 136 National Aeronautics 163, 167 and Space

Qualifications

of

Administration

(NASA),

Metz, Gary G.. 198 Michel, Frank C., 163 Micfioud Operations, 63, 159, 195 Minnesota Mission Mission Mission Mission Mining and Manufacturing Company, Control Center. 9, 45, 108, 187, 216 Constraints Control Panel, 215 Operations Director, 206, 207 Operations Organization, 206 7

Administrator, 3, 128,240 Associate Administrator, 240 Deputy Administrator, 239 Director of Bioscience l'rograms, 166 I)ire(tor of lamar and Planetary Programs, Director of Manned Science Programs, 169 Director of Mission Operations, 235 Headquarters, 14, 56, 90, 148, 177, 183, 200 Historical Office, xiv Office 72 of Advanced Research Flight, 207 18 and and Technology, 18, 26,

245

18,

33, 124,

Mission l'lanning and Analysis Division. See Apollo craft Program Office. Mockup 3 (LEM), 62, 241 Mockup 4 (LEM), 217 Mockup 5 (LEM), 4-6, 12, 40, 46, 99, 103, 149 Mockup 12 (CM), 36, 62, 79 Mocknp 27A (CM), 120, 127,229, 230 Mockup 28 (CM), 120 Modisette. Jerry, 234 Moe, "W. R., 32 Mogave Airfield, Calif., 189 Montgomery, Ala., 60 Moore, Thomas E., 46 Morris, Corinne L., xiv Morris, Owen G., 4 Motorola, 134, 194 MSC. See Manned Spacecraft Center.

Space-

Office of Manned Space 153, 156, 161, 165,203, Office of Space Medicine, Office of 209 Senior Space Sciences Council,

32, 55, 82,

Applications, 231

91,

145,

204,

Management

Neal, James L., 47, 81, 123, 132, 152, 171, 172, Nebrig, Daniel E., 114 Newell, Homer E., 39, 155, 163, 209, 234, 235 Newlander, R. A., 196 New Orleans, La., 63, 206 Nicks, Oran W., 245 North, Warren J.. 62, 103, 197, 213 Inc. (NAA), ill-passim North American Aviation, Rocketdyne l)ivision) Northrop Corporation, Northrop Space Northrop-Ventura,

203, 210,

234

(see

also

229 Laboratories, 132 58, 59, 143, 194

283

INDEX

0
Oak Park, Ill., 60 Studies, 18, 121

R
Radio Corporation of America (RCA), 39, 43, 48, 62, 92, 108, 115, 127,134, 141, 167,222 Aerospace Systems Division, 5 Radnofskv Matfl_ew 1.,78 Raines, Martin I,., 66, 89,245 Ranger 1"I, 95 Ranger VII, 64, 95 Ranger VIII, 74, 75 Ranger IX, 82, 93, 94 Ranger progranl, 13, 82 RASPO (Resident Apollo Spacecraft Program Office). See Apollo Spacetraft Program Office. Raushenbakh, B. V., 128 Ray, Thomas %V., xiv Raytiehl, John F., 53 Raytheon Company, 84 Rector, William F., IlI, 4, 6-9, 12, 14, 15, 19, 20, 22, 24, 28, 30, 32, 34, 38, 40, 42, 54, 56, 57, 67, 68, 71, 75, 77, 81. 87, 95, 98-101, 104, 112, 115, 116, 118, 120, 123, 128 Reference Traiectory Sub-Panel, 49 Reid, Richard, 87 Reliability and Quality Assurance Division. See Manned Spacecrit ft Center. Reynolds, Harry L., 79, 112, 151, 156, 178 Reynolds, Orr E., 128 Ridnour. R. ti., 106. 153 Rocketdvne Division, North American Aviation, Inc., 32, 60, 104, 146, 192 Rvan Aeronautical Corporation, 222 R_'ken, |olin, 93, 163,213

Oak Ridge Institute for Nuclear O'Connor, Edmund F., 216 Ohlsson, Oscar O., 206 O'Kane, James H., 219, 295 O'Neill, Jobn W., 133 Operations Executive Group, Operations Planning Division. Osl)on, H. G., 97, 123, 162 ()ttinger, C. _Vayne, 142, 213

165, 2,t4 See ASPO.

P
Pat]lie Crane anti Pacific Ocean. 41 Pacific Plantronics, Packtlanl, I.eonard Rigging Company, 64

Inc., 140 E., 140

Pegasus, iv, 55 Pegasus 1, 72, 73 Pegasus II, 137, 138 Pega._us 11I, 176 Perkin-Ehncr Corporation, The, 132 Perrine, Calvin H., 83, 116, 125, 185 Petrocelli, A. W., 245 Petyuia, Willianl, Philco Corporation, Aeronutronic 99 26 Division, 77

Phillips, Briggs, 170 Phillips, Samuel C., 8, 13, 15, 32, 33, 50. 51, 59, 60, 70, 71, 82, 104, 105, 109, 112, 125, 126, 132, 139, 148, 149, 161, 172, 174, 179, 183, 189, 195, 196, 210, 215, 226, 235, 236, 238, 239, 242 t'ickering, Willianl H., 64 Piland, Robert O., 79, 98 Pratt g: Whitney Aircraft Division, 11, 12, 23, 41, 80, 109, 110, 113, 152, 172 President's Scientific Advisory Committee (PSAC), 116 Space Technology Panel, 133 Preston, G. Merritt, 47 I'rocurements and Contracts 1)]vision. See Manned Spacecraft Center. l'rogrant ()like. Control Division. See Apollo Spacecraft Program

I'rnject Fire II, 135 Project Mercury. ,%e Mercury program. Project Squeeze. See Command and servRe module. Promise (barge), 196 Propulsion and Power It]vision. See Manned Spacecraft Center. Propulsion systems "all battery" systems, 68, 80, 83 backup for service propulsion system. 69 delivery schedules, 32 descent engine, 30, 32 flight engines, 32 ground development tests, 32 LEM ascent engine, 30 redesign, 36 Public Health Service, 91, 128, 177, 204,217,218 Connnunicable Disease Center, 91, 178 Purdy, M. M., 20 Pyle, Ray, 99

S-IB-I (Saturn IB lit'st stage), 104 S-IC (Saturn V first stage), 63, 154, 159, 180, 192, 202, S-II (Saturn V second stage), 67, 68, 113, 182, 239 S-IV (Saturn I stage), 72-73 S-IVB (Saturn V third stage; Saturn IB second stage), 37, 77, 125, 132, 157-158, 164, 182, 186, 232,249 Sack, E. E., 11, 15, 125 Sacranlento, Calif., 164, 182, 186 Saegesser, l,ee D., xiv St. Petersburg, Fla., 65 Salntield, Edwin, 149 Sanlonski, Frank tt., Jr., 21, 37, 67, 169, 198 Saturn 1, 65, 72, 78, 137, 176 Saturn IB, 15, 37, 59, 60, 65, 76, 78, 130, 132, 148, 149, 156, 162, 164. 192 Saturn V, iii, xiii, 10, 16, 23, 64, 65, 76, 83, 110, 114, 176, 232,235 Saturn ST-124, 10

235

10,

153, 164,

Savage, Melvyn. 183 Sawyer, Ralph S., 6, 46, 68,205 Scheer, Julian, 172 Scheller, John A., 183 Schirra, Walter M., Jr., 235 Schmitt, Harrison, H., 163 Schweickart, Russell L., 73 Scientist-astronauts, 162-163 Scott, David R., 73 Seamans, Robert C., Jr., 51, 61,121,195, 196, 202, 229, 239, 24o Service module. See SM. Shannon, Janies J., 164 Shea, .|oseph F., 4, 8, 13, 32, 33, 41, 43, 49, 51, 54, 57, 59, 61, 62, 64, 65, 70, 76, 79, 83, 87, 90, 95, 98, 99, 104, 105, 121, 126, 134, 140, 142, 144, 147-149, 152, 154, 166-168, 170, 174, 177, 185, 186, 188, 194, 196, 197, 202, 205, 210, 212,237,239,242

284

INDEX

Shell (:heroical Company, 17 Shields, Willianl G.. 26 Silveira, Milton A., 223, 224 Simons, IIoward, 136
g;iH|lllalors

partial

suit

wear,

51 220,

personal communications equipment, 34, 50 portable life support system, 24, 29, 105, 108, 121, 221, 225 pressule garment assembly, shiltslecve CIIViFOHIIICllt, tests, 12.1 visors, 212 Space Technology l_aboratories 123 Spacecraft Operations Branch, Speier. William M., 203, 206 Sperry Rand Corporation. 45 Univac Division, 45. 73 Stafford, Thomas P., 235 Stevens Institute of Technology, Stoney, William E,, Jr,, 155 Stoops, G. J., 114 Stroup, James, 126, 138-140 220, 24t
DI

AF, ollo (tloneywell), 106, 107 Apollo Mission Simulator 1, 197. 109, 200, 225 Apollo Mission Simulalor 2, 197 CSM, 15, 35 inflight metabolic, 25 internal cnxiroumcnt, 133, 134 LEM, 35, 66, 201 Y;-IVB forwald stage, II0 Sjoberg, Sigurd A., 4, 153, 163 Sjogren, \Villiam I.., 95 Skuridin, (;. A., 128 SLA (spacecraft /l_EM /adapter), airlifted, 167 Block I panels, 33 Block II panels, 33
(Ollllll_tlTd allleltlla S_,NIL'III,

(STL), 166

8,

32, 60,

98,

102,

33.

38,

60,

77,

127,

189

61

88

retention. 184 panel cabh's, 191 changes, 106 deployment angles. 151 hear)weight I.EM effect, separation It*sis. 224 thernud coating, 240,294 weight, 139 vibration factor, 187 Slayton. 1)onald K.. 4, 27, 43, 168, 209 Slight, John B., 89

52

Structures and Mechanics l)ivision. See craft Center. Stuhs, Robert C., 21 Surve}or program, 13, 14, 186,216, 223 Swenson, Loyd S., Jr., \iv Systelns Engineering l)ivision. See Apollo gram Office.

Manned

Space-

Spacecraft

Pro-

1"
50. 5.t, 57. 58, 70, 137, 148, Tarango, Tarl)ox. Taylor. 115, Teague, Texstar, 0., 153 T., 163 C. I,. 11, 15. 29. 124, 143, 145, 148, Olin E., 175 46 31, 54, 78. 88. !)7, 106, 151, 162. 166, 170, 205, 112, 210, 114. 221

S_,[ (st'l'4i¢e module: set' also I.EM and CSM), fuel cell, 113, 245 J-2 engine, 23.37 propellant dispersion, 11 propulsion system, iii, 43, 46, 57 propellant engine, 33, 189 lanks qualifie([, 57 reaction control system, 113, 135, 174, 202, 203, 222 service propulsion system Block I, 232 233, 2't4. 246 Block II, 17-1, 18!I, 233, 244 Smith. E. P., 112 Smith, Henry S., 179 Smith, .lames A., Jr., 193, 199 Smith, Norman F., 58 Smithsonian Institution, xiv Smylie, Robert E., 19, 24, 25, 45, 48, 66, 76, Sne(h'ker, loire C., 152, 171, 172, 203, 210, 234 ,Solar Particle Alert Network (SPAN), 125 Sonett, Charles P., 234 Space Environment Group. Space-General Corporation, Space Space Space Medicine Ordnance Branch. Systems, See Manned 179 See Manned Inc., 59, 145

216,242

179,

189,

199,

168,

208,

215

Brunch. See Manned Thibodaux, Joseph (;., .It-., 23, 32, 188 Thiokol Chemical Company, 141 "Ihompso,L H. 1., Comp,my, 105 Thompson-Ramo-Wooldridge, Inc., 235 'lhompson, T., 125 Tikho,n-arov, M. K., 128 Tischler, Adelberl O., 33 Tragescr. M. B.. 157 "I'raiuers Apollo part task, 13 systems, 35, 56 Trask, 1)onakl W., 95 Trout, James B., 130 TRW Svstems C, roup, 179, 188 Tulsa, ()kla. (NAA), '_'_ 191, '_2't 244
"lhertno-Slrllctures

Spacecraft

Center.

Spacecraft Spacecraft

Center. Center. 205

U
United Aircraft Corporation, Urey, Haroht C., 75 U.S. Air Force 220

suits, 46, 51, 90, 11,t, 131, 132, 154, 178, 194, 200, antenna, 194 Apollo space suit assembly, 84 back pack, 194 Block I contract, 78 Block I pressure garment assembly, 79 Block II development program, 61, 62 Block II suit requirements, 71, 146, 225 communications, 140, 220 constant wear garment, 220 Gemini suits in Block I, 48 gluves, 51, 146 hehnet, 23, 47, 51, 52,201, 214,220 I)ubble hehnet, 23, 46, 69 International Latex Company "state-of-the-art,"

Air Force Systems Command. Brooks AFB. 121 Eastern Test Command, 11 Eastern Test Range, 94 Edwards AFB, 142 Electronics Systems Division, Ellington AFB, 126 U.S. Army, 167 Corps of Engineers, 64 U.S. Gcological Survey, 209 U.S, Navv Air Crew Equipment U.S.S. Intrepid, 96 U.S.S. If'as/), 236 285 I.aboratory,

20

45

74, 147

69

INDEX

V
Vale, Rohert E., 191 Vaysberg, O. L., 128 Vecchietti, George J., 172 yon Braun, _Vernher, 182, 202, 215 Vonhun, Friedrich O., 39 '¢orzimmer, Peter J., 97,229 Voskhod (U.S.S.R. spacecraft), 245 Voskhod 1, 7 Voskhod lI, 90 Vostok (U.S.SR. spacecraft), 245 Vruels, Frederick E., 130

White, Raymond I.., 142 White Sar;cls Missile Range, N. Mex., 23, 32, 46, 124, 140, 160. 161, 209, 230, 247,248 White Sands Test Facility, N. Mex., iii, 66, 77, 100, 202,227 Williams. Clifton C., Jr., 73 Williams. Rohert W., 99, 124, 148, 176 Williams, Walter C., 47 Wiscman, 1)onahl G., 39 Wright-Pattelson AFB, 43, 73, 137, 172, 178. 211,229

134, 168.

¥
Yardney Electric Corporation, 40, 80, 122, 130 Yegorov, Boris B., 7 Young, John W., 95, 96, 158 Young, R. Wa)ne, 124, 132, 134, 136, 140, 1.t7, 157, 167, 173, 17.1, 179, 183-185, 188, 190, 193, 209,212, 213,217,224, 225 Yschek, llenry P., 15.20, 38, 75, 77, 78 229, 240

W
Walker, Joseph A., 24, 25, 35, 62, 142 Walter, Louis, 79, 80 Watertown (recovery ship), 196 Wehb, James E., 3, 7-9, 45, 121, 175, 191,202, Weight Control Board, 196 Weil, Joseph, 241 West, Robert B., 86 Westinghouse Electric Company, 139, 205 Whitaker, Ewen A., 75 White, Edward H., lI, 143, 144 White, Lyle D., 224

151, 196,

15"t, 198.

X
Zaret Foundation, Zond II1, 172 Zwink,/con, 142 129

286

THE AUTHORS
Courtney G. Brooks has been a Research Associate in the History DepartSavannah, College, degrees merit of the University of Houston since July 1969. Born in Georgia (1939), he received his B.A. degree from Huntingdon Montgomery, Alabama in history from Tulane Ivan since June 1964. (;eorgia A llanta's News, was Manned authored flight and (1969). Press D. Ertel has been 1972. serving _niversity, Reporter, Georgia at Headquarters, Center's and of The otticial Apollo brochures (1964), and iTniversity, a Contract He New retired York East his M.A. (1966) New Orleans, Historian from (1914), Georgia Point, Third news about Before ILS. each NASA's Assistant (1958). Georgia, coming Army. Mercury A organ, to and Ph.D. Louisiana. NASA's Johnson Historian He and was the Ertel Space and

(1969)

Historical Space since news in

Office in from of he the Kalb

November 1972 Born after

Center September degree ur-De editor 1961,

as the

Center's

in Marion,

he received

his B.B.A. Decal

State Decatur,

Atlanta, (1954-1957).

Suburban Officer Spacecraft fact sheets is (o-author

to NASA News

established Roundup, Gemini

manned Volume I

Spacecra[t:

Chronology,

NASA
HISTORI[_

HISTORICAL

PUBLICATIONS

• Robert

L. Roshoh,

An Administrative James 1966, M. (;firewood, (JPO.

Hi_tory and

o] NASA, Charles

1958-1963,

NASA Thi._ New

SP-4101, Ocean:

1966,

(;1'O.

• o[ Project Mmcury,

• I_oy(l S. Swcnson, NASA * Constance sonian • Alfred • Edwin 1970, SP_I201,

C. Alexander,

A History

Mcl.. (;teen and Milton Institution Press, 1971. Rosenthal, P. Hartman, Venture into

Lomask,

l.'anguard--A

ltistor),

NASA

S1'-4202,

lq70;

also

Washington:

Smith-

Spate: in

Early

)'ears

o] (,oddard o] the

Spate Ame.s

Flight

Center,

NASA

St'_t3{11,

1968, NASA

(,PO. SI' 43(}2,

Adr,etttmes

Reseatch:

A Histor'v

Research

Center,

1940-1965,

(;PO.

HISTORICAL

STUDIES

• Mac

Mills

lank, Sketch

Space

Medicine NASA

in Project EP-29,

Mercury, 1965 and

NASA 1966,

SP-4003,

1.(t65, NTIS.

••

• Hi.storical • Katherine NASA • Eugene Senate • William • Helen • Jane

o] NASA, (I.ihrary

NTIS. and Astronautics: A Preliminary Bibliography,

M. Dickson HHR-29, M. Emme Committee R. ('orliss, with

of ('ongress),

ttistory

o/ .4eronautic_

NTIS. (ed.), on NASA Susan and Statements Aeronautical SouT,ling Whitely, by the Presidents o] the United and Space Sciences, Sen. 1)o(. 1958-1968: o] NASA NASA A Hi._torital Names, NASA Data Book, States 92_t0, on International 1.(171, (;PO. NASA (1975). 1968, Vnl. 1, NASA lle_ottmes, S[' 4012 Cooperation in Space,

Rockets, Origins

Summary, SP_402 1958

SP-4401,

1971,

GPO.

T. l, Vells Van Nimmcn

Leonard

C. Bruno,

Historical

(1976).

(]HRONOLOGIES

• Astronautics tinuing available in • Project • P_oject • The 1975.

and

Aeronautics:

,4 Chronolog)

o]

Science,

Technology,

and

Policy,

series

o[

annual

volumes

con-

from 1961, with an from NTIS; recent

earlier summary volume, Aeronautics volumes from GPO. Ast_onautif_ and

and Astronautics, Aeronautics, 1973,

1915-1960. Early volumes NASA SP-'t018, to appear

Mercury: Gemini

A (.hronologv. Technolog_ _ aml

NASA

S1'-4001,

1963, NTIS. A Chronology, NASA SI' 4002, 1969, (,PO.

Operatio,ls:

Apollo

Spacecra]t:

A Chro_ology 7, 1962, September JI'I.:'HR-2, NASA NASA SP-4009 I, 1969, (;PO. 30, 1964, NASA SP-4I)09 II, 1971, HHN-130, NTIS. May 1973, NTIS. 1973, GPO.

Volume Volume • Project I Skylab:

I, Through Navemt,er II, .\'ovembcr 8, 19o2 Raltger: Prelimbtary A Chronology, ('hronolog'¢,

* GPO: D.C. 20402. • * NTIS:

Titles Titles

may may

I)e ordere(l I)c ordered

from from

the

Superintendent Techlfical

of

I)ocmneuts,

(;overnment Springlield,

Printing Va.

Office, 22151.

Washington,

National

lnformati(m

SCIS'icu,

"=: U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1976 0--576-897

NATIONAL ALRONAUTICS A N D SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON. D.C. 2 0 5 4 6 O F F I C I A L DUSINE66
PENALTY

m0STAC.L AND FEES PAID NATIONAL AEIONAUTICS A N 0 SPACE AOYINISTRATION as I

101 PRIYATL

USE S ~ O O

SPECIAL FOURTH-CLASS RATE BOOK

@I
UUMIlL
(Bectloo

P08TMABTER :

If Undeliverable
Pontnl M n n u a l )

168

Do N o t R e t u r n

' T h e aeronautical and rpace activities of ,he Unbed Strrtes shall be to the expanrion of human knowlconducted s as to contribute o edge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space. T h e Administration shall provide for the widest practicable and appropiate d i r s e m i ~ i a of information concerning its activities and the results thereof." -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS SPACEACT OF 1958 AND

...

NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS
TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific and technical information considered important, complete, and a lasting contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL NOTES: Information less broad in scope bur nevertheless of importance as a contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: Information receiving limited distribution because of preliminary data, security classification, or other reasons. Also includes conference proceedings with either limited or unlimited distribution. CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Scientific and technical information generated under a NASA contract or grant and considered an important contribution to existing knowledge. TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information published in a foreign language considered to merit NASA distribution in English.
SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information derived from or of value to NASA activities. Publications include final reports of major projects, monographs, data compilations, handbooks, sourcebooks, and specid bibliographies.

TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION PUBLICATIONS: Information on technology used by NASA that may be of particular interest in commercial and other.non-aerospace applications. Publications include Tech Briefs, Technology Utilization Reports and Technology Surveys.

Details on the availability of there publications may be obtained from:

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION OFFICE

NATIONAL

AERONAUTICS

AND

SPACE A D M I N I S T R A T I O N

Washington, D.C. 20546

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful