#Apollo CSM Block II

[lonestarflight]

Apollo 9 Gumdrop (CSM-104) prior docking with the Lunar Module Spider (LM-3).

Date: March 7, 1969

NASA ID: AS09-24-3631, AS09-24-3624, AS09-24-3652

[maddyaddy]

It's pretty interesting to think about how manned space capsule design, at least with the US programs, evolved so rapidly in 10 years (1958-1968). Case in point. Mercury's only real capability, flight-wise, was to orbit the Earth. It couldn't change its trajectory mid-orbit; it had to reenter the atmosphere to do that. Gemini, however, could use vernier thrusters to change its orbit by translation and did so in March of 1965. For the uninitiated among us, verniers are gimbaled thrusters that allow you to rotate and translate a spacecraft. Gemini could even rendezvous with another spacecraft in orbit.

Apollo's CSM, obviously, was capable of far more. Gemini, in fact, was a crash program to serve as a proof of concept for technologies developed for it. But in 10 years from the first American manned spaceflight, we have Apollo Block II - which can go from the moon and back. Truly fascinating.

[moonwatchuniverse]

December 2... we remember Apollo 7 astronaut Don Eisele USAF Colonel Don Fulton Eisele passed away on December 2, 1987 while on a business trip in Japan. Selected in NASA group 3 astronauts (October 1963), Eisele was teamed up with Ed White and Gus Grissom for Apollo 1. However, Eisele flew as CMP - Command Module Pilot onboard Apollo 7 testing the first Block II CSM in LEO - Low Earth Orbit. In 1986, Eisele was a guide onboard the supersonic Concorde passenger airliner during comet Halley’s chase flight out of Miami and New York. Colonel Eisele was an Eagle Scout and in 1987 he was cremated in Japan, his ashes were buried in Arlington cemetery with full military honors. (Photo: NASA)

[odishaphotos]

Apollo-7 (lunar mission)

Apollo-7 (lunar mission)

The Apollo 7 (Moon Mission) is the first human-to-human mission in the United States Apollo series. With the exception of NASA's Gemini-12 test, this was the first test to send manned vehicles into space. The Apollo 1 manned mission in the Apollo spacecraft failed to launch a manned spacecraft into the lunar mission for 21 months after failing to catch fire in January 1967. Meanwhile, the cause of the accident was investigated and the spacecraft and security systems were improved, and the Saturn-V rocket was re-tested unmanned. The Apollo-7 test was performed by the Apollo-7 command and service module in the lower chamber of the Earth.

About the campaign ---

The commander of the Apollo 7 crew was Walter M. Schirra. The other two drivers are senior pilot Donn F. Eisele and another pilot and engineer, R. Walter Cunningham. The driver's team was tasked with maneuvering and maneuvering their spacecraft. In this way, Eisel was given the command module pilot and Cunningham the Lunar module pilot. The mission of the Apollo-C class was to test the redesign of the redesigned Block-II CSM by orbiting the Earth for 11 days. It took off from Cape Kennedy Space Station on October 11, 1968. The mission was technically a successful mission that later convinced scientists to send Apollo-8 to the lunar orbit. On October 22, 1968, the vehicle completed its test and crashed into the Atlantic Ocean.

[alwaysconsiderate-blog]

Fake it

This genuine NASA design makes for a stunning bright white watchband that gives the watch an unmistakable space-strap look. It's a rarely seen watchband only produced by NASA during the development stages of the Block II Apollo CSM. Though never flown in orbit, they were the current issue during manned Thermal Vacuum testing (2TV-1).  

The relevant configurations of the SEB12100030 blueprint were the 19" and 21½" pairs -203 and -204 made with beta fabric tape, and then for -205 and -206 made from Telfon-coated beta cloth folded with a single seam.  Five or six 1-inch segments of loop pile were stitched at regular intervals from the VELCRO® brand hook tape end.

Although the watchbands for sale here aren't made from beta fabric, the alternative fabric was chosen for the same look and feel.

https://www.seb12100030.com/products/white-nasa-velcro

[louismixon]

What Happened to Apollos 2 and 3? By Amy Shira Teitel October 28, 2013 Things were looking good for NASA at the beginning of 1966. The Gemini program was halfway done and well on track to accomplish all the major program goals by the end of the year, and Apollo was in the pipeline on track to begin manned missions early in 1967. And flights in support of Apollo's lunar goal were well underway by this point. Tests of the Saturn I rocket and flights of boilerplate Apollo Command Modules (CSM) had begun in 1961. And from the start NASA had been using a straightforward and self-evident naming scheme: a letter denoting the rocket and payload and number standing for the rocket type and launch number. There were ten Saturn I launches designated by “S” or “AS” followed by a number from 100 to 110. The 100-series numbers were reserved for the Saturn I rocket, so AS-101 would be the first Saturn I launch. Five Little Joe launched tests of the CSM were noted by "A" followed by a number from 1 to 4; the first was an unnumbered qualification flight. Getting closer to manned missions were the more advanced Saturn IB launches. These missions were designated “AS” for Apollo-Saturn followed by a number beginning with 201, the 200-series numbers were reserved for the Saturn IB rocket. NASA AS-109's 1965 launch. All launched in 1966 while Gemini was coming to a close, AS-201 on February 26 was a suborbital test of the Saturn IB with a Block I Apollo CSM as its payload, AS-203 on July 5 was another suborbital flight to test the CSM’s heat shield, and AS-202 was a test of the Saturn IB rocket. The next mission in the Saturn IB sequence, AS-204, was scheduled as the first manned mission. It was a simple but vital Earth orbital test of the Block I CSM scheduled to launch on February 21, 1967. When NASA received the spacecraft for AS-204, spacecraft 012, at the Kennedy Space Center on August 26, 1966, it was protected by a cover emblazoned with “Apollo One” in capital letters. The mission was colloquially known as Apollo 1; the crew even had agency approval for a mission patch paying homage to the flight’s foremost position among manned missions. Following this first manned flight would be Apollo 2 was, a duplicate of the Apollo 1 mission to give NASA a chance to test or revisit anything the first crew might have missed. Apollo 3 would debut the advanced Block II CSM, the lunar mission-capable version of the spacecraft designed to dock with the Lunar Module and create a tunnel through which astronauts could transfer between vehicles. But it wasn’t long before this plan fell out of favour. With spacecraft 014, the spacecraft for Apollo 2, falling badly behind, many started questioning the value of flying a second Block I mission. There wasn’t too much the agency could learn from a Block I flight that it could then apply to the Moon-bound Block II missions. Besides, NASA had long abandoned the practice of duplicating missions; not since Gus Grissom followed in Al Shepard’s suborbital contrails in 1961 had NASA duplicated a mission. Not long after Gemini 12 splashed down on November 15, 1966, George Mueller of the Office of Manned Spaceflight cancelled Apollo 2. The missions were reorganized so Apollo 2 would debut the Lunar Module while Apollo 3, a high Earth orbit mission with both the CSM and LM, would be the first manned Saturn V launch. This was the standing order for Apollo missions, all with assigned crews in training, in January of 1967. Then NASA was struck with its first major setback. During a pre-launch test, a fire ripped through spacecraft 012 and killed the Apollo 1 crew. The ensuing accident investigation had widespread effects. It revealed shoddy workmanship found flaws in management practices, and underscored discrepancies in the spacecraft’s overall design. The review board recommended dozens of changes be made to make the spacecraft safer going forward, meaning NASA and the CSM contractor North American Aviation were facing a substantial redesign. A congressional inquiry ended with Apollo Spacecraft Program Office manager Joe Shea leaving the agency. NASA managers became increasingly cautious right at the time they needed to take big risks to meet the end of decade lunar landing goal. The fire also forced Apollo management to reconsider whether it was worth rescheduling the Apollo 1 Block I shakedown flight at all. With so many changes pending, it hardly seemed worth flying the version of the spacecraft that wouldn’t be going to the Moon. While the Apollo 1 investigation wore on, the structure of the whole lunar program was called into question. By the end of April, the charred spacecraft 012 had been disassembled to find the root of the accident and the pieces of Apollo were slowly coming back together. The decision was made to cancel all manned Block I flights. And with the Lunar Module still behind schedule, Apollo would start with an Earth orbital Block II CSM only flight followed, possibly, by a lunar orbital CSM flight.

[lonestarflight]

The Apollo 15 Command Module Endeavour (CM-112) prior to and after being brought aboard U.S.S. OKINAWA (LPH-3).

Date: August 7, 1971

NASA ID: link, S71-42024, S71-42037

[lonestarflight]

Cancelled Missions/Station: Manned Orbital Research Laboratory (MORL)

This was a study initiated in 1962 for space stations designs using the Gemini Spacecraft and later on the Apollo CSM. Boeing and Douglas received Phase I contracts in June 1964.

MORL/S-IVB Concept

"A 5 metric ton 'dry' space station, launched by Saturn IB, with Gemini or Apollo being used for crew rotation. The 6.5 meter diameter and 12.6 meter long station included a docking adapter, hangar section, airlock, and a dual-place centrifuge. Douglas was selected by NASA LaRC for further Phase 2 and 3 studies in 1963 to 1966. Although MORL was NASA's 'baseline station' during this period, it was dropped by the late 1960's in preference to the more capable station that would become Skylab.

Different docking concepts studied.

The Manned Orbital Research Laboratory was the brainchild of Carl M Houson and Allen C. Gilbert, two engineers at Douglas. In 1963 they proposed a Mini Space Station using existing hardware, to be launched by 1965. A Titan II or Atlas would be launched with a payload of control system, docking adapter and hangar module. The visiting crew would use the payload to transform the empty fuel tank of the last stage of the rocket into pressurized habitat (a so-called 'wet' space station). Provisions were available for 4 astronauts for a 100 day stay. Crew members would arrive two at a time aboard Gemini spacecraft. Equipment included a two-place centrifuge for the astronauts to readapt to gravity before their return to earth.

An early MORL concert. Artwork by Gordon Phillips.

In June 1964 Boeing and Douglas received Phase I contracts for further refinement of MORL station designs. The recommended concept was now for a 13.5 metric ton 'dry' space station, launched by Saturn IB, with Gemini or Apollo being used for crew rotation. The 6.5 meter diameter and 12.6 meter long station included a docking adapter, Hangar section, airlock, and a dual-place centrifuge.

"Medium-sized orbiting lab is this Manned Orbital Research Laboratory (MORL) developed for NASA's Langley Lab by Douglas Missiles & Spacecraft Division. The lab which weighs about 35,000 pounds, could maintain 3 to 6 men in orbit for a year.

Orbiting Stations: Stopovers to Space Travel by Irwin Stambler, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1965."

Douglas was selected by NASA LaRC for further Phase 2 and 3 studies in 1963 to 1966. The major system elements of the baseline that emerged included:

A 660-cm-diameter laboratory launched by the Saturn IB into a 370-km orbit inclined at 28.72 degrees to the equator

A Saturn IB launched Apollo logistics vehicle, consisting of a modified Apollo command module, a service pack for rendezvous and re-entry propulsion, and a multi-mission module for cargo, experiments, laboratory facility modification, or a spacecraft excursion propulsion system.

Supporting ground systems.

MORL Phase IIb examined the utilization of the MORL for space research in the 1970s. Subcontractors included:

Eclipse-Pioneer Division of Bendix, stabilization and control

Federal Systems Division of IBM, communications, data management, and ground support systems

Hamilton Standard Division of the United Aircraft Corporation, environmental control/life support

Stanford Research Institute, priority analysis of space- related objectives

Bissett-Berman, oceanography

Marine Advisors, oceanography

Aero Services, cartography and photogrammetry

Marquardt, orientation propulsion

TRW, main engine propulsion.

The original MORL program envisioned one or two Saturn IB and three Titan II launches. Crew would be 6 to 9 Astronauts. After each Gemini docked to the MORL at the nose of the adapter, the crew would shut down the Gemini systems, put the spacecraft into hibernation, and transfer by EVA to the MORL airlock. The Gemini would then be moved by a small manipulator to side of the station to clear docking adapter for arrival of the next crew."

"Docking was to have 3 ports, all Nose Dock config, with spacecraft modifications totaling +405 lbs over the baseline Gemini spacecraft (structure beef-up, dock provisions, added retro-rockets, batteries, a data link for rendezvous, temp. control equip. for long-term, unoccupied Gemini storage on-orbit and removal of R&D instruments)."

"Later concepts including docking a Saturn-IB launched space telescope to MORL. At 4 meter diameter and 15 meter long, this would be the same size as the later Hubble Space Telescope. The crew would have to make EVA's to recover the film from the camera.

In 1965 Robert Sohn, head of the Technical Requirements Staff, TRW Space Technology Laboratories, proposed a detailed plan for early manned flight to Mars using MORL. The enlarged MORL-derived mission module would house six to eight men and be hurled on a Mars flyby by a single Saturn MLV-V-1 launch. MORL-derived Mars mission modules cropped up in other Douglas Mars studies until superseded by the 10-m diameter Planetary Mission Module in 1969.

MORL/Space Telescope

Why was MORL never launched ?

NASA had a need for a Space Station and MORL was little, easy and cheap. But NASA had more ambitious plans, embodied in the Apollo Applications Orbital Workshop (later called Skylab)."

-information from astronautix.com: link

source, source, source

NARA: 6375661, S66-17592

Posted on Flickr by Numbers Station: link

[lonestarflight]

USS HORNET (CVS-12) entering Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, following the Apollo 11 recovery. On deck are various aircraft of Carrier Anti-Submarine Air Group 59 (CVSG-59) and the Apollo 11 Capsule (CM-107). Following decontamination procedures, the three astronauts were placed in quarantine for 18 days until August 10, 1969.

Date: July 26, 1969

U.S. Navy photo: 428-KN-18090

[lonestarflight]

Interior view of the Manned Spacecraft Operations Building, Kennedy Space Center, during the move of Apollo 9 Command and Service Module (CSM-104) Gumdrop from workstand to transfer stand prior to mating to Spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter (SLA-12A).

Date: November 30, 1968

NASA ID: S68-55032

[lonestarflight]

Sketches by W. Taub outlining Soviet and American spacecraft characteristics. Prepared in 1969 for the Apollo Soyuz Test Program. Of note is the Gemini and Big G capsule sketches and the lack of the docking module for the Apollo Capsule.

The Apollo's cabin atmosphere was 100 percent oxygen at 0.34 atmosphere pressure, while that of Soyuz was nitrogen/oxygen at 1.0 atmosphere. This necessitated the docking module for the two crews to interact with one another.

source, source, source

NASA ID: S74-05269

[lonestarflight]

"Apollo 13: Separation of the never-flown-before Command Module / Lunar Module configuration from the crippled Service Module. Approaching Earth, they fired the Aquarius engine again to thread themselves through the slender gateway out of space, shifted to the damaged Service Module and their lifeboat, the Aquarius. Carrier Iwo Jima, steaming on station in the Pacific Ocean, picked them up 45 minutes after splashdown, the fastest recovery ever."

Date: April 17, 1970

Posted on Flickr by Dan Beaumont Space Museum: link

[lonestarflight]

"A view of Earth as photographed from the Apollo 12 spacecraft some three and a half hours after it lifted off on Nov. 14, 1969. Parts of the United States and Central America can be seen through the clouds. The area includes Texas, Lake Michigan, Florida and the Yucatan Peninsula."

Date: November 14, 1969

NASA ID: AS12-51-7587

[lonestarflight]

"Farewell, Aquarius, and we thank you",

Artwork of the separation sequence leading to re-entry of Apollo 13 Commande Module Odyssey.

Date: April 17, 1970

Posted on Flickr by Dan Beaumont Space Museum: link

[lonestarflight]

Trajectory correction propulsion of the Apollo 13 Lunar Module Aquarius.

"Artist portrays particles from damaged spacecraft accompanying Aquarius and ruptured Odyssey as Apollo 13 fires engine to alter course. NASA: The spacecraft was then maneuvered back into a free-return trajectory at 061:29:43.49 by firing the LM descent engine for 34.23 seconds. It then looped behind the Moon and was out of contact with the Earth tracking stations between 077:08:35 and 077:33:10, a total of 24 minutes 35 seconds."

Date: April 14, 1970

Posted on Flickr by "Dan Beaumont Space Museum": link

[lonestarflight]

Cancelled Missions: Apollo-Soyuz Test Program II, with a Salyut Space Station

"The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) had its origins in talks aimed at developing a common U.S./Soviet docking system for space rescue. The concept of a common docking system was first put forward in 1970; it was assumed at that time, however, that the docking system would be developed for future spacecraft, such as the U.S. Space Station/Space Shuttle, not the U.S. Apollo Command and Service Module (CSM) and Soviet Soyuz spacecraft in operation at the time.

A joint U.S./Soviet space mission served the political aims of both countries, however, so the concept of a near-term docking mission rapidly gained momentum. In May 1972, at the superpower summit meeting held in Moscow, President Richard Nixon and Premier Alexei Kosygin signed an agreement calling for an Apollo-Soyuz docking in July 1975.

NASA and its contractors studied ways of expanding upon ASTP even before it was formally approved; in April 1972, for example, McDonnell Douglas proposed a Skylab-Salyut international space laboratory . A year and a half later (September 1973), however, the aerospace trade magazine Aviation Week & Space Technology cited unnamed NASA officials when it reported that, while the Soviets had indicated interest in a 1977 second ASTP flight, the U.S. space agency was 'currently unwilling' to divert funds from Space Shuttle development.

Salyut Apollo docking diagram

Nevertheless, early in 1974 the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas, examined whether a second ASTP mission might be feasible in 1977. The 1977 ASTP proposal aimed to fill the expected gap in U.S. piloted space missions between the 1975 ASTP mission and the first Space Shuttle flight.

The brief in-house study focused on mission requirements for which NASA JSC had direct responsibility. FOD assumed that Apollo CSM-119 would serve as the prime 1977 ASTP spacecraft and that the U.S. would again provide the Docking Module (DM) for linking the Apollo CSM with the Soyuz spacecraft. CSM-119 had been configured as the five-seat Skylab rescue CSM; work to modify it to serve as the 1975 ASTP backup spacecraft began as FOD conducted its study, soon after the third and final Skylab crew returned to Earth in February 1974. FOD suggested that, if a backup CSM were deemed necessary for the 1977 ASTP mission, then the incomplete CSM-115 spacecraft should get the job. CSM-115, which resided in storage in California, had been tapped originally for the cancelled Apollo 19 moon landing mission.

FOD also assumed that the ASTP prime crew of Thomas Stafford, Vance Brand, and Deke Slayton would serve as the backup crew for the 1977 ASTP mission, while the 1975 ASTP backup crew of Alan Bean, Ronald Evans, and Jack Lousma would become the 1977 ASTP prime crew. FOD conceded, however, that this assumption was probably not realistic. If new crewmembers were needed, FOD noted, then training them would require 20 months. They would undergo 500 hours of intensive language instruction during their training.

FOD estimated that Rockwell International support for the 1977 ASTP flight would cost $49.6 million, while new experiments, nine new space suits, and 'government-furnished equipment' would total $40 million. Completing and modifying CSM-115 for its backup role would cost $25 million. Institutional costs — for example, operating Mission Control and the Command Module Simulator (CMS), printing training manuals and flight documentation, and keeping the cafeteria open after hours — would add up to about $15 million. This would bring the total cost to $104.7 million without the backup CSM and $129.7 million with the backup CSM.

The FOD study identified 'two additional major problems' facing the 1977 ASTP mission, both of which involved NASA JSC's Space Shuttle plans. The first was that the CMS had to be removed to make room for planned Space Shuttle simulators. Leaving it in place to support the 1977 ASTP mission would postpone Shuttle simulator availability.

A thornier problem was that 75% of NASA JSC's existing flight controllers (about 100 people) would be required for the 1977 ASTP in the six months leading up to and during the mission. In the same period, NASA planned to conduct "horizontal" Space Shuttle flight tests. These would see a Shuttle Orbiter flown atop a modified 747; later, the aircraft would release the Orbiter for an unpowered glide back to Earth. FOD estimated that NASA JSC would need to hire new flight controllers if it had to support both the 1977 ASTP and the horizontal flight tests. The new controllers would receive training to support Space Shuttle testing while veteran controllers supported the 1977 ASTP.

The ASTP Apollo CSM (CSM-111) lifted off on a Saturn IB rocket on 15 July 1975 with astronauts Thomas Stafford, Vance Brand, and Donald Slayton on board. The ASTP Saturn IB, the last rocket of the Saturn family to fly, lifted off from Launch Complex (LC) 39 Pad B, one of two Saturn V pads at Kennedy Space Center, not the LC 34 and LC 37 pads used for Saturn IB launches in the Apollo lunar program. This was because NASA had judged that maintaining the Saturn IB pads for Skylab and ASTP would be too costly. A 'pedestal' (nicknamed the 'milkstool') raised the Skylab 2, 3, and 4 and ASTP Saturn IB rockets so that they could use the Pad 39B Saturn V umbilicals and crew access arm.

Once in orbit, the ASTP CSM turned and docked with the DM mounted on top of the Saturn IB's second stage. It then withdrew the DM from the stage and set out in pursuit of the Soyuz 19 spacecraft, which had launched about eight hours before the Apollo CSM with cosmonauts Alexei Leonov and Valeri Kubasov on board. The two craft docked on 17 July and undocked for the final time on July 19. Soyuz 19 landed on 21 July. The ASTP Apollo CSM, the last Apollo spacecraft to fly, splashed down near Hawaii on 24 July 1975 ��� six years to the day after Apollo 11, the first piloted Moon landing mission, returned to Earth.

The proposal for a 1977 ASTP repeat gained little traction. Though talks aimed at a U.S. Space Shuttle docking with a Soviet Salyut space station had resumed in May 1975, no plans for new U.S.-Soviet manned missions existed when the ASTP Apollo splashed down. Shuttle-Salyut negotiators made progress in 1975-1976, but the U.S. deferred signing an agreement until after the results of the November 1976 election were known.

In May 1977, the sides formally agreed that a Shuttle-Salyut mission should occur. In September 1978, however, NASA announced that talks had ended pending results of a comprehensive U.S. government review. Following the December 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, work toward joint U.S.-Soviet piloted space missions was abandoned on advice from the U.S. Department of State. It would resume a decade later as the Soviet Union underwent radical internal changes that led to its collapse in 1991 and the rebirth of the Soviet space program as the Russian space program."

-Article from "No Shortage of Dreams" blog: link

Drew Granston: link

source, source, source