Saturn 1B Media Gallery

Improved Saturn I, with uprated first stage and Saturn IVB second stage (common with Saturn V) replacing Saturn IV. Used for earth orbit flight tests of Apollo CSM and LM.

From Stages to Saturn:

In July 1962, when NASA announced its intention to use the lunar orbit rendezvous, the space agency also released details on the two other Saturn vehicles. The three-stage Saturn V was planned for the lunar mission. A corollary decision called for development of an interim vehicle, the Saturn IB, to permit early testing of Apollo-Saturn hardware, such as the manned command and service modules, and the manned lunar excursion module in Earth orbit, as well as the S-IVB stage of the Saturn V. This decision permitted such flight testing a year before the Saturn V would be available. Chrysler's initial contract, completed late in 1962, called for 13 first-stage Saturn IB boosters and 8 Saturn I first-stage boosters.

In most respects, the new S-IB first-stage booster retained the size and shape of its S-I predecessor. The upper area was modified to take the larger-diameter and heavier S-IVB upper stage, and the aerodynamic fins were redesigned for the longer and heavier vehicle. The Saturn IB mounted its eight H-I engines in the same cluster pattern as the Saturn I, although successive improvements raised the total thrust of each engine to 890 000 newtons (200 000 pounds) and then to 912 000 newtons (205 000 pounds). The thrust increase raised the overall performance of the Saturn IB; the performance was further enhanced by cutting some 9000 kilograms of weight from the stage cluster. A more compact fin design accounted for part of the reduction, along with modifications to the propellant tanks, spider beam, and other components and removal of various tubes and brackets no longer required. Additional weight savings accrued from changes in the instrument unit and S-IVB, and the insights gained from the operational flights of Saturn I. Many times, engineers came to realize designs had been too conservative-too heavy or unnecessarily redundant. The production techniques worked out for the Saturn S-I stage were directly applicable to the S-IB, so no major retooling or change in the manufacturing sequence was required. With so few basic changes in the booster configuration, existing checkout and test procedures could also be applied. At Huntsville, appropriate modifications were made to the dynamic test stand to account for the different payload configurations of the Saturn IB and the same static test stand served just as well for the S-IB first stage, although engineers reworked the stand's second test position to accept additional S-IB stages.

Manufacturer: Von Braun. Launches: 9. Success Rate: 100.00%. First Launch Date: 1966-02-26. Last Launch Date: 1975-07-15. Launch data is: complete. LEO Payload: 18,600 kg (41,000 lb). to: 185 km Orbit. at: 28.00 degrees. Associated Spacecraft: Apollo ASTP Docking Module, Apollo CSM, Apollo LM, Gemini Observatory, Apollo X, Orbital Workshop, Apollo LM Lab, Apollo Rescue CSM, Apollo RM, Apollo Experiments Pallet, MORL. Liftoff Thrust: 7,295.100 kN (1,640,004 lbf). Total Mass: 589,770 kg (1,300,220 lb). Core Diameter: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Total Length: 51.00 m (167.00 ft). Development Cost $: 1,002.200 million. in: 1965 average dollars. Launch Price $: 107.000 million. in: 1967 price dollars. Cost comments: J-2 engine development cost included with Saturn V.

Improved Saturn I, with uprated first stage and Saturn IVB stage (common with Saturn V).

LEO Payload: 18,600 kg (41,000 lb). to: 185 km Orbit. at: 28.00 degrees. Liftoff Thrust: 7,295.100 kN (1,640,004 lbf). Total Mass: 589,770 kg (1,300,220 lb). Core Diameter: 6.61 m (21.68 ft). Total Length: 51.00 m (167.00 ft).

Apogee: 250 km (150 mi). Liftoff Thrust: 7,290.000 kN (1,638,850 lbf). Total Mass: 587,300 kg (1,294,700 lb). Core Diameter: 6.53 m (21.42 ft). Total Length: 68.10 m (223.40 ft).

• Stage Number: 1. 1 x Stage: Saturn IB. Gross Mass: 448,648 kg (989,099 lb). Empty Mass: 41,594 kg (91,699 lb). Thrust (vac): 8,241.763 kN (1,852,822 lbf). Isp: 296 sec. Burn time: 155 sec. Isp(sl): 262 sec. Diameter: 6.52 m (21.39 ft). Span: 6.52 m (21.39 ft). Length: 24.48 m (80.31 ft). Propellants: Lox/Kerosene. No Engines: 8. Engine: H-1b.

• Stage Number: 2. 1 x Stage: Saturn IVB (S-IB). Gross Mass: 118,800 kg (261,900 lb). Empty Mass: 12,900 kg (28,400 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 IB version of S-IVB stage. Due to lower payload payload, 300 kg saving in structure compared to Saturn V version. Due to deletion of restart requirement, 700 kg saving in propulsion system (primarily reduction in helium for restart).

1960 May 31 - Launch Vehicle: Saturn IB, Saturn C-5, Saturn V.

• 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.

• Support service contractor selected for Michoud. Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA selected Mason-Rust as the contractor to provide support services at NASA's Michoud plant near New Orleans, providing housekeeping services through June 30, 1962 for the three contractors who would produce the Saturn S-I and S-IB boosters and the Rift nuclear upper-stage vehicle.References: 18, 27.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• Apollo mission plans Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. OMSF, MSC, and Bellcomm representatives, meeting in Washington, D.C., discussed Apollo mission plans: OMSF introduced a requirement that the first manned flight in the Saturn IB program include a LEM. ASPO had planned this flight as a CSM maximum duration mission only.
  • Bellcomm was asked to develop an Apollo mission assignment program without a Saturn I.
  • MSFC had been asking OMSF concurrence in including a restart capability in the S-IVB (second) stage during the Saturn IB program.
  ASPO would agree to this, but only if the H-1 engine were uprated from 85,275 to 90,718 kilograms (188,000 to 200,000 pounds) of thrust, resulting in a 907-kilogram (2,000-pound) payload gain.References: 16.

• Manned Saturn I earth orbital flights canceled Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo Lunar Landing. NASA canceled four manned earth orbital flights with the Saturn I launch vehicle. Six of a series of 10 unmanned Saturn I development flights were still scheduled. Development of the Saturn IB for manned flight would be accelerated and "all-up" testing would be started. This action followed Bellcomm's recommendation of a number of changes in the Apollo spacecraft flight test program. The program should be transferred from Saturn I to Saturn IB launch vehicles; the Saturn I program should end with flight SA-10. All Saturn IB flights, beginning with SA-201, should carry operational spacecraft, including equipment for extensive testing of the spacecraft systems in earth orbit.

  Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller had recommended the changeover from the Saturn I to the Saturn IB to NASA Administrator James E. Webb on October 26. Webb's concurrence came two days later.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.

• Uprated H-1 engine for the first stage of the Saturn IB Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSFC directed Rocketdyne to develop an uprated H-1 engine to be used in the first stage of the Saturn IB. In August, Rocketdyne had proposed that the H-1 be uprated from 85,275 to 90,718 kilograms (188,000 to 200,000 pounds) of thrust. The uprated engine promised a 907-kilogram (2,000 pound) increase in the Saturn IB's orbital payload, yet required no major systems changes and only minor structural modifications.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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• Requirements for Apollo spacecraft launched by Saturn IB assessed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. At the request of Maj. Gen. Samuel C. Phillips, Apollo Program Director, ASPO reexamined the performance requirements for spacecraft slated for launch with Saturn IBs. MSC currently assessed that the launch vehicle was able to put 16,102 kg (35,500 lbs) into a circular orbit 105 nm above the earth. Based on the spacecraft control weights, however, it appeared that the total injected weight of the modules would exceed this amount by some 395 kg (870 lbs).Additional Details: Requirements for Apollo spacecraft launched by Saturn IB assessed(16861). 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• First stage of the Saturn IB first static firing at MSFC Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. The first stage of the Saturn IB booster (the S-IB-1) underwent its first static firing at Huntsville, Alabama. The stage's eight uprated H-1 engines produced about 71,168-kilonewtons (1.6 million lbs) thrust. On April 23, Marshall and Rocketdyne announced that the uprated H-1 had passed qualification testing and was ready for flight.References: 16.

• Thrust of the H-1 engine uprated Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. MSFC informed MSC that the thrust of the H-1 engine was being uprated to 1,000 kilonewtons (205,000 lbs), thus increasing the Saturn IB's payload capability. References: 16.

• Mission directive for Apollo-Saturn 201 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Samuel C. Phillips, Apollo Program Director, issued the mission directive for Apollo-Saturn 201. The mission would flight-test the Saturn IB and the Apollo CSM. References: 16.

• Data tape recorder probably not to be installed on Apollo LEM-1 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. The question of whether a data tape recorder would be installed on LEM-1 had been discussed at several Apollo 206 Mission Operations Plan meetings and there was a strong possibility it would not be installed. Additional Details: Data tape recorder probably not to be installed on Apollo LEM-1(17160). References: 16.

• Reduced Apollo Block II service propulsion system for Saturn IB missions Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Independent studies were made at MSC and North American to determine effects and impact of off-loading certain Block II service propulsion system components for Saturn IB missions. The contractor was requested to determine the weight change involved and schedule and cost impact of removing one oxidizer tank, one fuel tank, one helium tank and all associated hardware (fuel and oxidizer transfer lines, propellant quantity sensors and certain gaging wire harnesses) from CSM 101 and CSM 103. The MSC study was oriented toward determining technical problems associated with such a change and the effects on spacecraft operational requirements. The North American study indicated that removing the equipment would save about 690 000, along with a weight reduction of approximately 454 kg (1,000 lbs).Additional Details: Reduced Apollo Block II service propulsion system for Saturn IB missions(17167). References: 16.

• Planned missions for the Saturn IB Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Officials from Bellcomm, MSFC, and the Apollo offices in Houston and in Washington planned primary and alternate missions for the Saturn IB (applicable to SA-201 through SA-208). On July 16, the Office of Manned Space Flight specified launch vehicles (both Saturn IB and V hardware) for Apollo missions.References: 16.

• Col Bolender Mission Director for the first and second Apollo/Saturn IB flights Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA announced the appointment of Col. C. H. Bolender as Mission Director for the first and second Apollo/Saturn IB flights. Bolender was assigned to the Mission Operations Organization in the Office of Manned Space Flight, NASA. References: 16.

• No structural changes required for uprated Saturn IB's H-1 engine Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. 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 kg (200,000 to 205,000 lbs). Effects on the performance of the launch escape vehicle would be negligible.References: 16.

• Performance of the Apollo launch escape vehicle evaluated Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. During the preceding six months, officials in ASPO and the Engineering and Development Directorate evaluated the performance of the launch escape vehicle (LEV) during aborts on and near the launch pad. That performance, they had determined, was inadequate. To solve this problem, MSC ordered North American to incorporate a number of design changes in both the LEV and the spacecraft:
  • provide the capability for manual override of the main parachute deployment timer and for manual deployment of those parachutes (for both Saturn IB and V flights)
  • Provide for dumping helium from the CM's reaction control system (RCS) automatically
  • Modify the CM RCS to permit rapid dumping of its fuel (similar to the existing oxidizer dump). But fuel and oxidizer must not be dumped simultaneously. (This change applied only to Block II CMs.)
  • Provide the capability to cut out the LEV's pitch control motor on Block I vehicles (similar to that already in Block II spacecraft)
  • Design a removable device that, while on the pad, would keep the launch escape motor's propellant temperature above 70 degrees.
  References: 16.

• Saturn V stages tested Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Two Saturn milestones occurred on the same day. At Santa Susana, Calif., North American conducted the first full-duration captive firing of an S-II, 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.References: 16.

• Ultimate strength of Apollo spacecraft Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. 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. References: 16.

• Launch schedule for Apollo-Saturn IB flights revised Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Samuel C. Phillips, Apollo Program Director, notified the Center directors and Apollo program managers in Houston, Huntsville, and Cape Kennedy that OMSF's launch schedule for Apollo-Saturn IB flights had been revised, based on delivery of CSMs 009 and 011:
  • AS-201 - January 1966
  • AS-202 - June 1966
  Schedules for AS-203 through 205 (July and October 1966, and January 1967) were unchanged.References: 16.

• Saturn IB/Centaur Office named changed to Saturn Applications. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Voyager 1973. John H. Disher, Saturn/Apollo Applications Deputy Director, requested the Manned Space Flight Management Operations Director to officially change the designation of the Saturn IB/Centaur Office to Saturn Applications. This change, Disher said, reflected the change in status of the office and provided for necessary management of potential Saturn Applications such as the Saturn V/Voyager by the Office of Manned Space Flight. However, on the same day, Disher ordered E. F. O'Connor at MSFC to halt all Saturn IB/Centaur efforts (except those already underway that could not be recalled) and disapproved the request for an additional $1.1 million for the program. (Any funds required for definition of a Saturn V/Voyager mission, he said, would be authorized separately.)

• Land impact program for the Apollo CM Block I deleted Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. A decision made at a Program Management Review eliminated the requirement for a land impact program for the CM to support Block I flights. Post-abort CM land impact for Saturn IB launches had been eliminated from Complex 37 by changes to the sequence timers in the launch escape system abort mode. The Certification Test Specification and related Certification Test Requirements would reflect the new Block II land impact requirements.References: 16.

• MSFC issued requests for proposals to the aerospace industry for definition studies of integrating experiment hardware into AAP space vehicles. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop. MSFC issued requests for proposals to the aerospace industry for definition studies of integrating experiment hardware into AAP space vehicles-i.e., payload integration in the Apollo lunar module, the Saturn instrument unit, and the S-IVB stage of the Saturn IB and Saturn V launch vehicles. Following evaluation of the proposals, MSFC would select two or more firms for negotiation of nine-month study contracts to be managed by Huntsville as the Center responsible for payload integration of this portion of AAP. (MSC was responsible for payload integration of the Apollo CSM.)

• Apollo 201 (AS-201) Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: Apollo CSM 009. Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Location of Spacecraft: Strategic Air Command Museum, Ashland, NE. Agency: NASA. Apogee: 488 km (303 mi). Duration: 2.02 days. Decay Date: 1966-02-26. Apollo-Saturn 201 was launched from Cape Kennedy, with liftoff of an Apollo Block I spacecraft (CSM 009) on a Saturn IB launch vehicle at 11:12:01 EST. Launched from Launch Complex 34, the unmanned suborbital mission was the first flight test of the Saturn IB and an Apollo spacecraft. Total launch weight was 22,000 kilograms.

  Spacecraft communications blackout lasted 1 minute 22 seconds. Reentry was initiated with a space-fixed velocity of 29,000 kilometers per hour. CM structure and heatshields performed adequately. The CM was recovered by the USS Boxer from the Atlantic about 72 kilometers uprange from the planned landing point. (8.18 S x 11.15 W).References: 0.

• Changes in Saturn/Apollo nomenclature Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. A memo to KSC, MSC, and MSFC from the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight reported that the NASA Project Designation Committee had concurred in changes in Saturn/Apollo nomenclature recommended by Robert C. Seamans, Jr., George E. Mueller, and Julian Scheer:
  • lunar excursion module to be called lunar module.
  • Saturn IB to become the "uprated Saturn I."
  The memo instructed that the new nomenclature be used in all future news releases and announcements.References: 16.

• Apollo 203 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: Saturn S-IVB-203. Mass: 26,500 kg (58,400 lb). Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Agency: NASA MSF. Perigee: 183 km (113 mi). Apogee: 212 km (131 mi). Inclination: 31.90 deg. Period: 88.50 min. COSPAR: 1966-059A. USAF Sat Cat: 2289. Decay Date: 1966-07-05. First orbital test Saturn IB; no spacecraft. AS-203 lifted off from Launch Complex 37, Eastern Test Range, at 10:53 a.m. EDT in the second of three Apollo-Saturn missions scheduled before manned flight in the Apollo program. All objectives - to acquire flight data on the S-IVB stage and instrument unit - were achieved.

  The uprated Saturn I - consisting of an S-IB stage, S-IVB stage, and an instrument unit - boosted an unmanned payload into an original orbit of 185 by 189 kilometers. The inboard engine cutoff of the first stage occurred after 2 minutes 18 seconds of flight and the outboard engine cutoff was 4 seconds later. The S-IVB engine burned 4 minutes 50 seconds. No recovery was planned and the payload was expected to enter the earth's atmosphere after about four days.References: 1, 2, 5, 6, 16, 26, 27.

• Apollo 202 (AS-202) Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: Apollo CSM 011. Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Location of Spacecraft: USS Hornet Museum, Alameda, CA. Agency: NASA. Apogee: 1,143 km (710 mi). Duration: 2.02 days. Decay Date: 1966-08-25. The unmanned suborbital Apollo-Saturn 202 mission was successfully flown - the third Saturn IB flight test and the second CM heatshield flight test. The 202 included an uprated Saturn I (Saturn IB) launch vehicle (S-IB stage, S-IVB stage, and instrument unit) and the Apollo 011 spacecraft (spacecraft-lunar module adapter, service module, command module, and launch escape system). Liftoff was from Launch Complex 34 at Cape Kennedy at 1:15 p.m. EDT. The command module landed safely in the southwest Pacific Ocean, near Wake Island 1 hour 33 minutes after liftoff. It was recovered by the U.S.S. Hornet about 370 kilometers uprange from the recovery ship (16.07 N 168.54 E).Additional Details: Apollo 202 (AS-202)(81290). References: 0.

• Propellant tanks of Apollo service module 017 failed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Propellant tanks of service module 017 failed during a pressure test at North American Aviation, Downey, Calif. Additional Details: Propellant tanks of Apollo service module 017 failed(17587). References: 16.

• Revised criteria for design of a one-year Workshop in space. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab. Maurice J. Raffensperger, Earth Orbital Mission Studies Director in NASA Hq, spelled out revised criteria for design of a one-year Workshop in space (criteria to be incorporated by MSFC and MSC planners into their proposed configurations). Maurice J. Raffensperger, Earth Orbital Mission Studies Director in NASA Hq, spelled out revised criteria for design of a one-year Workshop in space (criteria to be incorporated by MSFC and MSC planners into their proposed configurations): This 'interim space station' should be ready for launch in January 1971. The design had to be a minimum-cost structure capable of a two-year survival in low Earth orbit. (Raffensperger speculated that a 'dry-launched' S-IVB stage could be employed without major structural changes.) Initial vehicle subsystems were to consist of flight-qualified Apollo and Manned Orbiting Laboratory hardware capable of one-year operation. Operation of the station during the second year was to be accomplished by means of a long- duration 'developmental systems' module that would be attached to the original space station structure (and would be developed separately as part of the long-duration space station program). Initial launch of the station would be with a Saturn V (and include CSM). This interim space station must be suited for operation in either zero-g or with artificial gravity (using the 'simplest, least expensive' approach). Cost of the hardware must not exceed $200 million (excluding launch vehicle and the long-duration subsystems module). Cargo resupply and crew changes were to be carried out using Apollo Applications- modified CSMs (limited to three Saturn IBs per year).

• NASA Hq issued a schedule which introduced the cluster concept into the AAP design. The cluster concept consisted of a Workshop launch following a manned CSM launch. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab, Apollo ATM. Six months later, a LM/ATM launch would follow a second manned flight. The LM/ATM would rendezvous and dock to the cluster. The first Workshop launch was scheduled for June 1968. As opposed to the habitable OWS and cluster concept which projected a much more complex program, the S-IVB SSESM had been a comparatively simple mission requiring no rendezvous and docking and no habitation equipment. A major similarity between the old S-IVB/SSESM concept and the cluster concept was use of the S-IVB stage to put the payload into orbit before passivation and pressurization of the stage's hydrogen tanks. The new cluster concept embodied the major step of making the Saturn IVB habitable in orbit, incorporating a two-gas atmosphere (oxygen and nitrogen) and a 'shirt- sleeve' environment. The OWS would contain crew quarters in the S IVB hydrogen tank (two floors and walls installed on the ground), which would be modified by Douglas Aircraft Company under MSFC management; an airlock module (previously called the SSESM) attached to the OWS, which would be built by McDonnell Aircraft Corporation under MSC management; and a multiple docking adapter (MDA), which would contain five docking ports permitting up to five modules to be docked to the Workshop at any one time. The MDA would also house most OWS astronaut habitability equipment and many experiments. The schedule called for 22 Saturn IB and 15 Saturn V launches. Two of the Saturn IBs would be launched a day apart-one manned, the other unmanned. Flights utilizing two Saturn V Workshops and four LM ATM missions were also scheduled.

• Apollo 204 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: CSM-012. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM, Apollo Lunar Landing. Location of Spacecraft: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA (Not on public display). Flight Crew: Chaffee, Grissom, White. Flight: Apollo 204. The first manned flight of the Apollo CSM, the Apollo C category mission, was planned for the last quarter of 1966. Numerous problems with the Apollo Block I spacecraft resulted in a flight delay to February 1967. The crew of Virgil I. Grissom, Edward H. White II, and Roger B. Chaffee, was killed in a fire while testing their capsule on the pad on 27 January 1967, still weeks away from launch. The designation AS-204 was used by NASA for the flight at the time; the designation Apollo 1 was applied retroactively at the request of Grissom's widow.References: 26, 27, 33,60.

• Apollo AS-204 first steps Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Flight: Apollo 204. Fire sweeping through command module 012 atop its Saturn IB launch vehicle at Launch Complex 34, KSC, took the lives of the three-man crew scheduled for the first manned Apollo space flight. Additional Details: Apollo AS-204 first steps(17622). References: 16.

• Progress of the Apollo 204 Review Board investigation reported Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Flight: Apollo 204. NASA Deputy Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., reported to Administrator James E. Webb on progress of the Apollo 204 Review Board investigation of the January 27 spacecraft fire. Additional Details: Progress of the Apollo 204 Review Board investigation reported(17634). References: 16.

• Interim nature of schedule for manned Apollo missions discussed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA Deputy Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., informed Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller that, in view of the interim nature of schedule outlook for manned uprated Saturn I and Saturn V missions, he had decided to show these missions as "Under Study" in the Official NASA Flight Schedule for February 1967. As soon as firm approved dates for the missions were available the schedule would be updated. He said that all participants in the Apollo program should be advised that - except for unmanned missions 206, 501, and 502 - official agency schedule commitments had not been made and certainly could not be quoted until management assessments of the program had been completed and schedules approved by the Office of the Administrator.References: 16.

• Designations for Apollo / Apollo Applications missions Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Flight: Apollo 204. NASA Hq. Office of Manned Space Flight informed KSC, MSFC, and MSC of approved designations for Apollo and Apollo Applications missions:
  1. all Apollo missions would be numbered sequentially in the order flown, with the next mission to be designated Apollo 4, the following one Apollo 5, etc., and
  2. the Apollo Applications missions would be designated sequentially as AAP-1, AAP-2, etc. The number designations would not differentiate between manned and unmanned or uprated Saturn I and Saturn V missions.Additional Details: Designations for Apollo / Apollo Applications missions(17691). References: 16.

• Apollo spacecraft delivery dates Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. Flight: Apollo 7. Spacecraft delivery date and ground rule discussions were summarized by MSC ASPO Manager George M. Low in a letter to North American Aviation's Apollo Program Manager Dale D. Myers. Additional Details: Apollo spacecraft delivery dates(17726). References: 16.

• NASA realigned its Apollo and AAP launch schedules following the Apollo 204 accident in January. Nation: USA. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab, AES Lunar Base, ALSS Lunar Base. Because of the Apollo 204 accident in January and the resulting program delays, NASA realigned its Apollo and AAP launch schedules. The new AAP schedule called for 25 Saturn IB and 14 Saturn V launches. Major hardware for these launches would be two Workshops flown on Saturn IB vehicles, two Saturn V Workshops, and three ATMs. Under this new schedule, the first Workshop launch would come in January 1969.

• Apollo spacecraft/S-IVB rendezvous for AS-205 mission discussed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Flight: Apollo 7. H. G. Paul, Chief of Marshal Space Flight Center's Propulsion Division, said it had come to the attention of his office that spacecraft/S-IVB rendezvous to within approximately 100 meters was being considered for the AS-205 mission. Additional Details: Apollo spacecraft/S-IVB rendezvous for AS-205 mission discussed(17740). References: 16.

• AS-208 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: LM-2. Class: Manned. Type: Lunar lander. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. Before fire, planned in-orbit test of LM. CSM-101 would dock with and crew would maneuver together. References: 26, 27.

• Apollo 207 (cancelled) Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: CSM-101. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Flight Crew: McDivitt, Schweickart, Scott. Flight: Apollo 207. Before the Apollo 1 fire, it was planned that McDivitt's crew would conduct the Apollo D mission - a first manned test in earth orbit of the Lunar Module. Separate Saturn IB launches would put Apollo Block II CSM 101 / AS-207 and Lunar Module LM-2 / AS-208 into earth orbit. The crew would then rendezvous and dock with the lunar module and put it through its paces. After the fire, it was decided to launch the mission on a single Saturn V as Apollo 9.References: 16, 26, 27, 366.

• Proposed sequence of Apollo missions leading to a lunar landing mission Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. Flight: Apollo 204, Apollo 11, Apollo 12, Apollo 15. MSC proposed to the NASA Office of Manned Space Flight a sequence of missions leading to a lunar landing mission. The sequence included the following basic missions:
  • A - Saturn V/unmanned CSM development
  • B - Saturn IB/unmanned LM development
  • C - Saturn IB/manned CSM evaluation
  • D - Saturn V/manned CSM and LM development (A dual Saturn IB mission would be an alternative to the Saturn V for mission D)
  • E - CSM/LM operations in high earth orbit
  • F - Lunar orbit mission
  • G - Lunar landing mission (like Apollo 11)
  • H - Lunar landing mission (Apollo 12, 13, and 14)
  • I - Reserved for lunar survey missions (not used)
  • J - Lunar landing missions, upgraded hardware (Apollo 15, 16, and 17)
  References: 16.

• Budgetary cutbacks reduced AAP lunar activity to four missions and Saturn V Workshops to 17 Saturn IB and 7 Saturn V launches. Nation: USA. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab, AES Lunar Base, ALSS Lunar Base. NASA Hq issued a revised AAP schedule incorporating recent budgetary cutbacks. The schedule reflected the reduction of AAP lunar activity to four missions and of Saturn V Workshop activity to 17 Saturn IB and 7 Saturn V launches. There would be two Workshops launched on Saturn IBs, one Saturn V Workshop, and three ATMs. Launch of the first Workshop was scheduled for March 1970.

• Minuteman strap-one for the Saturn IB were canceled as part of the AAP. The studies for AAP on the feasibility of the Minuteman strap-one were terminated. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab.

• Apollo mission schedule for six flights in 1968 and five in 1969 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. Flight: Apollo 10, Apollo 14. NASA announced an Apollo mission schedule calling for six flights in 1968 and five in 1969. NASA Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller said the schedule and alternative plans provided a schedule under which a limited number of Apollo command and service modules and lunar landing modules, configured for lunar landing might be launched on test flights toward the moon by the end of the decade. Apollo/uprated Saturn I flights were identified with a 200 series number; Saturn V flights were identified with a 500 series number.Additional Details: Apollo mission schedule for six flights in 1968 and five in 1969(17824). References: 16.

• Designation Saturn IB approved Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. NASA Administrator James E. Webb approved the designation "Saturn IB" as the standard way of referring to that launch vehicle in public statements, congressional testimony, and similar materials, rather than "Uprated Saturn I." References: 16.

• Budgetary restraints required additional cuts in AAP to three Saturn IB and three Saturn V launches. Nation: USA. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab, AES Lunar Base, ALSS Lunar Base. NASA budgetary restraints required an additional cut in AAP launches. The reduced program called for three Saturn IB and three Saturn V launches, including one Workshop launched on a Saturn IB, one Saturn V Workshop, and one ATM. Two lunar missions were planned. Launch of the first Workshop would be in April 1970.

• Apollo 5 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: Apollo LM-1. Mass: 14,360 kg (31,650 lb). Class: Manned. Type: Lunar lander. Spacecraft: Apollo LM. Agency: NASA MSC. Perigee: 169 km (105 mi). Apogee: 374 km (232 mi). Inclination: 31.60 deg. Period: 89.90 min. COSPAR: 1968-007B. USAF Sat Cat: 3107. Decay Date: 1968-02-12. NASA launched Apollo 5 - the first, unmanned LM flight - on a Saturn IB from KSC Launch Complex 37B at 5:48:08 p.m. EST. Mission objectives included verifying operation of the LM structure itself and its two primary propulsion systems, to evaluate LM staging, and to evaluate orbital performances of the S-IVB stage and instrument unit. Flight of the AS-204 launch vehicle went as planned, with nosecone (replacing the CSM) jettisoned and LM separating. Flight of LM-1 also went as planned up to the first descent propulsion engine firing. Because velocity increase did not build up as quickly as predicted, the LM guidance system shut the engine down after only four seconds of operation, boosting the LM only to a 171 x 222 km orbit. Mission control personnel in Houston and supporting groups quickly analyzed the problem. They determined that the difficulty was one of guidance software only (and not a fault in hardware design) and pursued an alternate mission plan that ensured meeting the minimum requirements necessary to achieve the primary objectives of the mission. The ascent stage separated and boosted itself into a 172 x 961 km orbit. After mission completion at 2:45 a.m. EST January 23, LM stages were left in orbit to reenter the atmosphere later and disintegrate. Apollo program directors attributed success of the mission to careful preplanning of alternate ways to accomplish flight objectives in the face of unforeseen events.References: 1, 2, 5, 6, 16, 26, 27.

• Saturn V and Saturn I Workshop designations. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab. Nomenclature for the OWS included in the AAP presented in the FY 1969 budget was confirmed by NASA. The ground-outfitted OWS to be launched with Saturn V would be designated the 'Saturn V Workshop.' (This had sometimes been called the 'dry Workshop.') The OWS that would be launched by a Saturn IB would be referred to as the 'Saturn I Workshop.' (Colloquially it had been referred to as the 'wet workshop.') Terminology 'Uprated Saturn I' would not be used officially. This launch vehicle would be referred to as the 'Saturn IB.'

• New AAP schedule decreased to 11 Saturn IB flights and one Saturn V flight. Nation: USA. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab, AES Lunar Base, ALSS Lunar Base. NASA released a new AAP launch readiness and delivery schedule. The schedule decreased the number of Saturn flights to 11 Saturn IB flights and one Saturn V flight. It called for three Workshops. One of the Workshops would be launched by a Saturn IB, and another would serve as a backup. The third Workshop would be launched by a Saturn V. The schedule also included one ATM. Launch of the first Workshop would be in November 1970. Lunar missions were no longer planned in the AAP.

• Launch wind constraint for Saturn IB relaxed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Flight: Apollo 7. Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips wrote to his two principal counterparts at MSFC and MSC, Lee B. James and George M. Low, to express his concern that the launch-release wind constraint for the Saturn IB, currently 45 kilometers, was perhaps the most restrictive of all such constraints. Additional Details: Launch wind constraint for Saturn IB relaxed(18011). References: 16.

• MSFC and KSC officials agreed upon procedures for maintaining the capability to check out and launch the remaining Saturn IB vehicle inventory. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Their joint recommendations included a phasedown on contractor activity following the AS 205 launch; deactivation of Launch Complexes 34 and 37 to allow maximum storage of equipment and minimum maintenance on items remaining in place; and continuance of KSC analysis of manpower required to support the AAP dual launch requirement, with contractor participation at the earliest date.

• All changes to Apollo 7 as a result of Apollo 1 fire completed Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Flight: Apollo 7. NASA Apollo Mission Director William C. Schneider reported completion of all action items pertinent to Apollo 7 assigned by Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips as a result of recommendations by the Apollo Crew Safety Review Board on May 27, 1968. Additional Details: All changes to Apollo 7 as a result of Apollo 1 fire completed(18027). References: 16.

• Apollo 7 Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Payload: Apollo CSM 101 / S-IVB-205. Mass: 14,674 kg (32,350 lb). Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Location of Spacecraft: Frontiers of Flight Museum, Dallas Love Field, Dallas, Texas. Agency: NASA MSC. Perigee: 229 km (142 mi). Apogee: 306 km (190 mi). Inclination: 31.60 deg. Period: 89.90 min. COSPAR: 1968-089A. USAF Sat Cat: 3486. Duration: 10.84 days. Decay Date: 1968-10-22. Flight Crew: Cunningham, Eisele, Schirra. Flight: Apollo 7. Apollo 7 (AS-205), the first manned Apollo flight, lifted off from Launch Complex 34 at Cape Kennedy Oct. 11, carrying Walter M. Schirra, Jr., Donn F. Eisele, and R. Walter Cunningham. The countdown had proceeded smoothly, with only a slight delay because of additional time required to chill the hydrogen system in the S-IVB stage of the Saturn launch vehicle. Liftoff came at 11:03 a.m. EDT. Shortly after insertion into orbit, the S-IVB stage separated from the CSM, and Schirra and his crew performed a simulated docking with the S-IVB stage, maneuvering to within 1.2 meters of the rocket. Although spacecraft separation was normal, the crew reported that one adapter panel had not fully deployed. Two burns using the reaction control system separated the spacecraft and launch stage and set the stage for an orbital rendezvous maneuver, which the crew made on the second day of the flight, using the service propulsion engine.

  Crew and spacecraft performed well throughout the mission. During eight burns of the service propulsion system during the flight, the engine functioned normally. October 14, third day of the mission, witnessed the first live television broadcast from a manned American spacecraft.References: 1, 2, 5, 6, 16, 26, 27, 33,60.

• Saturn IB program placed in a standby status Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Flight: Apollo 8. Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips ordered that the Saturn IB program be placed in a standby status pending any future requirements for Apollo or the Apollo Applications program. Phillips' action signaled the shift in Apollo to the Saturn V vehicle, effective with AS-503.References: 16.

• Management of the Saturn IB project and AAP-assigned spacecraft was transferred from the Apollo program to AAP. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. This transfer of management responsibility included Saturn IB launch vehicles SA-206 through SA-212 and Saturn IB unique spares and unique facilities. The Apollo program would continue to fund the Saturn IB effort through FY 1969, except for that effort unique to AAP. Beginning in FY 1970, the Saturn IB funding would be an AAP responsibility. This transfer of responsibilities placed management of the Saturn IB project under control of the program that would use it and relieved Apollo management of some responsibilities, allowing more time for concentration on the mainline Apollo program.

• Saturn V "dry" Workshop decision. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab, Apollo ATM. Gilruth and Von Braun support decision to fly a complete integrated solution on a single Saturn V launch. Additional Details: Saturn V "dry" Workshop decision.(22100).

• NASA Administrator Paine approved the shift from a "wet" to a "dry" Orbital Workshop for AAP. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop, Skylab, Apollo ATM. NASA Administrator Thomas O. Paine approved the shift from a 'wet' to a 'dry' Orbital Workshop concept for AAP following a review presentation by program officials on the potential benefits of such a change. On 22 July, AAP Director William C. Schneider ordered program managers at the three Centers to implement the change, abandoning the idea of using a spent Saturn IB second stage for a Workshop and adopting the concept of a fully equipped 'dry' configuration-with the ATM integrated into the total payload-launched aboard a Saturn V.Additional Details: NASA Administrator Paine approved the shift from a "wet" to a "dry" Orbital Workshop for AAP.(22109).

• NASA Hq revised AAP delivery and launch schedules, further altering the program in light of both changing resources and fiscal climate, as well as a maturing of program plans per se. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Orbital Workshop. The new schedule called for seven Saturn IB and two Saturn V launches, with flight of the first Workshop slated for July 1972.

• KSC officials and AAP managers recommended to the Manned Space Flight Management Council that the Saturn IB AAP launches take place from LC-37 rather than LC-34. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. They were incorporating the recommendation into the latest program operating plan proposals. If the recommendation were accepted, LC-34 would be partially deactivated and placed in a 'down- mode' condition.

• Program responsibility for the Saturn launch vehicles was divided Nation: USA. Program: Apollo. Program responsibility for the Saturn launch vehicles was divided, at the Headquarters level, between the Apollo Program Office and the Apollo Applications Program. Overall responsibility for the Saturn V remained with the Apollo Program Office, while overall responsibility for the Saturn IB vehicle was assigned to Apollo Applications.References: 16.

• A major study was performed by KSC, The Boeing Company, and Chrysler Corporation to determine the feasibility of launching S-IB vehicles from LC-39. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Major facilities and equipment needed to convert LC-39 to an elevated pedestal configuration were studied, as well as estimated cost figures, program schedules, and interrelationships with other NASA programs. The study indicated that use of the elevated pedestal concept in LC-39 appeared technically and operationally feasible. However, because of the close operational coupling of the Apollo and AAP if this concept were implemented, it was decided to defer further consideration of this concept.

• LC-34 would be used for Saturn IB-related AAP manned launches. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. KSC Director Kurt H. Debus announced that LC-34 would be used for Saturn IB-related AAP manned launches (scheduled to begin in mid-1972), while LC-37 would be placed in a semi- deactivated 'minimum maintenance' condition. Thomas W. Morgan, AAP Manager of the Florida Center, said that design of modifications to LC-34 to meet the needs of AAP would begin on 1 January 1970, while the modifications to the pad itself would begin around the end of the summer. The current estimate for the cost of modifying the complex and bringing it to a state of readiness was about $3.7 million.

• NASA Hq announced that both the manned and unmanned (Saturn IB and Saturn V) launches of the Skylab Program would be from KSC LC-39. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Previous plans were to conduct the Saturn IB launches from LC-34, a part of the U.S. Air Force Eastern Test Range used by NASA, a tenant at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida. However, program studies showed the feasibility of the pedestal concept of launching the Saturn IB from LC-39 and indicated a cost savings of $13.5 million. The pedestal would be of standard steel structural design; however, there were unique conditions considered. One of these was the requirement to withstand engine exhaust temperatures of 3000 K (5000°F). Another dealt with winds. The pedestal was designed to launch an S-IB at maximum vehicle allowed winds (59.4 km) and to withstand a 200-km per hr hurricane without the launch vehicle. Launch Complex 34, which became operational in 1961, was placed in a standby condition after the Apollo 7 flight in October 1968. It would have required extensive updating of equipment and repairs to ready it for the Skylab Program.

• Contract for adapting existing Saturn V facilities to launch Saturn IB space vehicles. Program: Skylab. KSC awarded a contract to Reynolds, Smith, and Hills of Jacksonville, Florida, for architectural and engineering services in modification plans for adapting existing Saturn V facilities at Launch Complex 39 to launch Saturn IB space vehicles. A launcher-umbilical tower would require a major modification, and minor modification would be required in the service platforms of the Vehicle Assembly Building, where space vehicles were assembled and checked out before being moved to the launch pad. The firm, fixed-price contract had a performance period of 200 days, with work to be performed at the Center and in Jacksonville.

• Modification to contract with McDonnell Douglas for Skylab Program work. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Skylab. MSFC issued a modification to an existing contract with McDonnell Douglas for Skylab Program work. The modification would pay for the conversion of the original OWS to be launched by a Saturn IB booster to a completely outfitted Workshop to be launched by a Saturn V. Originally the plan was to launch the second stage (S IVB) of a Saturn IB into Earth orbit. The S-IVB would be filled with fuel so that it could propel itself into orbit. Astronauts launched by a second Saturn IB would then rendezvous with the empty stage and convert it into living and working quarters. A decision was made 21 May 1969 to outfit an S-IVB on the ground and launch it ready for use on a Saturn V.

• KSC awarded a contract to the Holloway Corporation of Titusville, Florida, to construct a launcher-pedestal for the Skylab Program. Program: Skylab. The 38.7-m-tall pedestal adapted to an existing launcher-umbilical tower so that manned Saturn IB space vehicles could be launched from facilities supporting the larger Saturn V rockets. Holloway contracted to construct the launcher- pedestal in 180 days after receiving notice to proceed.

• MSFC granted International Business Machine Corporation (IBM) a contract modification for the manufacture of instrument units (IU) for Saturn launch vehicles. Program: Skylab. The modification would extend IBM's delivery schedule for IUs through 31 December 1973, to be compatible with the extended Apollo and Skylab Program launch schedules. IBM was under NASA contract to build 27 IUs for Saturn vehicles: 12 Saturn IBs and 15 Saturn Vs. Ten of the Saturn IB units and 12 Saturn V units had been completed. All work was being done at the company's facilities in Huntsville. The original IU contract had been granted to IBM in March 1965 for the fabrication, assembly, checkout, and delivery of the 27 units and related support functions.

• With the issuance of the Launch Complex 34/37 Phaseout Plan, Skylab Program management responsibility- for these two launch complexes was terminated. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Skylab. Although use of Launch Complex 37 for Space Shuttle engine testing had been considered, other options were chosen, and the complexes were to be removed from NASA operational facilities inventory.

• MSFC modified a contract with Chrysler Corporation to authorize additional work in the Saturn IB program. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Chrysler was the prime contractor for the first stage of the Saturn IB, which was assembled at the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans. Under the current modification, the company would maintain nine Saturn IB boosters in storage. Three of the nine vehicles were for the Skylab Program and would be launched in 1973. Those three, plus a fourth that would serve as a backup, would be maintained and modified as necessary under terms of this contract. Prelaunch checkout of the Skylab vehicles would also be accomplished under this modification. The period of performance was from 1 January 1971 to 15 August 1973. Six of the vehicles were located at the Michoud Facility; the other three were at MSFC in Huntsville.

• MSFC awarded Chrysler's Space Division a contract modification for additional work on Saturn IB launch vehicle booster stages. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. The contract extension would run through 31 January 1974. The additional work was to refurbish four S-IB booster stages that would be used in the Skylab Program in 1973. The fourth vehicle (SA-209) would be assigned as a backup. All four stages had been in storage for several years. The major portion of the work would be removing the stages from storage, preparing them for delivery to KSC, and providing launch support to them throughout the Skylab launch readiness period, which would end in early 1974. Most of the work would be done at the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, but some work would be done at MSFC.

• Skylab 2 spacecraft transferred to Launch Complex 39B in preparation for launch. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Flight: Skylab 2. The Skylab 2 spacecraft, mated to its launch vehicle, was transferred 27 February from the KSC Vehicle Assembly- Building to Launch Complex 39B in preparation for launch. The SL-2 space vehicle consisted of the following major components: an S-IB (the first stage); an S-IVB (the second stage, which comprised the propulsion stages); an IU; a CSM; and an SLA.Additional Details: Skylab 2 spacecraft transferred to Launch Complex 39B in preparation for launch.(22270).

• Skylab 2 Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Payload: Apollo CSM 116. Mass: 19,979 kg (44,046 lb). Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Location of Spacecraft: National Museum of Naval Aviation, Pensacola, FL. Agency: NASA MSC. Perigee: 425 km (264 mi). Apogee: 440 km (270 mi). Inclination: 50.00 deg. Period: 93.20 min. COSPAR: 1973-032A. USAF Sat Cat: 6655. Duration: 28.03 days. Decay Date: 1973-06-22. Flight Crew: Conrad, Kerwin, Weitz. Flight: Skylab 2. Epic repair mission which brought Skylab into working order. Included such great moments as Conrad being flung through space by the whiplash after heaving on the solar wing just as the debris constraining it gave way; deployment of a lightweight solar shield, developed in Houston in one week, which brought the temperatures down to tolerable levels. With this flight US again took manned spaceflight duration record.

  Skylab 2 , consisting of a modified Apollo CSM payload and a Saturn IB launch vehicle, was inserted into Earth orbit approximately 10 minutes after liftoff. The orbit achieved was 357 by 156 km and, during a six-hour period following insertion, four maneuvers placed the CSM into a 424 by 415 km orbit for rendezvous with the Orbital Workshop. Normal rendezvous sequencing led to stationkeeping during the fifth revolution followed by a flyaround inspection of the damage to the OWS. The crew provided a verbal description of the damage in conjunction with 15 minutes of television coverage. The solar array system wing (beam) 2 was completely missing. The solar array system wing (beam) 1 was slightly deployed and was restrained by a fragment of the meteoroid shield. Large sections of the meteoroid shield were missing. Following the flyaround inspection, the CSM soft-docked with the OWS at 5:56 p.m. EDT to plan the next activities. At 6:45 p.m. EDT the CSM undocked and extravehicular activity was initiated to deploy the beam 1 solar array. The attempt failed. Frustration of the crew was compounded when eight attempts were required to achieve hard docking with the OWS. The hard dock was made at 11:50 p.m. EDT, terminating a Skylab 2 first-day crew work period of 22 hours.References: 1, 2, 5, 6, 33,60.

• Skylab 3 space vehicle was moved to pad. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Flight: Skylab 3. The Skylab 3 space vehicle was moved to KSC Launch Complex 39, Pad B, on 11 June in preparation for launch. The space vehicle consisted of a Saturn IB launch vehicle S-IB-207 first stage, S-IVB-207 second stage, and a S-IU-208 instrument unit; a CSM; and a spacecraft lunar module adapter.Additional Details: Skylab 3 space vehicle was moved to pad.(22290).

• Skylab 3 Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Payload: Apollo CSM 117. Mass: 20,121 kg (44,359 lb). Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Location of Spacecraft: Glenn Research Center, NASA, Cleveland, OH. Agency: NASA MSC. Perigee: 422 km (262 mi). Apogee: 442 km (274 mi). Inclination: 50.00 deg. Period: 93.20 min. COSPAR: 1973-050A. USAF Sat Cat: 6757. Duration: 59.46 days. Decay Date: 1973-09-25. Flight Crew: Bean, Garriott, Lousma. Flight: Skylab 3. Continued maintenance of the Skylab space station and extensive scientific and medical experiments. Installed twinpole solar shield on EVA; performed major inflight maintenance; doubled record for length of time in space. Completed 858 Earth orbits and 1,081 hours of solar and Earth experiments; three EVAs totalled 13 hours, 43 minutes.

  The space vehicle, consisting of a modified Apollo command and service module payload on a Saturn IB launch vehicle, was inserted into a 231.3 by 154.7 km orbit. Rendezvous maneuvers were performed during the first five orbits as planned. During the rendezvous, the CSM reaction control system forward firing engine oxidizer valve leaked. The quad was isolated. Station-keeping with the Saturn Workshop began approximately 8 hours after liftoff, with docking being performed about 30 minutes later.References: 1, 2, 5, 6, 33,60.

• NASA plans release, disposition, and storage of all unneeded Skylab Program equipment. Nation: USA. Guidelines were issued by NASA Hq for release, disposition, and storage of all unneeded Skylab Program equipment. Two Saturn Vs, two Saturn IBs, three command and service modules, the backup Skylab cluster, and appropriate spares would be placed in minimum cost storage as soon as program requirements permitted.

• Skylab 4 Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Payload: Apollo CSM 118. Mass: 20,847 kg (45,959 lb). Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Location of Spacecraft: National Air and Space Museum (Smithsonian Institution), Washington, DC. Agency: NASA MSC. Perigee: 422 km (262 mi). Apogee: 437 km (271 mi). Inclination: 50.00 deg. Period: 93.10 min. COSPAR: 1973-090A. USAF Sat Cat: 6936. Duration: 84.05 days. Decay Date: 1974-02-08. Flight Crew: Carr, Gibson Edward, Pogue. Flight: Skylab 4. Final Skylab mission; included observation and photography of Comet Kohoutek among numerous experiments. Completed 1,214 Earth orbits and four EVAs totalling 22 hours, 13 minutes. Increased manned space flight time record by 50%. Rebellion by crew against NASA Ground Control overtasking led to none of the crew ever flying again. Biological experiments included two Mummichog fish (Fundulus heteroclitus).

  The space vehicle consisted of a modified Apollo CSM and a Saturn IB launch vehicle. All launch phase events were normal, and the CSM was inserted into a 150.1- by 227.08-km orbit. The rendezvous sequence was performed according to the anticipated timeline. Stationkeeping was initiated about seven and one-half hours after liftoff, and hard docking was achieved about 30 minutes later following two unsuccessful docking attempts. Planned duration of the mission was 56 days, with the option of extending it to a maximum of 84 days.References: 1, 2, 5, 6, 33,60.

• KSC was directed to discontinue plans for the Skylab rescue capability and to move the rescue vehicle (SA-209 and CSM-119) back to the Vehicle Assembly Building. Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Apollo Rescue CSM. Upon completion of this action, Headquarters responsibility for the SA-209 and CSM-119 would be transferred to the Program Director of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Program.

• Summary of Skylab operations. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Skylab. MSFC published a summary of Skylab operations. Additional Details: Summary of Skylab operations.(22332).

• Skylab B (cancelled) Nation: USA. Program: Skylab. Spacecraft: Skylab. Location of Spacecraft: National Air and Space Museum (Smithsonian Institution), Washington, DC. Flight: Skylab B. NASA considered use of surplus Apollo/Saturn assets for a second Skylab station in May 1973. Instead the decision was taken to mothball surplus hardware in August 1973. In December 1976, the boosters and spacecraft were handed over to museums. The opportunity to launch an International Space Station, at a tenth of the cost and twenty years earlier, was lost.References: 129.

• Apollo (ASTP) Nation: USA. Program: ASTP. Payload: Apollo CSM 111. Mass: 14,768 kg (32,557 lb). Class: Manned. Type: Lunar spacecraft. Spacecraft: Apollo CSM. Location of Spacecraft: California Science Center, Los Angeles, CA. Agency: NASA MSC. Perigee: 152 km (94 mi). Apogee: 166 km (103 mi). Inclination: 51.70 deg. Period: 87.60 min. COSPAR: 1975-066A. USAF Sat Cat: 8032. Duration: 9.06 days. Decay Date: 1975-07-24. Flight Crew: Brand, Slayton, Stafford. Flight: Soyuz 19 (ASTP), Apollo (ASTP). This flight marked the culmination of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, a post-moon race 'goodwill' flight to test a common docking system for space rescue. 15 July 1975 began with the flawless launch of Soyuz 19. Apollo followed right on schedule. Despite a stowaway - a 'super Florida mosquito' - the crew accomplished a series of rendezvous manoeuvres over the next day resulting in rendezvous with Soyuz 19. At 11:10 on 17 July the two spacecraft docked. The crew members rotated between the two spacecraft and conducted various mainly ceremonial activities. Stafford spent 7 hours, 10 minutes aboard Soyuz, Brand 6:30, and Slayton 1:35. Leonov was on the American side for 5 hours, 43 minutes, while Kubasov spent 4:57 in the command and docking modules.

  After being docked for nearly 44 hours, Apollo and Soyuz parted for the first time and were station-keeping at a range of 50 meters. The Apollo crew placed its craft between Soyuz and the sun so that the diameter of the service module formed a disk which blocked out the sun. This artificial solar eclipse, as viewed from Soyuz, permitted photography of the solar corona. After this experiment Apollo moved towards Soyuz for the second docking.

  Three hours later Apollo and Soyuz undocked for the second and final time. The spacecraft moved to a 40 m station-keeping distance so that the ultraviolet absorption (UVA MA-059) experiment could be performed. This was an effort to more precisely determine the quantities of atomic oxygen and atomic nitrogen existing at such altitudes. Apollo, flying out of plane around Soyuz, projected monochromatic laser-like beams of light to retro-reflectors mounted on Soyuz. On the 150-meter phase of the experiment, light from a Soyuz port led to a misalignment of the spectrometer, but on the 500-meter pass excellent data were received; on the 1,000-meter pass satisfactory results were also obtained.

  With all the joint flight activities completed, the ships went on their separate ways. On 20 July the Apollo crew conducted earth observation, experiments in the multipurpose furnace (MA-010), extreme ultraviolet surveying (MA-083), crystal growth (MA-085), and helium glow (MA-088). On 21 July Soyuz 19 landed safely in Kazakhstan. Apollo continued in orbit on 22-23 July to conduct 23 independent experiments - including a doppler tracking experiment (MA-089) and geodynamics experiment (MA-128) designed to verify which of two techniques would be best suited for studying plate tectonics from earth orbit.

  After donning their space suits, the crew vented the command module tunnel and jettisoned the docking module. The docking module would continue on its way until it re-entered the earth's atmosphere and burned up in August 1975.References: 1, 2, 5, 6, 33,60, 452.

• Saturn S-IVB-210 Nation: USA. Program: ASTP. Payload: Saturn S-IVB-210. Agency: NASA MSF. Perigee: 152 km (94 mi). Apogee: 166 km (103 mi). Inclination: 51.70 deg. Period: 87.60 min. COSPAR: 1975-066B. USAF Sat Cat: 8033. Decay Date: 1975-07-16. References: 279.

• Docking Module 2 Nation: USA. Program: ASTP. Payload: Apollo DM-2. Spacecraft: Apollo ASTP Docking Module. Agency: NASA MSC. Perigee: 201 km (124 mi). Apogee: 222 km (137 mi). Inclination: 51.70 deg. Period: 88.73 min. COSPAR: 1975-066C. USAF Sat Cat: 8042. Decay Date: 1975-08-02. References: 279.

• McDowell, Jonathan, Jonathan's Space Home Page, Harvard University, 1997-present. Jonathan McDowell's complete on-line listing of all objects orbited and over 20,000 rocket launches Accessed at: http://www.planet4589.org/jsr.html.

• Gatland, Kenneth, Manned Spacecraft, Macmillan, New York, 1968. ISBN: 0025428209. First of a marvelous series of pocket-size hardbacks covering spacecraft and rocketry. More at amazon.com...

• Ley, Willy, Rockets Missiles and Men in Space, Viking Press, New York, 1968. ISBN: 0670602264. Willy Ley was one of the great science writers and promoters of spaceflight in the 1950's. This book covers basic concepts and the history of rocketry up to the early 1960's. More at amazon.com...

• Hobbs, Marvin, Fundamentals of Rockets, Missiles, and Spacecraft, John F Rider, 1961..

• Bilstein, Roger E, Stages to Saturn, US Government Printing Office, 1980. ISBN: 0160489091. Excellent account of the evolution, design, and development of the Saturn launch vehicles. More at amazon.com...

• NASA Report, Saturn 1B/Centaur Propulsion Systems Compatibility Study, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064347_1973064347.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Apollo Command Module Access Arms, Saturn IB, Launch Complexes 34 and 37 Engineering Report, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19640016454_1964016454.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Orbital Payload Potential: Saturn 1B Earth Launch Vehicle Using Solid Propellant Motors, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740076081_1974076081.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, The Apollo 'A'/Saturn C-1 launch vehicle system, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064291_1973064291.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, LC-34 and LC-37 deactivation, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790075722_1979075722.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn Stage S-I-8 Final Static Test Report, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660006784_1966006784.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn S-Ib Stage Final Static Test Reportstage S-Ib-4, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660014225_1966014225.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn S-Ib Stage Final Static Test Report, Stage S-Ib-2, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660014374_1966014374.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, A Supersonic/Hypersonic Aerodynamic Investigation of The Saturn 1B/Apollo Upper Stage, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660006801_1966006801.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn Ib/S-Ivb Stage Separation Controllability Report, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19700075948_1970075948.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Flight Data Display Studies For Real Time Computer Flight Evaluation Final Report, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660002884_1966002884.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, AS 201 Launch Results, . Accessed at: http://klabs.org/history/history_docs/jsc_t/as201_launch_results.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn AS-201/Apollo Postflight Trajectory, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19920075297_1992075297.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, AS 201 Launch Results Vol 2, . Accessed at: http://klabs.org/history/history_docs/jsc_t/as202_saturn_Ib_results_vol_2.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Apollo/Saturn 201 Flight Controller and Recovery Assignments (2/23/66), . Accessed at: http://www.jdkbph.com/histdocs/apollo/flight%20controllers.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Control factors for Apollo-Saturn 201 vehicle, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19650023271_1965023271.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn S-Ib Stage Assembly And Test Report, S-Ib-1, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660011607_1966011607.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, AS 202 Saturn IB Results Vol 2, . Accessed at: http://klabs.org/history/history_docs/jsc/as202_saturn_Ib_results_vol_202.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn S-1B Stage and Saturn 1B Program: Saturn AS-202 Postflight Trajectory, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19920075314_1992075314.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, As-202 Launch Vehicle Operational Flight Trajectory, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660018447_1966018447.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, AS 203 Launch Results, . Accessed at: http://klabs.org/history/history_docs/jsc_t/as203_launch_results.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Evaluation of As-203 Low Gravity Orbital Experiment, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19680012073_1968012073.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn SA-203 postflight trajectory, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19920075300_1992075300.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Saturn S-IVB-203 stage acceptance firing test plan, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19700076119_1970076119.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Results of the third Saturn IB Launch Vehicle Test Flight AS 203, . Accessed at: http://klabs.org/history/history_docs/jsc_t/results_of_the_third_saturn_Ib_launch_vehicle_test_flight_as_203.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Apollo/Saturn IB Flight Safety Plan, Vehicle AS-203, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660020881_1966020881.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Aeroelaxtic Characteristics of the Saturn IB SA-203 Launch Vehicle, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19660022850_1966022850.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Control System Information for SA-203, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19670083111_1967083111.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Apollo 5 Mission - Final Flight Evaluation Report, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19700024869_1970024869.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Skylab Saturn 1B Flight Manual, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740021163_1974021163.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Skylab 1 space vehicle transfer operations VAB to PAD, . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19750069155_1975069155.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Skylab 2 Saturn IB Launch Vehicle Flight Evaluation, . Accessed at: http://klabs.org/history/history_docs/jsc_t/skylab_II_saturn_Ib.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, Skylab 2 space vehicle transfer operations PAD to VAB (BP-30), . Accessed at: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19750067812_1975067812.pdf. -Right click to download!

• NASA Report, <