F-1 engine Credit - © Mark Wade Media Gallery

Lunar landing booster. Design frozen before landing mode selected; could be used for either EOR or LOR methods. Ended up with same payload capability as Nova. Size dictated by ceiling height at Michoud factory selected for first stage manufacture.

Manufacturer: Von Braun. Launches: 13. Success Rate: 100.00%. First Launch Date: 1967-11-09. Last Launch Date: 1973-05-14. Launch data is: complete. LEO Payload: 118,000 kg (260,000 lb). to: 185 km Orbit. at: 28.00 degrees. Payload: 47,000 kg (103,000 lb). to a: Translunar trajectory. Associated Spacecraft: Apollo CSM, Apollo LM, Apollo LTA, PFS, Skylab, Apollo 120 in Telescope, Apollo R-3, MORL Mars Flyby, Saturn II Stage Wet Workshop, Apollo M-1, Gemini Lunar Surface Survival Shelter, Apollo LASS. Other Associated Spacecraft: Gemini Lunar Surface Rescue Spacecraft, Apollo W-1, S-IVB Advanced Station, LORL, Gemini LORV, LESA Shelter, Apollo ALSEP, Skylab Lunar Orbit Station, Apollo MSS, Apollo LM Truck, Apollo LRM, Space Base, Apollo LM Shelter, Apollo LM Taxi, Apollo ULS. Further Associated Spacecraft: Apollo LMSS, Apollo LRV, Saturn V Rotating Stations, Apollo LMAL, Apollo Lunar Base, Voyager 1973, . Liftoff Thrust: 33,737.900 kN (7,584,582 lbf). Total Mass: 3,038,500 kg (6,698,700 lb). Core Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft). Total Length: 102.00 m (334.00 ft). Development Cost $: 7,439.600 million. in: 1966 average dollars. Launch Price $: 431.000 million. in: 1967 price dollars.

Three-stage lunar landing booster.

LEO Payload: 118,000 kg (260,000 lb). to: 185 km Orbit. at: 28.00 degrees. Payload: 47,000 kg (103,000 lb). to a: Translunar trajectory. Liftoff Thrust: 33,737.900 kN (7,584,582 lbf). Total Mass: 3,038,500 kg (6,698,700 lb). Core Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft). Total Length: 102.00 m (334.00 ft).

Two stage version of Saturn V, consisting of 1 x Saturn S-IC + 1 x Saturn S-II, used to launch Skylab.

LEO Payload: 75,000 kg (165,000 lb). Apogee: 500 km (310 mi). Liftoff Thrust: 34,030.000 kN (7,650,240 lbf). Total Mass: 2,822,000 kg (6,221,000 lb). Core Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft). Total Length: 104.80 m (343.80 ft).

• Stage Number: 1. 1 x Stage: Saturn IC. Gross Mass: 2,286,217 kg (5,040,245 lb). Empty Mass: 135,218 kg (298,104 lb). Thrust (vac): 38,703.160 kN (8,700,816 lbf). Isp: 304 sec. Burn time: 161 sec. Isp(sl): 265 sec. Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft). Span: 19.00 m (62.00 ft). Length: 42.06 m (137.99 ft). Propellants: Lox/Kerosene. No Engines: 5. Engine: F-1.

• Stage Number: 2. 1 x Stage: Saturn II. Gross Mass: 490,778 kg (1,081,980 lb). Empty Mass: 39,048 kg (86,086 lb). Thrust (vac): 5,165.790 kN (1,161,316 lbf). Isp: 421 sec. Burn time: 390 sec. Isp(sl): 200 sec. Diameter: 10.06 m (33.00 ft). Span: 10.06 m (33.00 ft). Length: 24.84 m (81.49 ft). Propellants: Lox/LH2. No Engines: 5. Engine: J-2.

• Stage Number: 3. 1 x Stage: Saturn IVB (S-V). Gross Mass: 119,900 kg (264,300 lb). Empty Mass: 13,300 kg (29,300 lb). Thrust (vac): 1,031.600 kN (231,913 lbf). Isp: 421 sec. Burn time: 475 sec. Isp(sl): 200 sec. Diameter: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Span: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Length: 17.80 m (58.30 ft). Propellants: Lox/LH2. No Engines: 1. Engine: J-2. Saturn V version of S-IVB stage

1953 March - Launch Vehicle: Saturn V.

• Research on 1 million lb thrust engine begun. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Research on 1-million-pound thrust plus engine begun at Rocketdyne, the feasibility of which was established in March 1955. References: 17, 27.

• Feasibility of million-pound-thrust liquid-fueled rocket engine established Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The feasibility of a million-pound-thrust liquid-fueled rocket engine established by the Rocketdyne Division of North American Aviation, Inc. References: 17, 27.

• First test of 400,000+ lb thrust engine. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. First U.S.-built complete liquid-rocket engine having a thrust in excess of 400,000 pounds was fired for the first time at Santa Susana, Calif. References: 17, 27.

• Million pound thrust test stand activiated. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Rocket test stand capable of testing engines to 1 million pounds thrust activated at Edwards AFB, which became operational in March 1957. References: 17, 27.

• Preliminary design begun on F-1 - 1.5 million pounds thrust rocket engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The U.S. Air Force contracted with NAA, Rocketdyne Division, for preliminary design of a single-chamber, kerosene and liquid-oxygen rocket engine capable of 1 to 1.5 million pounds of thrust. During the last week in July, Rocketdyne was awarded the contract to develop this engine, designated the F-1.References: 16.

• Rocketdyne gets F-1 engine contract. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Rocketdyne Division of North American announced an Air Force contract for a 1-million-pound thrust engine. References: 17, 27.

• F-1 engine gets highest priority. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA requested DX priority for 1.5-million-pound-thrust F-1 engine project and Project Mercury. References: 17, 27.

• Rocketdyne gets contract to develop F-1 engine. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA awarded contract to Rocketdyne of North American to build single-chamber 1.5-million-pound-thrust rocket engine. References: 17, 27.

• 1 million pound engine demonstrated. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Rocketdyne demonstrated 1-million-pound-thrust liquid-propellant rocket combustion chamber at full power. References: 17, 27.

• Contract with Rocketdyne for development of the F-1 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA signed a definitive contract with Rocketdyne Division, NAA, for $102 million covering the design and development of a single-chamber, liquid-propellant rocket engine in the 1- to l.5-million-pound-thrust class (the F-1, to be used in the Nova superbooster concept). NASA had announced the selection of Rocketdyne on December 12.References: 16.

• Thrust chamber of the Saturn F-1 engine successfully static-fired Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The thrust chamber of the F-1 engine was successfully static-fired at the Santa Susana Air Force-Rocketdyne Propulsion Laboratory in California. More than one million pounds of thrust were produced, the greatest amount attained to that time in the United States.References: 16.

• Study and research areas for manned flight to and from the moon Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Mercury. Members of the Research Steering Committee determined the study and research areas which would require emphasis for manned flight to and from the moon and for intermediate flight steps: Additional Details: Study and research areas for manned flight to and from the moon(15619). References: 16.

• Static firing of the first Saturn planned for early 1960 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) directed the Army Ordnance Missile Command to proceed with the static firing of the first Saturn vehicle, the test booster SA-T, in early calendar year 1960 in accordance with the $70 million program and not to accelerate for a January 1960 firing. ARPA asked to be informed of the scheduled firing date.References: 16.

• Study group to recommend upper-stage configurations Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. While awaiting the formal transfer of the Saturn program, NASA formed a study group to recommend upper-stage configurations. Membership was to include the DOD Director of Defense Research and Engineering and personnel from NASA, Advanced Research Projects Agency, Army Ballistic Missile Agency, and the Air Force. This group was later known both as the Saturn Vehicle Team and the Silverstein Committee (for Abe Silverstein, Chairman).References: 16.

• NASA approval of Saturn development program Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA accepted the recommendations of the Saturn Vehicle Evaluation Committee Silverstein Committee on the Saturn C-1 configuration and on a long-range Saturn program. A research and development plan of ten vehicles was approved. The C-1 configuration would include the S-1 stage (eight H-1 engines clustered, producing 1.5 million pounds of thrust), the S-IV stage (four engines producing 80,000 pounds of thrust), and the S-V stage two engines producing 40,000 pounds of thrust.References: 16.

• Super booster program to be accelerated Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. President Dwight D. Eisenhower directed NASA Administrator T. Keith Glennan "to make a study, to be completed at the earliest date practicable, of the possible need for additional funds for the balance of FY 1960 and for FY 1961 to accelerate the super booster program for which your agency recently was given technical and management responsibility."References: 16.

• Lunar Program Based on Saturn Systems Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Class: Manned. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. Study issued by Huntsville of lunar landing alternatives using Saturn systems. Huntsville transferred from Army to NASA. Vought study on modular approach to lunar landing. Internally NASA decides on lunar landing as next objective after Mercury. References: 26, 27.

• Selection of Rocketdyne for the J-2 rocket engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA selected Rocketdyne Division of NAA to develop the J-2, a 200,000-pound-thrust rocket engine, burning liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. (A decision was later made to use the J-2 in the upper stages of the Saturn C-5.) References: 16.

• Boilerplate Apollo spacecraft to be used on Saturn C-1 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. H. Kurt Strass of STG and John H. Disher of NASA Headquarters proposed that boilerplate Apollo spacecraft be used in some of the forthcoming Saturn C-1 hunches. (Boilerplates are research and development vehicles which simulate production spacecraft in size, shape, structure, mass, and center of gravity.) These flight tests would provide needed experience with Apollo systems and utilize the Saturn boosters effectively. Four or five such tests were projected. On October 5, agreement was reached between members of Marshall Space Flight Center and STG on tentative Saturn vehicle assignments and flight plans.References: 16.

• House recommends a high priority manned expedition to the moon Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The House Committee on Science and Astronautics declared: "A high priority program should be undertaken to place a manned expedition on the moon in this decade. A firm plan with this goal in view should be drawn up and submitted to the Congress by NASA. Such a plan, however, should be completely integrated with other goals, to minimize total costs. The modular concept deserves close study. Particular attention should be paid immediately to long lead-time phases of such a program." The Committee also recommended that development of the F-1 engine be expedited in expectation of the Nova launch vehicle, that there be more research on nuclear engines and less conventional engines before freezing the Nova concept, and that the Orion project be turned over to NASA. It was the view of the Committee that "NASA's 10-year program is a good program, as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. Furthermore the space program is not being pushed with sufficient energy."References: 16.

• Contract for development of the Saturn J-2 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. A NASA contract for approximately $44 million was signed by Rocketdyne Division of NAA for the development of the J-2 engine. References: 16.

• Discussion of Saturn and Apollo guidance integration Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Members of STG visited the Marshall Space Flight Center to discuss possible Saturn and Apollo guidance integration and potential utilization of Apollo onboard propulsion to provide a reserve capability. Agreement was reached on tentative Saturn vehicle assignments on abort study and lunar entry simulation; on the use of the Saturn guidance system; and on future preparations of tentative flight plans for Saturns SA-6, 8, 9, and 10.References: 16.

• First static test of prototype F-1 thrust chamber Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Rocketdyne Division's first static test of a prototype thrust chamber for the F-1 engine achieved a thrust of 1.550 million pounds in a few seconds at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. References: 16.

• 1,640 million pounds of thrust achieved in static- firing of the F-1 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Marshall Space Flight Center announced that 1.640 million pounds of thrust was achieved in a static- firing of the F-1 engine thrust chamber at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. This was a record thrust for a single chamber. References: 16.

• Seamans established the permanent Saturn Program Requirements Committee Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., established the permanent Saturn Program Requirements Committee. Members were William A. Fleming, Chairman; John L. Sloop, Deputy Chairman; Richard B. Canright; John H. Disher; Eldon W. Hall; A. M. Mayo; and Addison M. Rothrock, all of NASA Headquarters. The Committee would review on a continuing basis the mission planning for the utilization of the Saturn and correlate such planning with the Saturn development and procurement plans.References: 16.

• Reevaluation of the Saturn C-2 to support circumlunar missions Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Marshall Space Flight Center began reevaluation of the Saturn C-2 configuration capability to support circumlunar missions. Results showed that a Saturn vehicle of even greater performance would be desirable. References: 16.

• NASA and DoD to study development of large launch vehicles Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The NASA Administrator and the Secretary of Defense concluded an agreement to study development of large launch vehicles for the national space program. For this purpose, the DOD-NASA Large Launch Vehicle Planning Group was created, reporting to the Associate Administrator of NASA and to the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Deputy Director of Defense Research and Engineering).References: 16.

• F-1 engine begins static testing. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced that a complete F-1 engine had begun a series of static test firings at Edwards Rocket Test Center, Calif. References: 18, 27.

• Large Launch Vehicle Planning Group Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Large Launch Vehicle Planning Group, established on July 7, 1961, began its formal existence with seven DOD and seven NASA members and alternates. Additional Details: Large Launch Vehicle Planning Group(15844). References: 16.

• NASA-DOD report on launch sites for Apollo Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Phase I of a joint NASA-DOD report on facilities and resources required at launch sites to support the manned lunar landing program was submitted to Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., by Kurt H. Debus, Director, Launch Operations Directorate, and Maj. Gen. Leighton I. Davis, Commander of the Air Force Missile Test Center. The report, requested by Seamans on June 23, was based on the use of Nova- class launch vehicles for the manned lunar landing in a direct ascent mode, with the Saturn C-3 in supporting missions. Eight launch sites were considered: Cape Canaveral (on-shore); Cape Canaveral (off- shore); Mayaguana Island (Atlantic Missile Range downrange); Cumberland Island, Ga.; Brownsville, Tex.; White Sands Missile Range, N. Mex.; Christmas Island, Pacific Ocean; and South Point, Hawaii. On the basis of minimum cost and use of existing national resources, and taking into consideration the stringent time schedule, White Sands Missile Range and Cape Canaveral (on-shore) were favored. White Sands presented serious limitations on launch azimuths because of first-stage impact hazards on populated areas.References: 16.

• Apollo launch site study begun. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA headquarters announced that it was making a world-wide study of possible launching sites for Moon vehicles; the size, power, noise, and possible hazards of Saturn-Nova type rockets requiring greater isolation for public safety than presently available.References: 18, 27.

• First F-1 firing. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. F-1 rocket engine tested in first of firing series of the complete flight system. References: 18, 27.

• Golovin Committee evaluates three rendezvous methods for manned lunar landing Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. The Large Launch Vehicle Planning Group (Golovin Committee) notified the Marshal! Space Flight Center (MSFC), Langley Research Center, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) that the Group was planning to undertake a comparative evaluation of three types of rendezvous operations and direct flight for manned lunar landing. Rendezvous methods were earth orbit, lunar orbit, and lunar surface. MSFC was requested to study earth orbit rendezvous, Langley to study lunar orbit rendezvous, and JPL to study lunar surface rendezvous. The NASA Office of Launch Vehicle Programs would provide similar information on direct ascent.Additional Details: Golovin Committee evaluates three rendezvous methods for manned lunar landing(15863). References: 16.

• Merritt Island selected for Saturn V launch site. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. After considering Cape Canaveral, Cape Canaveral-Merritt Island, Mayaguana-Bahamas, Cumberland-Georgia, Brownville-Texas, Christmas Island, Hawaii, and White Sands, Merritt Island selected as launch site for manned lunar flights and other missions requiring Saturn and Nova class vehicles. Based upon national space goals announced by the President in May, NASA plans called for acquisition of 80,000 acres north and west of AFMTC, to be administered by the USAF as agent for NASA and as a part of the Atlantic Missile Range.Additional Details: Merritt Island selected for Saturn V launch site.(6480). References: 18, 27.

• Purchase of land for Saturn V launch facilities. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Authorization for NASA to acquire necessary land for additional launch facilities at Cape Canaveral was approved by the Senate. References: 18, 27.

• Selection of Saturn first stage assembly plant Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Class: Manned. NASA announced that the government-owned Michoud Ordnance Plant near New Orleans, La., would be the site for fabrication and assembly of the Saturn C-3 first stage as well as larger vehicles. Finalists were two government-owned plants in St. Louis and New Orleans. The height of the factory roof at Michoud meant that an 8 x F-1 engined vehicle could not be built; 4 or 5 engines would have to be the maximum.References: 26, 27.

• North American selected to build S-II stage. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. NASA selected NAA to develop the second stage (S-II) for the advanced Saturn launch vehicle. The cost, including development of at least ten vehicles, would total about $140 million. The S-II configuration provided for four J-2 liquid-oxygen - liquid-hydrogen engines, each delivering 200,000 pounds of thrust.References: 18, 27.

• 36 companies invited to bid on the first stage of advanced Saturn Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA invited 36 companies to bid on a contract to produce the first stage of the advanced Saturn launch vehicle. Representatives of interested companies would attend a pre-proposal conference in New Orleans, La., on September 26. Bids were to be submitted by October 16 and NASA would then select the contractor, probably in November.References: 16.

• S-IC fabrication plant manager named. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Dr. George N. Constan of Marshall Space Flight Center named as acting manager of the new NASA Saturn fabrication plant near New Orleans by Director von Braun of Marshall Space Flight Center. References: 18, 27.

• Bidders conference for S-IC stage. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. NASA bidders conference on a contract to produce the booster (S-I) stage of the Saturn vehicle was held at the Municipal Auditorium, New Orleans. References: 18, 27.

• S- IVB stage to have a single J-2 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The MSFC-STG Space Vehicle Board at NASA Headquarters discussed the S- IVB stage, which would be modified by the Douglas Aircraft Company to replace the six LR-115 engines with a single J-2 engine. Funds of $500,000 were allocated for this study to be completed in March 1962.Additional Details: S- IVB stage to have a single J-2 engine(15881). References: 16.

• Saturn static test stand site selected. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA selected Pearl River site in southwestern Mississippi, 35 miles from Michoud plant in New Orleans, for static test facility for Saturn and Nova-class vehicles, completed facility to operate under direction of Marshall Space Flight Center. References: 18, 27.

• Saturn S-II to use five J-2 engines Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Marshall Space Flight Center directed NAA to redesign the advanced Saturn second stage (S-II) to incorporate five rather than four J-2 engines, to provide a million pounds of thrust. References: 16.

• Second decision on launch vehicles Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Class: Manned. Golovin Committe studies launch vehicles through summer, but found the issue to be completely entertwined with mode (earth-orbit, lunar-orbit, lunar-surface rendezvous or direct flight. Two factions: large solids for direct flight; all-chemical with 4 or 5 F-1's in first stage for rendezvous options. In the end Webb and McNamara ordered development of C-4 and as a backup, in case of failure of F-1 in development, build of 6.1 m+ solid rocket motors by USAF.References: 26, 27.

• Emergency switchover from Saturn to Apollo guidance as backup discussed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. On a visit to Marshall Space Flight Center by MIT Instrumentation Laboratory representatives, the possibility was discussed of emergency switchover from Saturn to Apollo guidance systems as backup for launch vehicle guidance. References: 16.

• Rosen working group on launch vehicles Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., commented to D. Brainerd Holmes, Director, Office of Manned Space Flight, on the report of the Rosen working group on launch vehicles, which had been submitted on November 20. Seamans expressed himself as essentially in accord with the group's recommendations.References: 16.

• Boeing named contractor for Saturn C-5 first stage (S-IC) Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. NASA announced that The Boeing Company had been selected for negotiations as a possible prime contractor for the first stage (S-IC) of the advanced Saturn launch vehicle. The S-IC stage, powered by five F-1 engines, would be 35 feet in diameter and about 140 feet high. The $300-million contract, to run through 1966, called for the development, construction, and testing of 24 flight stages and one ground test stage. The booster would be assembled at the NASA Michoud Operations Plant near New Orleans, La., under the direction of the Marshall Space Flight Center.References: 16.

• Douglas named contractor for Saturn S-IVB stage Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. NASA announced that Douglas Aircraft had been selected for negotiation of a contract to modify the Saturn S-IV stage by installing a single 200,000-pound-thrust, Rocketdyne J-2 liquid-hydrogen/liquid-oxygen engine instead of six 15,000-pound-thrust P. & W. hydrogen/oxygen engines. Known as S-IVB, this modified stage will be used in advanced Saturn configurations for manned circumlunar Apollo missions.References: 18, 27.

• Saturn C-5 launch vehicle configuration selected Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. Rosen Committee studies in November and December indicated that the most flexible choice for Apollo was the Saturn C-4, with two required for the earth orbit rendezvous approach or one for the lunar orbit rendezvous mission, with a smaller landed payload. The panel rejected solid motors again, but Rosen himself still pushed for Nova. An extra F-1 engine was 'slid in' for insurance, resulting in the Saturn C-5 configuration. The Manned Space Flight Management Council decided at its first meeting that the Saturn C-5 launch vehicle would have a first stage configuration of five F-1 engines and a second stage configuration of five J-2 engines. The third stage would be the S-IVB with one J-2 engine. It recommended that the contractor for stage integration of the Saturn C-1 be Chrysler Corporation and that the contractor for stage integration of the Saturn C-5 be The Boeing Company. Contractor work on the Saturn C-5 should proceed immediately to provide a complete design study and a detailed development plan before letting final contracts and assigning large numbers of contractor personnel to Marshall Space Flight Center or Michoud.References: 16.

• Three-man Apollo spacecraft, Saturn C-5 launch vehicle announced Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. NASA made public the drawings of the three-man Apollo spacecraft to be used in the lunar landing development program, On January 9, NASA announced its decision that the Saturn C-5 would be the lunar launch vehicle. References: 16.

• Technical aspects of earth orbit rendezvous meeting Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Gemini. A meeting on the technical aspects of earth orbit rendezvous was held at NASA Headquarters. Representatives from various NASA offices attended: Arthur L. Rudolph, Paul J. DeFries, Fred L. Digesu, Ludie G. Richard, John W. Hardin, Jr., Ernst D. Geissler, and Wilson B. Schramm of Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC); James T. Rose of MSC; Friedrich O. Vonbun, Joseph W. Siry, and James J. Donegan of Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC); Douglas R. Lord, James E. O'Neill, Richard J. Hayes, Warren J. North, and Daniel D. McKee of the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight (OMSF). Joseph F. Shea, Deputy Director for Systems, OMSF, who had called the meeting, defined in general terms the goal of the meeting: to achieve agreement on the approach to be used in developing the earth orbit rendezvous technique. After two days of discussions and presentations, the Group approved conclusions and recommendations:
  • Gemini rendezvous operations could and must provide substantial experience with rendezvous techniques pertinent to Apollo.
  • Incorporation of the Saturn guidance equipment in a scaled-down docking module for the Agenas in the Gemini program was not required.
  • Complete development of the technique and equipment for Apollo rendezvous and docking should be required before the availability of the Saturn C-5 launch vehicle.
  • Full-scale docking equipment could profitably be developed by three- dimensional ground simulations. MSFC would prepare an outline of such a program.
  • The Apollo rendezvous technique and actual hardware could be flight- tested with the Saturn C-1 launch vehicle. MSFC would prepare a proposed flight test program.
  • The choice of connecting or tanking modes must be made in the near future. The MSFC Orbital Operations Study program should be used to provide data to make this decision.
  • The rendezvous technique which evolved from this meeting would place heavy requirements on the ground tracking network. GSFC should provide data relating the impact of detailed trajectory considerations to ground tracking station requirements.
  (This meeting was part of a continuing effort to select the lunar mission mode.)References: 16.

• Initial contract with Boeing leading to the first stage S-IC of the Saturn C-5 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA signed a contract with The Boeing Company for indoctrination, familiarization, and planning, expected to lead to a follow-on contract for design, development, manufacture, test, and launch operations of the first stage S-IC of the Saturn C-5 launch vehicle.References: 16.

• Manned Space Flight Management Council meeting Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The preparation of schedules based on the NASA Fiscal Year 1962 budget (including the proposed supplemental appropriation), the Fiscal Year 1963 budget as submitted to Congress, and Fiscal Year 1964 and subsequent funding was discussed at the Manned Space Flight Management Council meeting. Program assumptions as presented by Wernher von Braun, Director, Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), were approved for use in preparation of the schedules :
  • The Saturn C-5 launch vehicle and earth orbital rendezvous were considered the primary mode for the lunar landing.
  • Full-scale orbit operations development, including ground testing, would be accomplished, using S-I boosters and orbital upper stages. This development would be planned so that upper stages and rendezvous techniques would be developed by the time the C-5 was operational. Planning would consider both connecting and fueling modes.
  • The development of a two-stage Nova with liquid-propellant engines in both stages would be activated as early as realistically feasible. This would provide an alternative, direct flight mode carrying the same orbital launch vehicle as developed for the C-5.
  • There would be no solid-propellant vehicle development.
  Charles W. Frick of MSC and Hans H. Maus of MSFC would coordinate schedule assumptions between the Centers.References: 16.

• Saturn C-5 first launch scheduled in the last quarter of 1965 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Marshall Space Flight Center's latest schedule on the Saturn C-5 called for the first launch in the last quarter of 1965 and the first manned launch in the last quarter of 1967. If the C-5 could be man-rated on the eighth research and development flight in the second quarter of 1967, the spacecraft lead time would be substantially reduced.References: 16.

• Preliminary Apollo program schedules Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. A small group within the MSC Apollo Spacecraft Project Office developed a preliminary program schedule for three approaches to the lunar landing mission: earth orbit rendezvous, direct ascent, and lunar orbit rendezvous. The exercise established a number of ground rules :
  • Establish realistic schedules that would "second guess" failures but provide for exploitation of early success.
  • Schedule circumlunar, lunar orbit, and lunar landing missions at the earliest realistic dates.
  • Complete the flight development of spacecraft modules and operational techniques, using the Saturn C-1 and C-1B launch vehicles, prior to the time at which a "man-rated" C-5 launch vehicle would become available.
  • Develop the spacecraft operational techniques in "buildup" missions that would progress generally from the simple to the complex.
  • Use the spacecraft crew at the earliest time and to the maximum extent, commensurate with safety considerations, in the development of the spacecraft and its subsystems.
  The exercise also provided a basis for proceeding with the development of definitive schedules and a program plan.References: 16.

• Meeting at NASA Headquarters reviews the lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) technique for Project Apollo Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM, Apollo Lunar Landing. A meeting to review the lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) technique as a possible mission mode for Project Apollo was held at NASA Headquarters. Representatives from various NASA offices attended: Joseph F. Shea, Eldon W. Hall, William A. Lee, Douglas R. Lord, James E. O'Neill, James Turnock, Richard J. Hayes, Richard C. Henry, and Melvyn Savage of NASA Headquarters; Friedrich O. Vonbun of Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC); Harris M. Schurmeier of Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Arthur V. Zimmeman of Lewis Research Center; Jack Funk, Charles W. Mathews, Owen E. Maynard, and William F. Rector of MSC; Paul J. DeFries, Ernst D. Geissler, and Helmut J. Horn of Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC); Clinton E. Brown, John C. Houbolt, and William H. Michael, Jr., of Langley Research Center; and Merrill H. Mead of Ames Research Center. Each phase of the LOR mission was discussed separately.

  The launch vehicle required was a single Saturn C-5, consisting of the S-IC, S-II, and S-IVB stages. To provide a maximum launch window, a low earth parking orbit was recommended. For greater reliability, the two-stage-to-orbit technique was recommended rather than requiring reignition of the S-IVB to escape from parking orbit.

  The current concepts of the Apollo command and service modules would not be altered. The lunar excursion vehicle (LEV), under intensive study in 1961, would be aft of the service module and in front of the S-IVB stage. For crew safety, an escape tower would be used during launch. Access to the LEV would be provided while the entire vehicle was on the launch pad.

  Both Apollo and Saturn guidance and control systems would be operating during the launch phase. The Saturn guidance and control system in the S-IVB would be "primary" for injection into the earth parking orbit and from earth orbit to escape. Provisions for takeover of the Saturn guidance and control system should be provided in the command module. Ground tracking was necessary during launch and establishment of the parking orbit, MSFC and GSFC would study the altitude and type of low earth orbit.

  The LEV would be moved in front of the command module "early" in the translunar trajectory. After the S-IVB was staged off the spacecraft following injection into the translunar trajectory, the service module would be used for midcourse corrections. Current plans were for five such corrections. If possible, a symmetric configuration along the vertical center line of the vehicle would be considered for the LEV. Ingress to the LEV from the command module should be possible during the translunar phase. The LEV would have a pressurized cabin capability during the translunar phase. A "hard dock" mechanism was considered, possibly using the support structure needed for the launch escape tower. The mechanism for relocation of the LEV to the top of the command module required further study. Two possibilities were discussed: mechanical linkage and rotating the command module by use of the attitude control system. The S-IVB could be used to stabilize the LEV during this maneuver.

  The service module propulsion would be used to decelerate the spacecraft into a lunar orbit. Selection of the altitude and type of lunar orbit needed more study, although a 100-nautical-mile orbit seemed desirable for abort considerations.

  The LEV would have a "point" landing (±½ mile) capability. The landing site, selected before liftoff, would previously have been examined by unmanned instrumented spacecraft. It was agreed that the LEV would have redundant guidance and control capability for each phase of the lunar maneuvers. Two types of LEV guidance and control systems were recommended for further analysis. These were an automatic system employing an inertial platform plus radio aids and a manually controlled system which could be used if the automatic system failed or as a primary system.

  The service module would provide the prime propulsion for establishing the entire spacecraft in lunar orbit and for escape from the lunar orbit to earth trajectory. The LEV propulsion system was discussed and the general consensus was that this area would require further study. It was agreed that the propulsion system should have a hover capability near the lunar surface but that this requirement also needed more study.

  It was recommended that two men be in the LEV, which would descend to the lunar surface, and that both men should be able to leave the LEV at the same time. It was agreed that the LEV should have a pressurized cabin which would have the capability for one week's operation, even though a normal LOR mission would be 24 hours. The question of lunar stay time was discussed and it was agreed that Langley should continue to analyze the situation. Requirements for sterilization procedures were discussed and referred for further study. The time for lunar landing was not resolved.

  In the discussion of rendezvous requirements, it was agreed that two systems be studied, one automatic and one providing for a degree of manual capability. A line of sight between the LEV and the orbiting spacecraft should exist before lunar takeoff. A question about hard-docking or soft-docking technique brought up the possibility of keeping the LEV attached to the spacecraft during the transearth phase. This procedure would provide some command module subsystem redundancy.

  Direct link communications from earth to the LEV and from earth to the spacecraft, except when it was in the shadow of the moon, was recommended. Voice communications should be provided from the earth to the lunar surface and the possibility of television coverage would be considered.

  A number of problems associated with the proposed mission plan were outlined for NASA Center investigation. Work on most of the problems was already under way and the needed information was expected to be compiled in about one month.

  (This meeting, like the one held February 13-15, was part of a continuing effort to select the lunar mission mode).References: 16.

• Rosen recommends Saturn C-5 design and lunar orbit rendezvous Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM, Apollo Lunar Landing. Milton W. Rosen, NASA Office of Manned Space Flight Director of Launch Vehicles and Propulsion, recommended that the S-IVB stage be designed specifically as the third stage of the Saturn C-5 and that the C-5 be designed specifically for the manned lunar landing using the lunar orbit rendezvous technique. The S-IVB stage would inject the spacecraft into a parking orbit and would be restarted in space to place the lunar mission payload into a translunar trajectory. Rosen also recommended that the S- IVB stage be used as a flight test vehicle to exercise the command module (CM), service module (SM), and lunar excursion module (LEM) (previously referred to as the lunar excursion vehicle (LEV)) in earth orbit missions. The Saturn C-1 vehicle, in combination with the CM, SM, LEM, and S-IVB stage, would be used on the most realistic mission simulation possible. This combination would also permit the most nearly complete operational mating of the CM, SM, LEM, and S-IVB prior to actual mission flight.References: 16.

• Saturn F-1 engine first fired at full power Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The F-1 engine was first fired at full power more than 1.5 million pounds of thrust) for 2.5 minutes at Edwards Rocket Site, Calif. References: 16.

• Mobile launcher concept for the Saturn C-5 approved Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Manned Space Flight Management Council approved the mobile launcher concept for the Saturn C-5 at Launch Complex 39, Merritt Island, Fla. References: 16.

• von Braun recommends lunar orbit rendezvous mode for Apollo Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM, Apollo Lunar Landing. Wernher von Braun, Director, Marshall Space Flight Center, recommended to the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight that the lunar orbit rendezvous mode be adopted for the lunar landing mission. He also recommended the development of an unmanned, fully automatic, one-way Saturn C-5 logistics vehicle in support of the lunar expedition; the acceleration of the Saturn C-1B program; the development of high-energy propulsion systems as a backup for the service module and possibly the lunar excursion module; and further development of the F-1 and J-2 engines to increase thrust or specific impulse.References: 16.

• Selection of ablative material for Apollo heatshield Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth reported to the Manned Space Flight Management Council that the selection of the ablative material for the Apollo spacecraft heatshield would be made by September 1. The leading contender for the forebody ablative material was an epoxy resin with silica fibers for improving char strength and phenolic microballoons for reducing density.

  In addition, Gilruth noted that a reevaluation of the Saturn C-1 and C-1B launch capabilities appeared to indicate that neither vehicle would be able to test the complete Apollo spacecraft configuration, including the lunar excursion module. Complete spacecraft qualification would require the use of the Saturn C-5.References: 16.

• Lunar orbit rendezvous selected as mode for the Apollo lunar landing mission Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. After an extended discussion, the Manned Space Flight Management Council unanimously decided:
  • Lunar orbit rendezvous, using the Saturn C-5 launch vehicle, should be the mission mode for lunar exploration.
  • The development of a lunar logistics vehicle, using the Saturn C-1B or the C-5 launch vehicle, should be started and a six-month study of this development should begin immediately.
  • Time was too short and the expense too great to develop a parallel backup mode.
  • Study of the Nova vehicle should continue with the expectation that its development would follow the C-5 by two or three years.
  • The C-1B launch vehicle should be started immediately, looking toward the first two-stage flight in mid- 1965.
  • Development of a lunar excursion module should begin at once.
  These decisions were to be presented to NASA Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., NASA Deputy Administrator Hugh L. Dryden, and NASA Administrator James E. Webb for approval.References: 16.

• Study of repair of J-2 engine in space Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Five NASA scientists, dressed in pressure suits, completed an exploratory study at Rocketdyne Division of the feasibility of repairing, replacing, maintaining, and adjusting components of the J-2 rocket while in space. The scientific team also investigated the design of special maintenance tools and the effectiveness of different pressure suits in performing maintenance work in space.References: 16.

• Contracts to Rocketdyne for production of the Saturn's F-1 and J-2 rocket engines Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA awarded three contracts totaling an estimated $289 million to NAA's Rocketdyne Division for the further development and production of the F-1 and J-2 rocket engines. References: 16.

• Selection of LOR as Apollo Mission Mode Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Class: Manned. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. Following a long controversy NASA selected Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (LOR) as the fastest, cheapest, and safest mode to accomplish the Apollo mission. LOR solved the engineering problem of how to land. The EOR or Direct Landing approaches required the Apollo crew to be on their backs during the landing and having to use television or mirrors to see the lunar surface. A lunar crasher stage approach had finally emerged as lesser of evils but raised other issues. LOR allowed a purpose-built lander with a logical helicopter-like crew station layout. Studies indicated LOR would allow landing 6-8 months earlier and cost $9.2 billion vs $ 10.6 billion for EOR or direct. Direct flight by this time would not involve Nova, but a scaled-down two-man spacecraft that could be launched by the Saturn C-5.Additional Details: Selection of LOR as Apollo Mission Mode(5315). References: 26, 27.

• Apollo advanced Saturn launch complex northwest of Cape Canaveral Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced plans for an advanced Saturn launch complex to be built on 80,000 acres northwest of Cape Canaveral. The new facility, Launch Complex 39, would include a building large enough for the vertical assembly of a complete Saturn launch vehicle and Apollo spacecraft.References: 16.

• Conclusions on the selection of a lunar mission mode based on studies conducted in 1961 and 1962 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. The Office of Systems under NASA's Office of Manned Space Flight summarized its conclusions on the selection of a lunar mission mode based on NASA and industry studies conducted in 1961 and 1962:
  • There were no significant technical problems which would preclude the acceptance of any of the modes, if sufficient time and money were available. (The modes considered were the C-5 direct ascent, C-5 earth orbit rendezvous (EOR), C-5 lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR), Nova direct ascent, and solid-fuel Nova direct ascent.)
  • The C-5 direct ascent technique was characterized by high development risk and the least flexibility for further development.
  • The C-5 EOR mode had the lowest probability of mission success and the greatest development complexity.
  • The Nova direct ascent method would require the development of larger launch vehicles than the C-5. However, it would be the least complex from an operational and subsystem standpoint and had greater crew safety and initial mission capabilities than did LOR.
  • The solid-fuel Nova direct flight mode would necessitate a launch vehicle development parallel to the C-5. Such a development could not be financed under current budget allotments.
  • Only the LOR and EOR modes would make full use of the development of the C-5 launch vehicle and the command and service modules. Based on technical considerations, the LOR mode was distinctly preferable.
  • The Directors of MSC and Marshall Space Flight Center had both expressed strong preference for the LOR mode.
  On the basis of these conclusions, the LOR mode was recommended as most suitable for the manned lunar landing mission. (The studies summarized in this document were used by the Manned Space Flight Management Council in their mission mode decision on June 22.)References: 16.

• Apollo lunar bus Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Lunar Bus. NASA's Office of Manned Space Flight issued Requests for Proposals for a study of the lunar "bus" and studies for payloads which could be handled by the C-1B and C-5 launch vehicles. Contract awards were expected by September 1 and completion of the studies by December 1.References: 16.

• Two Apollo lunar logistic studies Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Lunar Bus. At a bidders' conference held at NASA Headquarters, proposals were requested from Centers and industry for two lunar logistic studies: a spacecraft "bus" concept that could be adapted for use first on the Saturn C-1B and later on the Saturn C-5 launch vehicles and a variety of payloads which could be soft-landed near manned Apollo missions. The latter study would determine how a crew's stay on the moon might be extended, how human capability for scientific investigation of the moon might be increased, and how man's mobility on the moon might be facilitated.References: 16.

• Contract to Douglas for the S-IVB stage Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA awarded a $141.1 million contract to the Douglas Aircraft Company for design, development, fabrication, and testing of the S-IVB stage, the third stage of the Saturn C-5 launch vehicle. The contract called for 11 S-IVB units, including three for ground tests, two for inert flight, and six for powered flight.References: 16.

• Structural requirements for Apollo lunar excursion module adapter established Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NAA finished structural requirements for a lunar excursion module adapter mating the 154-inch diameter service module to the 260-inch diameter S-IVB stage. References: 16.

• Plans for Apollo Mississippi Test Facility Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced that it had completed preliminary plans for the development of the $500-million Mississippi Test Facility. The first phase of a three-phase construction program would begin in 1962 and would include four test stands for static-firing the Saturn C-5 S-IC and S-II stages; about 20 support and service buildings would be built in the first phase. A water transportation system had been selected, calling for improvement of about 15 miles of river channel and construction of about 15 miles of canals at the facility.Additional Details: Plans for Apollo Mississippi Test Facility(16098). References: 16.

• Apollo spacecraft weights Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. The Apollo spacecraft weights had been apportioned within an assumed 90,000 pound limit. This weight was termed a "design allowable." A lower target weight for each module had been assigned. Achievement of the target weight would allow for increased fuel loading and therefore greater operational flexibility and mission reliability. The design allowable for the command module was 9,500 pounds; the target weight was 8,500 pounds. The service module design allowable was 11,500 pounds; the target weight was 11,000 pounds. The S-IVB adapter design allowable and target weight was 3,200 pounds. The amount of service module useful propellant was 40,300 pounds design allowable; the target weight was 37,120 pounds. The lunar excursion module design allowable was 25,500 pounds; the target weight was 24,500 pounds.References: 16.

• Tentative Apollo flight plan Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSC outlined a tentative Apollo flight plan:

  Pad abort:

  Two tests to simulate an abort on the pad.

  Saturn C-1:

  Determine launch exit environment: SA-6 with SA-8 as backup. Flight- test the emergency detection system: SA-7, SA-9, and SA-10

  Saturn C-1B:

  Four launch vehicle development flights prior to the manned flight.

  Saturn C-5:

  Six unmanned Saturn C-5 launch vehicle development flights.

  Additional Details: Tentative Apollo flight plan(16113). References: 16.

• First full-duration static firing of the Apollo J-2 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Rocketdyne Division successfully completed the first full-duration (250-seconds) static firing of the J-2 engine. References: 16.

• New numbering system for flight missions of the Apollo spacecraft Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Flight missions of the Apollo spacecraft were to be numerically identified in the future according to the following scheme :

  Pad aborts: PA-1, PA-2, etc.

  Missions using Little Joe II launch vehicles: A-001, A-002, etc. Missions using Saturn C-1 launch vehicles: A-101, A-102, etc. Missions using Saturn C-1B launch vehicles: A-201, A-202, etc. Missions using Saturn C-5 launch vehicles: A-501, A-502, etc.

  The 'A' denoted Apollo, the first digit stood for launch vehicle type or series, and the last two digits designated the order of Apollo spacecraft flights within a vehicle series.References: 16.

• Contract for production of the S-II stage signed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced the signing of a contract with the Space and Information Systems Division of NAA for the development and production of the second stage (S-II) of the Saturn C-5 launch vehicle. The $319.9-million contract, under the direction of Marshall Space Flight Center, covered the production of nine live flight stages, one inert flight stage, and several ground-test units for the advanced Saturn launch vehicle. NAA had been selected on September 11, 1961, to develop the S-II.References: 16.

• Contract for the S-IVB stage for use in the Saturn C- 1B Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced that the Douglas Aircraft Company had been awarded a $2.25million contract to modify the S-IVB stage for use in the Saturn C- 1B program. References: 16.

• Technique for separating the Apollo command and service modules during an abort Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. The technique tentatively selected by NAA for separating the command and service modules from lower stages during an abort consisted of firing four 2000-pound-thrust posigrade rockets mounted on the service module adapter. With this technique, no retrorockets would be needed on the S-IV or S-IVB stages. Normal separation from the S-IVB would be accomplished with the service module reaction control system.References: 16.

• Four firms to design the Apollo Vertical Assembly Building (VAB) Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, acting for NASA, awarded a $3.332 million contract to four New York architectural engineering firms to design the Vertical Assembly Building (VAB) at Cape Canaveral. The massive VAB became a space-age hangar, capable of housing four complete Saturn V launch vehicles and Apollo spacecraft where they could be assembled and checked out. The facility would be 158.5 meters (520 feet high) and would cost about $100 million to build. Subsequently, the Corps of Engineers selected Morrison-Knudson Company, Perini Corp., and Paul Hardeman, Inc., to construct tile VAB.References: 16.

• First test of the Apollo main parachute system Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The first test of the Apollo main parachute system, conducted at the Naval Air Facility, El Centro, Calif., foreshadowed lengthy troubles with the landing apparatus for the spacecraft. One parachute failed to inflate fully, another disreefed prematurely, and the third disreefed and inflated only after some delay. No data reduction was possible because of poor telemetry. North American was investigating.References: 16.

• Orbiting Space Station. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: LORL. Addressing an Institute of Aerospace Science meeting in New York, George von Tiesenhausen, Chief of Future Studies at NASA's Launch Operations Center, stated that by 1970 the United States would need an orbiting space station to launch and repair spacecraft. The station could also serve as a manned scientific laboratory. In describing the 91-m-long, 10-m-diameter structure, von Tiesenhausen said that the station could be launched in two sections using Saturn C-5 vehicles. The sections would be joined once in orbit.

• Simplified terminology for the Saturn booster series Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced a simplified terminology for the Saturn booster series: Saturn C-1 became "Saturn I," Saturn C-1B became "Saturn IB," and Saturn C-5 became "Saturn V." References: 16.

• Marion Power Shovel selected to build the Saturn V crawler-transport Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA selected the Marion Power Shovel Company to design and build the crawler-transport, a device to haul the Apollo space vehicle (Saturn V, complete with spacecraft and associated launch equipment) from the Vertical Assembly Building to the Merritt Island, Fla., launch pad, a distance of about 5.6 kilometers (3.5 miles). The crawler would be 39.6 meters (130 feet) long, 35 meters (115 feet) wide, and 6 meters (20 feet) high, and would weight 2.5 million kilograms (5.5 million pounds). NASA planned to buy two crawlers at a cost of $4 to 5 million each. Formal negotiations began on February 20 and the contract was signed on March 29.References: 16.

• Formal contract with Boeing for the S-IC Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced the signing of a formal contract with The Boeing Company for the S-IC (first stage) of the Saturn V launch vehicle, the largest rocket unit under development in the United States. The $418,820,967 agreement called for the development and manufacture of one ground test and ten flight articles. Preliminary development of the S-IC, which was powered by five F-1 engines, had been in progress since December 1961 under a $50 million interim contract. Booster fabrication would take place primarily at the Michoud Operations Plant, New Orleans, La., but some advance testing would be done at MSFC and the Mississippi Test Operations facility.References: 16.

• Earth parking orbit requirements Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Apollo Spacecraft Mission Trajectory Sub-Panel discussed earth parking orbit requirements for the lunar mission. The maximum number of orbits was fixed by the S-IVB's 4.5-hour duration limit. Normally, translunar injection (TLI) would be made during the second orbit. The panel directed North American to investigate the trajectory that would result from injection from the third, or contingency, orbit. The contractor's study must reckon also with the effects of a contingency TLI upon the constraints of a free return trajectory and fixed lunar landing sites.References: 16.

• Status report on the Apollo LEM landing gear design and Apollo LEM stowage height Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. At a meeting on mechanical systems at MSC, Grumman presented a status report on the LEM landing gear design and LEM stowage height. On May 9, NASA had directed the contractor to consider a more favorable lunar surface than that described in the original Statement of Work. Accordingly, Grumman recommended an envelope of LEM S-IVB clearance of 152.4 centimeters (40 inches) for a landing gear radius of 457 centimeters (180 inches). Beyond this radius, a different gear scheme was considered more suitable but would require greater clearances. The landing gear envelope study was extended for one month to establish a stowed height of the LEM above the S-IVB for adapter design.References: 16.

• Length of the spacecraft-Saturn V adapter had been increased from 8.077 meters to 8.89 meters Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. MSC informed MSFC that the length of the spacecraft-Saturn V adapter had been increased from 807.7 centimeters to 889 centimeters (318 inches to 350 inches). The LEM would be supported in the adapter from a fixed structure on the landing gear. References: 16.

• Apollo LEM landing gear design freeze Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth reported to the MSF Management Council that the LEM landing gear design freeze was now scheduled for August 31. Grumman had originally proposed a LEM configuration with five fixed legs, but LEM changes had made this concept impractical. The weight and overall height of the LEM had increased, the center of gravity had been moved upward, the LEM stability analysis had expanded to cover a wider range of landing conditions, the cruciform descent stage had been selected, and the interpretation of the lunar model had been revised. These changes necessitated a larger gear diameter than at first proposed. This, in turn, required deployable rather than fixed legs so the larger gear could be stored in the Saturn V adapter. MSC had therefore adopted a four-legged deployable gear, which was lighter and more reliable than the five-legged configuration.References: 16.

• Pregnant Guppy FAA certification Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Aero Spacelines' "Pregnant Guppy," a modified Boeing Stratocruiser, won airworthiness certification by the Federal Aviation Agency. The aircraft would be used to transport major Apollo spacecraft and launch vehicle components. References: 16.

• Grumman to design the LEM to have a thrusting capability with the Apollo CSM attached Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. North American asked MSC if Grumman was designing the LEM to have a thrusting capability with the CSM attached and, if not, did NASA intend to require the additional effort by Grumman to provide this capability. North American had been proceeding on the assumption that, should the service propulsion system (SPS) fail during translunar flight, the LEM would make any course corrections needed to ensure a safe return trajectory.Additional Details: Grumman to design the LEM to have a thrusting capability with the Apollo CSM attached(16380). References: 16.

• Preliminary configuration freeze for the Apollo LEM-adapter arrangement Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. At a LEM Mechanical Systems Meeting in Houston, Grumman and MSC agreed upon a preliminary configuration freeze for the LEM-adapter arrangement. The adapter would be a truncated cone, 876 centimeters (345 inches) long. The LEM would be mounted inside the adapter by means of the outrigger trusses on the spacecraft's landing gear. This configuration provided ample clearance for the spacecraft, both top and bottom (i.e., between the service propulsion engine bell and the instrument unit of the S-IVB).

  At this same meeting, Grumman presented a comparison of radially and laterally folded landing gears (both of 457-centimeter (180-inch) radius). The radial-fold configuration, MSC reported, promised a weight savings of 22-2 kilograms (49 pounds). MSC approved the concept, with an 876-centimeter (345-inch) adapter. Further, an adapter of that length would accommodate a larger, lateral fold gear (508 centimeters (200 inches)), if necessary. During the next several weeks, Grumman studied a variety of gear arrangements (sizes, means of deployment, stability, and even a "bending" gear). At a subsequent LEM Mechanical Systems Meeting, on November 10, Grumman presented data (design, performance, and weight) on several other four-legged gear arrangements - a 457-centimeter (180-inch), radial fold "tripod" gear (i.e., attached to the vehicle by three struts), and 406.4-centimeter (160-inch) and 457-centimeter (180-inch) cantilevered gears. As it turned out, the 406.4-centimeter (160-inch) cantilevered gear, while still meeting requirements demanded in the work statement, in several respects was more stable than the larger tripod gear. In addition to being considerably lighter, the cantilevered design offered several added advantages:

  • A reduced stowed height for the LEM from 336.5 to 313.7 centimeters (132.5 to 123.5 inches).
  • A shorter landing stroke (50.8 instead of 101.6 centimeters) (20 instead of 40 inches).
  • Better protection from irregularities (protuberances) on the surface.
  • An alleviation of the gear heating problem (caused by the descent engine's exhaust plume).
  • Simpler locking mechanisms.
  • A better capability to handle various load patterns on the landing pads.
  Because of these significant (and persuasive) factors, MSC approved Grumman's change to the 406.4- centimeter (160-inch) cantilevered arrangement as the design for the LEM's landing gear. By mid- November, MSC reported to OMSF that Grumman was pursuing the 406.4-centimeter (160-inch) cantilevered gear. Although analyses would not be completed for some weeks, the design was "shown . . . to be the lightest gear available to date. . . . Tentative estimates indicate a gear stowed height reduction of about 9" (22.9 centimeters), which will still accommodate the 180" (45.7 centimeter) cantilever or 200" (508-centimeter) lateral fold gear as growth potential." Grumman's effort continued at "firming up" the design, including folding and docking mechanisms.References: 16.

• Apollo Guidance and Performance Sub-Panel first meeting Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Guidance and Performance Sub-Panel, at its first meeting, began coordinating work at MSC and MSFC. The sub-panel outlined tasks for eac Center: MSFC would define the dispersions comprising the launch vehicle performance reserves, prepare a set of typical translunar injection errors for the Saturn V launch vehicle, and give MSC a typical Saturn V guidance computation for injection into an earth parking orbit. MSC would identify the constraints required for free-return trajectories and provide MSFC with details of the MIT guidance method. Further, the two Centers would exchange data each month showing current launch vehicle and spacecraft performance capability. (For operational vehicles, studies of other than performance capability would be based on control weights and would not reflect the current weight status.)References: 16.

• First production F-1 engine delivered Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The first production F-1 engine for the Apollo Saturn V was flown from Rocketdyne's Canoga Park, Calif., facility, where it was manufactured, to MSFC aboard Aero Spacelines' "Pregnant Guppy." References: 16.

• Major reorganization of NASA Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. NASA Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller notified the Directors of MSC, MSFC, and LOC that he intended to plan a flight schedule which would have a good chance of being met or exceeded. To this end, he directed that "all-up" spacecraft and launch vehicle tests be started as soon as possible; all Saturn IB flights would carry CSM and CSM LEM configurations; and two successful unmanned flights would be flown before a manned mission on either the Saturn IB or Saturn V.

  On November 18, Mueller further defined the flight schedule planning. Early Saturn IB flights might not be able to include the LEM, but every effort must be made to phase the LEM into the picture as early as possible. Launch vehicle payload capability must be reached as quickly as practicable. Subsystems for the early flights should be the same as those intended for lunar missions. To conserve funds, the first Saturn V vehicle would be used to obtain reentry data early in the Saturn test program.

  By December 31 the official schedule showed:

  Final Saturn I flight (SA-10):

  June 1965

  First Saturn IB flight (SA-201):

  first quarter, 1966

  First manned Saturn IB flight:

  either SA-203, third quarter of 1966, or SA-207, third quarter of 1967

  First Saturn V flight (SA-501):

  first quarter, 1967

  First manned Saturn V flight:

  either SA-503, third quarter of 1967, or SA-507, second quarter of 1968.

  References: 16.

• Contract for the construction of Saturn V LC-39A Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA awarded a $19.2 million contract to Blount Brothers Corporation and M. M. Sundt Construction Company for the construction of Pad A, part of the Saturn V Launch Complex 39 at LOC. References: 16.

• Supplemental agreement for the S-IC stage of the Saturn V launch vehicle Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Boeing Company and NASA signed a $27.4 million supplemental agreement to the contract for development, fabrication, and test of the S-IC (first) stage of the Saturn V launch vehicle. References: 16.

• An engine hard-over maximum q manual abort was impractical for the Apollo CSM on Saturn I and IB Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA and contractor studies showed that, in the event of an engine hard-over failure during maximum q, a manual abort was impractical for the Saturn I and IB, and must be carried out by automatic devices. Studies were continuing to determine whether, in a similar situation, a manual abort was possible from a Saturn V.References: 16.

• First long-duration test firing of Apollo J-2 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. At its Santa Susana facility, Rocketdyne conducted the first long-duration (508 seconds) test firing of a J-2 engine. In May 1962 the J-2's required firing time was increased from 250 to 500 seconds. References: 16.

• Space required in the S-IVB instrument unit for different Apollo LEM landing gear designs defined Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. ASPO requested that Grumman make a layout for transmittal to MSFC showing space required in the S-IVB instrument unit for 406.4- and 457-centimeter (160- and 180-inch) cantilevered gears and for 508-centimeter (200-inch)-radius lateral fold gears. References: 16.

• Douglas contracted for 10 additional Apollo S-IVB stages Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA Headquarters approved a $48,064,658 supplement to the Douglas Aircraft Company, Inc., contract for 10 additional S-IVB stages, four for the Saturn IB and six for the Saturn V missions. References: 16.

• Extension of Apollo systems to permit more extensive exploration of the lunar surface. Nation: USA. Spacecraft: Apollo LM Taxi, Apollo LM Shelter. MSFC Director Wernher von Braun described to Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager Joseph F. Shea a possible extension of Apollo systems to permit more extensive exploration of the lunar surface. Huntsville's concept, called the Integrated Lunar Exploration System, involved a dual Saturn V mission (with rendezvous in lunar orbit) to deliver an integrated lunar taxi/shelter spacecraft to the Moon's surface.Additional Details: Extension of Apollo systems to permit more extensive exploration of the lunar surface.(21895).

• Development flight tests for Apollo heatshield qualification Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSC and MSFC officials discussed development flight tests for Apollo heatshield qualification. Engineers from the Houston group outlined desired mission profiles and the number of missions needed to qualify the component. MSFC needed this information to judge its launch vehicle development test requirements against those of MSC to qualify the heatshield. By the middle of the month, Richard D. Nelson of the Mission Planning and Analysis Division (MPAD) had summarized the profiles to be flown with the Saturn V that satisfied MSC's needs. Nelson compiled data for three trajectories that could provide reentry speeds of around 11,000 meters (36,000 feet) per second, simulating lunar return. As an example, "Trajectory 1" would use two of the booster's stages to fire into a suborbital ballistic path, and then use a third stage to accelerate to the desired reentry speed.

  Flight profiles for Saturn IB missions for heatshield qualification purposes proved to be a little more difficult because "nobody would or could define the requirements or constraints, or test objectives." In other words, MSFC requirements for booster development test objectives and those of MSC for the spacecraft heatshield conflicted. So compromises had to be forged. Finally Ted H. Skopinski and other members of MPAD bundled up all of ASPO's correspondence on the subject generated from the various pertinent sources: MSFC, MSC, and contractors. From this, the Skopinski group drafted "broad term test objectives and constraints" for the first two Saturn IB flights (missions 201 and 202). Generally, these were to man-rate the launch vehicle and the CSM and to "conduct entry tests at superorbital entry velocities" (8,500 to 8,800 meters per second) (28,000 to 29,000 feet per second). Skopinski also enumerated specific test objectives covering the whole spacecraft-launch vehicle development test program. These were first distributed on March 27, and adjustments were made several times later in the year.References: 16.

• Lockheed recommendations on a scientific space station program. Nation: USA. Spacecraft: LORL. The Lockheed-California Company released details of its recommendations to MSC on a scientific space station program. The study concluded that a manned station with a crew of 24 could be orbiting the Earth in 1968. Total cost of the program including logistics spacecraft and ground support was estimated at $2.6 billion for five years' operation. Lockheed's study recommended the use of a Saturn V to launch the unmanned laboratory into orbit and then launching a manned logistics vehicle to rendezvous and dock at the station.

• Apollo missions defined Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. OMSF outlined launch vehicle development, spacecraft development, and crew performance demonstration missions, using the Saturn IB and Saturn V:
  1. Launch vehicle and unmanned CSM (at least two flights planned).
  2. CSM long-duration.
  3. CSM and LEM (two flights planned).
  4. Launch vehicle and heatshield (at least two flights).
  5. Lunar mission simulation.
  6. Lunar exploration.
  Missions (1) through (3) would use the Saturn IB and (4) through (6) the Saturn V. Additional launch vehicles and spacecraft would be provided for contingency or repeated flights. If necessary, repeat flights could provide additional crew training.References: 16.

• Contract for production of 76 F-1 engines Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSFC awarded Rocketdyne a definitive contract (valued at $158.4 million) for the production of 76 F-1 engines for the first stage of the Saturn V launch vehicle and for delivery of ground support equipment. References: 16.

• Rotating manned orbital research laboratory for a Saturn V launch vehicle. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: LORL. A study to recommend, define, and substantiate a logical approach for establishing a rotating manned orbital research laboratory for a Saturn V launch vehicle was made for MSC. The study was performed by the Lockheed-California Company, Burbank, California. It was based on the proposition that a large rotating space station would be one method by which the United States could maintain its position as a leader in space technology.Additional Details: Rotating manned orbital research laboratory for a Saturn V launch vehicle.(21902).

• IBM to build the instrument units for the Saturn launch vehicles Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA selected IBM, Federal Systems Division, to develop and build the instrument units (IU) for the Saturn IB and Saturn V launch vehicles. (IBM had been chosen by NASA in October 1963 to design and build the IU data adapters and digital guidance computers and to integrate and check out the IUs.) Under this new contract, expected to be worth over $175 million, IBM would supply the structure and the environmental control system. NASA would furnish the telemetry system and the stabilized platform (ST-124M) of the guidance system. MSFC would manage the contract.References: 16.

• Plan to verify the Apollo CM's radiation shielding Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. MSC's Apollo Spacecraft Program Office (ASPO) approved a plan (put forward by the MSC Advanced Spacecraft Technology Division to verify the CM's radiation shielding. Checkout of the radiation instrumentation would be made during manned earth orbital flights. The spacecraft would then be subjected to a radiation environment during the first two unmanned Saturn V flights. These missions, 501 and 502, with apogees of about 18,520 km (10,000 nm), would verify the shielding. Gamma probe verification, using spacecraft 008, would be performed in Houston during 1966. Only Block I CM's would be used in these ground and flight tests. Radiation shielding would be unaffected by the change to Block II status.References: 16.

• Apollo guidance and control interfaces Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. The Guidance and Control Implementation Sub-Panel of the MSC-MSFC Flight Mechanics Panel defined the guidance and control interfaces for Block I and II missions. In Block II missions the CSM's guidance system would 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.References: 16.

• Apollo mission programming Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. ASPO's Operations Planning Division defined the current Apollo mission programming as envisioned by MSC. The overall Apollo flight program was described in terms of its major phases: Little Joe II flights (unmanned Little Joe II development and launch escape vehicle development); Saturn IB flights (unmanned Saturn IB and Block I CSM development, Block I CSM earth orbital operations, unmanned LEM development, and manned Block II CSM/LEM earth orbital operations); and Saturn V flights (unmanned Saturn V and Block II CSM development, manned Block II CSM/LEM earth orbital operations, and manned lunar missions).References: 16.

• Disagreement on number of reentry tests to qualify Apollo CM heatshield Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. There appeared to be some confusion and/or disagreement concerning whether one or two successful Saturn V reentry tests were required to qualify the CM heatshield. A number of documents relating to instrumentation planning for the 501 and 502 flight indicated that two successful reentries would be required. The preliminary mission requirements document indicated that only a single successful reentry trajectory would be necessary. The decision would influence the measurement range capability of some heatshield transducers and the mission planning activity being conducted by the Apollo Trajectory Support Office. The Structures and Mechanics Division had been requested to provide Systems Engineering with its recommendation.References: 16.

• Apollo procedural rules for translunar injection Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The MSC-Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Guidance and Control Implementation Sub-Panel set forth several procedural rules for translunar injection (TLI):
  • Once the S-IVB ignition sequence was started, the spacecraft would not be able to halt the maneuver. (This would occur about 427 sec before the stage's J-2 engine achieved 90 percent of its thrust capability.)
  • Because the spacecraft would receive no signal from the instrument unit (IU), the exact time of sequence initiation must be relayed from the ground.
  • The vehicle's roll attitude would be reset prior to injection.
  • And when the spacecraft had control of the vehicle, the IU would not initiate the ignition sequence.
  References: 16.

• Battleship S-IVB second stage static-fired Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. 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 J-2 engine, the stage underwent its first full-duration firing, 480 sec.References: 16.

• First S-IVB stage delivered for testing Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Douglas Aircraft Company delivered the first S-IVB stage to Marshall Space Flight Center for extensive vibration, bending, and torsional testing. The stage was not an actual flight stage and contained mockups of the engine and other components, but it duplicated the flight article in weight, mass, center of gravity, and stiffness.References: 16.

• Apollo trajectory with a launch azimuth of 108 degrees Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. At the fourth meeting of the Reference Trajectory Sub-Panel, MSC and MSFC members agreed on a trajectory with a launch azimuth of 108 degrees. Translunar injection would be performed over the Pacific Ocean during the first or second orbits. First-orbit injection would fix the minimum time required before the maneuver. Injection on the second pass would determine consequent penalties. The actions were initiated by Mission Planning and Analysis Division (MPAD) and were required to solidify and minimize analytical studies and operational planning.References: 16.

• Differences in the Apollo schedule Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSC Deputy Director George M. Low issued a memorandum regarding differences in the Apollo schedule as made public in an Associated Press release with a Houston, Texas, dateline. Low cited the following statement by George E. Mueller, Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight, and said it "represents our official and only position on Apollo schedules:
  • "The Apollo schedule for accomplishment of major milestones leading to the first manned lunar landing has not changed.
  • The first Saturn IB flight is scheduled in 1966.
  • Apollo manned flights on Saturn IB are scheduled for 1967.
  • Unmanned Saturn V flights are scheduled for 1967.
  • Manned Apollo earth orbital flights are scheduled for 1968.
  "We believe these major milestones will be met and our goal of a manned lunar landing in this decade can be accomplished."References: 16.

• S-IVB Stage attitude control capability Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Significant agreements from the Eleventh MSC-MSFC Flight Mechanics, Dynamics, Guidance and Control Panel meeting were:
  • There was no requirement to inhibit the S-IVB attitude and attitude rate hold modes during the transposition and docking phase.
  • The S-IVB auxiliary propulsion system had sufficient propellant to perform 21 roll maneuvers in earth orbit at 0.5 deg/sec for inertial measurement unit alignment and earth landmark sightings, one yaw maneuver at 0.3 deg/sec for sun avoidance before transposition and docking, and one pitch and or yaw maneuver at 0.3 deg/sec before the final CSM/LEM separation maneuver from the S-IVB.
  References: 16.

• Apollo qualification test plans Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips forecast "heavy ground testing" for Apollo during 1965. The coming months, he said, should see the completion of testing on the first Apollo spacecraft intended for manned space flight, as well as flight qualification of the Saturn IB and initial testing of the Saturn V launch vehicles.References: 16.

• Technique for Apollo LEM / S-IVB separation during manned mission approved Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. ASPO approved the technique for LEM S-IVB separation during manned missions, a method recommended jointly by North American and Grumman. After the CSM docked with the LEM, the necessary electrical circuit between the two spacecraft would be closed manually. Explosive charges would then free the LEM from the adapter on the S-IVB.References: 16.

• First major Saturn V flight component delivered Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The first major Saturn V flight component, a 10-m (33-ft) diameter, 27,215 kg (60,000 lb corrugated tail section which would support the booster's 6,672 kilonewtons (1.5-million-lb) thrust engines, arrived at MSFC from NASA's Michoud Operations near New Orleans. The section was one of five major structural units comprising Saturn V's first stage.References: 16.

• Pacific Crane and Rigging contract to install ground equipment at Launch Complex 39 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Pacific Crane and Rigging Company received a NASA contract, worth $8.3 million, to install ground equipment at Kennedy Space Center's Saturn V facility, Launch Complex 39. On the following day, the Army Corps of Engineers awarded a $2,179,000 contract to R. E. Carlson Corporation, St. Petersburg, Fla., to modify Launch Complex 34 to handle the Saturn IB.References: 16.

• Emergency detection system (EDS) and abort procedures for the early Apollo flights decided Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The Apollo-Saturn Crew Safety Panel decided on a number of emergency detection system (EDS) and abort procedures for the early Apollo flights:
  • If any of the three redundant automatic abort circuits so indicated, the launch vehicle would not be released.
  • The EDS would be flight-tested on the SA-201 and SA-202 missions.
  • Unmanned Apollo flights should be aborted from the ground only under the most severe conditions.
  • Liftoff permitted automatic abort without manual backup.
  • To ensure a successful abort, a redundant mode of EDS-commanded engine shutdown was mandatory.
  After hearing the results of several supporting studies, the Panel further agreed that Saturn IB flights would be automatically aborted if the vehicle's roll rate reached 20 degrees per second; if two engines should fail during the first 30 seconds of flight, the Saturn IB must be capable of aborting automatically, and the Saturn V must have the same capability for the first 60 seconds of flight; and, finally, the Panel stated that during the Saturn V's initial stages, automatic abort might be required if even one engine shut down.References: 16.

• First ground test model of the S-II stage completed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. North American completed the first ground test model of the S-II stage of the Saturn V. References: 16.

• Unmanned capabilities required of Block I Apollo CSM Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. ASPO Manager Joseph F. Shea clarified the manned unmanned capabilities required of Block I CSM spacecraft to ensure that end-item specifications appropriately reflect those capabilities. Additional Details: Unmanned capabilities required of Block I Apollo CSM(16921). References: 16.

• Deployment angle of the Apollo adapter panels changed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. To eliminate interference between the S-IVB stage and the instrument unit, MSC directed North American to modify the deployment angle of the adapter panels. Originally designed to rotate 170 degrees, the panels should open but 45 degrees (60 degrees during abort), where they were to be secured while the CSM docked with and extracted the LEM.

  But at this smaller angle, the panels now blocked the CM's four flush- mounted omnidirectional antennas, used during near-earth phases of the mission. While turning around and docking, the astronauts thus had to communicate with the ground via the steerable high gain antenna. For Block II spacecraft, therefore, MSC concurrently ordered North American to broaden the S-band equipment's capability to permit it to operate within 4,630 km (2,500 nm) of earth.References: 16.

• No serious weight problems with the Apollo spacecraft Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. Missiles and Rockets reported a statement by Joseph F. Shea, ASPO manager, that MSC had no serious weight problems with the Apollo spacecraft. The current weight, he said, was 454 kg (1,000 lbs) under the 40,823 kg (90,000 lb) goal. Moreover, the increased payload of the Saturn V to 43,091 kg (95,000 lbs) permitted further increases. Shea admitted, however, that the LEM was growing; recent decisions in favor of safety and redundancy could raise the module's weight from 13,381 kg to 14,575 kg (29,500 lbs to 32,000 lbs).References: 16.

• Environmental testing of a full-scale Apollo S-IVB stage simulator Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Marshall Space Flight Center finalized a $2,697,546 addition to an existing contract with Douglas Aircraft Company to provide for environmental testing of a full-scale S-IVB forward stage simulator, a full-scale test instrument unit, and an Apollo thermal simulator. Testing would be conducted in Douglas' 11.89-m- (39-ft-) diameter space simulator at Huntington Beach, California, and would simulate a typical Saturn V flight from launch to earth orbit and injection into lunar path.References: 16.

• Final beam in the structural skeleton of the Vertical Assembly Building Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Construction workers emplaced the final beam in the structural skeleton of the Vertical Assembly Building at Merritt Island (KSC), Florida. Scheduled for completion in 1966, the cavernous structure (160 m (525 ft) tall and comprising 10,968,476 cu m (129 million cu ft)) would provide a controlled environment for assembling Saturn V launch vehicles and mating them to Apollo spacecraft.References: 16.

• First ground test firing of S-II stage Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. References: 26, 27.

• First clustered firing of Saturn V's first stage Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSFC conducted the first clustered firing of the Saturn V's first stage (the S-IC). The booster's five F-1 engines burned for about 6½ seconds and produced 33,360 kilonewtons (7.5 million lbs) thrust.

  Eight days later, at its static facility in Santa Susana, California, North American first fired the S-II, intermediate stage of the Saturn V. The event was chronicled as the "second major Saturn V milestone" during April.Additional Details: First clustered firing of Saturn V's first stage(17040). References: 16.

• NASA and Boeing negotiated an Apollo contract modification Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA and Boeing negotiated a contract modification. For an additional $3,135,977, Boeing would furnish instrumentation equipment and engineering support for Marshall Space Flight Center's program for dynamic testing of the Saturn V. References: 16.

• 1,000th test firing of the F-1 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. North American's Rocketdyne Division conducted the 1,000th test firing of the Saturn V's first-stage engine, the F-1. <