Part 1 (C)
Defining Contractural Relations
April 1963 through June 1963
1963 April
1963 May
1963 June
April 1
Grumman began "Lunar Hover and Landing Simulation IIIA," a
series of tests simulating a LEM landing. Crew station configuration and
instrument panel layout were representative of the actual vehicle.
Through this simulation, Grumman sought primarily to evaluate the
astronauts' ability to perform the landing maneuver manually, using
semiautomatic as well as degraded attitude control modes. Other items
evaluated included the flight control system parameters, the attitude
and thrust controller configurations, the pressure suit's constraint
during landing maneuvers, the handling qualities and operation of LEM
test article 9 as a freeflight vehicle, and manual abort initiation
during the terminal landing maneuver.
GAEC, "Final Report: Lunar Landing Simulation IIIA,"
LED-770-4, April 1, 1964, p. 1.
April 2
The Soviet Union announced the successful launch of the Lunik
IV probe toward the moon. The 1,412- kilogram (3,135-pound)
spacecraft's mission was not immediately disclosed, but Western
observers speculated that an instrumented soft landing was planned. On
April 6, at 4:26 a.m. Moscow time, Lunik IV passed within
8,499 kilometers (5,281 miles) of the moon. The Soviet news agency,
Tass, reported that data had been received from the spacecraft
throughout its flight and that radio communication would continue for a
few more days.
The Washington Post, April 3 and 5, 1963; The New
York Times, April 3, 1963; The Sunday Star,
Washington, April 7, 1963.
April 3
Charles W. Frick resigned as ASPO Manager and Robert O. Piland was named
Acting ASPO Manager.
MSC Announcement 178, "New Assignment of Personnel," April 3,
1963.
April 3
At a North American design review, NASA representatives expressed a
preference for a fixed CM crew couch. This would have the advantages of
simplified design, elimination of couch adjustments by the crew, and
better placement of the astronauts to withstand reentry loads. NASA
authorized North American to adopt the concept following a three-week
study by the company to determine whether a favorable center of gravity
could be achieved without a movable couch.
Use of the fixed couch required relocation of the main and side display
panels and repositioning of the translational and rotational hand
controllers. During rendezvous and docking operations, the crew would
still have to adjust their normal body position for proper viewing.
"Apollo Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-12, p. 11;
ibid., SID 62-300-13, June 1, 1963, pp. 1, 7-8.
April 10
North American awarded a $9.5 million letter contract to the Link
Division of General Precision, Inc., for the development and
installation of two spacecraft simulators, one at MSC and the other at
the Launch Operations Center. Except for weightlessness, the trainers
would simulate the entire lunar mission, including sound and lighting
effects. (See December 8, 1962.)
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 40; "Apollo
Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-12, p. 2; Aviation
Daily, May 1, 1963, p. 1.
April 10
Wesley E. Messing, MSC WSMR Operations Manager, notified NASA, North
American, and General Dynamics/Convair (GD/C) that Phase I of the
range's launch complex was completed. GD/C and North American could now
install equipment for the launch of boilerplate 6 and the Little Joe II
vehicle.
TWX, Messing to MSC (Attn: W. C. Williams and R. O. Piland), NASA Hqs
(Attn: G. M, Low), GD/G (Attn: J. B. Hurt), and NAA, S&ID (Attn: J.
L. Pearce), April 10, 1963.
April 16-May 15
North American chose Simmonds Precision Products, Inc., to design and
build an electronic measurement and display system to gauge the service
propulsion system propellants. Both a primary and a backup system were
required by the contract, which was expected to cost about 2 million.
"Apollo Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-13, p. 2;
Space Business Daily, June 26, 1963, p. 824.
April 16-May 15
On the basis of wind tunnel tests and analytical studies, North American
recommended a change in the planned test of the launch escape system
(LES) using boilerplate 22. In an LES abort, the contractor reported,
18,300 meters (60,000 feet) was the maximum altitude at which high
dynamic pressure had to be considered. Therefore North American proposed
an abort simulation at that altitude, where maximum dynamic pressures
were reached, at a speed of Mach 2. 5.
The abort test would demonstrate two possibly critical areas:
- Any destablizing effect of large LES motor plumes on the CM
- The ability of the CM's reaction control system to arrest CM
rotation following tower jettison.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," pp. 28, 29;
"Apollo Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-l3, p. 5; MSC,
"Postlaunch Report for Apollo Mission A-003" (BP-22) (June 28,
1965), p. 2-1; memorandum, J. D. Reed, MSC, to Distr., "Meeting on
BP-22 Test Objectives and Trajectories, June 30, 1964," July 2,
1964.
April 16-May 15
North American simplified the CM water management system by separating
it from the freon system. A 4.5- kilogram (10-pound) freon tank was
installed in the left-hand equipment bay. Waste water formed during
prelaunch and boost, previously ejected overboard, could now be used as
an emergency coolant. The storage capacity of the potable water tank was
reduced from 29 to 16 kilograms (64 to 36 pounds) and the tank was moved
to the lower equipment bay to protect it from potential damage during
landing. These and other minor changes caused a reduction in CM weight
and an increase in the reliability of the CM's water management system.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 7; "Apollo
Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-13, p. 13.
Examining a one-eighth scale model of the LEM are, left to right, Congressman George P. Miller, Chairman of the House Committee on Science and Astronautics; Joseph M. Gavin, Grumman vice president; and Robert S. Mullaney, Grumman Apollo Program Manager.
April 17
At a mechanical systems meeting at MSC, customer and contractor achieved
a preliminary configuration freeze for the LEM. After "considerable
discussion," Grumman agreed to begin designing systems and subsystems
based on this configuration, bearing in mind that certain unresolved
areas (the docking system scanning telescope location and function, and
the outcome of visibility studies) would have a substantial effect on
the final configuration. Several features of the design of the two
stages were agreed upon:
- Descent
- four cylindrical propellant tanks (two oxidizer and two fuel); four-
legged deployable landing gear (see February)
- Ascent
- a cylindrical crew cabin (about 234 centimeters [92 inches] in
diameter) and a cylindrical tunnel (pressurized) for equipment stowage;
an external equipment bay.
GAEC, "Monthly Progress Report No. 3," LPR-10-6, May 10, 1963,
pp. 3, 4, 7-8.
April 18
North American signed a 6 million definitive contract with Lockheed
Propulsion Company for the development of solid propellant motors for
the launch escape system. Work on the motors had begun on February 13,
1962, when Lockheed was selected.
"Apollo Facts," p. 38; Space Business Daily, June
27, 1963, p. 834.
April 25-26
At ASPO's request, Wayne E. Koons of the Flight Operations Division
visited North American to discuss several features of spacecraft landing
and recovery procedures. Koon's objective, in short, was to recommend a
solution when ASPO and the contractor disagreed on specific points, and
to suggest alternate courses when the two organizations agreed. A
question had arisen about a recovery hoisting loop. Neither group wanted
one, as its installation added weight and caused design changes. In
another area, North American wanted to do an elaborate study of the
flotation characteristics of the CM. Koons recommended to ASPO that a
full-scale model of the CM be tested in an open-sea environment.
There were a number of other cases wherein North American and ASPO
agreed on procedures which simply required formal statements of what
would be done. Examples of these were:
- Spacecraft reaction control fuel would be dumped before landing (in
both normal and abort operations)
- The "peripheral equipment bay" would be flooded within 10
minutes after landing
- Location aids would be dye markers and recovery antennas.
Memorandum, W. E. Koons, MSC, to Chief, Flight Operations Div.,
"Report of visit to NAA, S&ID, Downey, Calif., 25-26 April
1963," May 7, 1963.
April 30
The Apollo Spacecraft Mission Trajectory Sub-Panel discussed earth
parking orbit requirements for the lunar mission. The maximum number of
orbits was fixed by the S-IVB's 4.5-hour duration limit. Normally,
translunar injection (TLI) would be made during the second orbit. The
panel directed North American to investigate the trajectory that would
result from injection from the third, or contingency, orbit. The
contractor's study must reckon also with the effects of a contingency
TLI upon the constraints of a free return trajectory and fixed lunar
landing sites.
Minutes of Second Meeting of the Apollo Spacecraft Mission Trajectory
Sub-Panel, April 30, 1963.
During the Month
NASA issued a technical note reporting that scientists at Ames Research
Center Hypervelocity Ballistic Range, Moffett Field, Calif., were
conducting experiments simulating the impact of micrometeoroids on the
lunar surface. The experimenters examined the threat of surface debris,
called secondary ejecta, that would be thrown from resultant craters.
Data indicated that secondary particles capable of penetrating an
astronaut's space suit nearly equaled the number of primary
micrometeoroids. Thus the danger of micrometeoroid impact to astronauts
on the moon may be almost double what was previously thought.
Donald E. Gault, Eugene M. Shoemaker, and Henry J. Moore, Spray
Ejected From the Lunar Surface by Meteoroid Impact, NASA TN
D-1767, April 1963, p. 1; Aviation Week and Space
Technology, 78 (January 14, 1964), pp. 54-55, 57, 59.
During the Month
NASA and General Dynamics/Convair (GD/C) negotiated a second Little Joe
II launch vehicle contract. (See February 18.) For an additional
$337,456, GD/C expanded its program to include the launch of a
qualification test vehicle before the scheduled Apollo tests. This
called for an accelerated production schedule for the four launch
vehicles and their pair of launchers. An additional telemetry system and
an instrumentation transmitter system were incorporated in the
qualification test vehicle, which was equipped with a simulated payload.
At the same time, NASA established earlier launch dates for the first
two Apollo Little Joe II missions.
Little Joe II Test Launch Vehicle, NASA Project Apollo: Final
Report, Vol. I, p. 4-3.
During the Month
Grumman reported to MSC the results of studies on common usage of
communications. Television cameras for the two spacecraft would be
identical (see May 2); the LEM transponder would be as similar as
possible to that in the CSM.
"Monthly Progress Report No. 3," LPR-10-6, p. 21.
During the Month
Grumman recommended that the LEM reaction control system (RCS) be
equipped with dual interconnected tanks, separately pressurized and
employing positive expulsion bladders. The design would provide for an
emergency supply of propellants from the main ascent propulsion tanks.
The RCS oxidizer to fuel ratio would be changed from 2.0:1 to 1.6:1. MSC
approved both of these changes.
Ibid., p. 20; "Apollo Quarterly Status Report No.
3," p. 20.
Grumman reported that it had advised North American's Rocketdyne
Division to go ahead with the lunar excursion module descent engine
development program. Negotiations were complete and the contract was
being prepared for MSC's review and approval. The go-ahead was formally
issued on May 2. (See January 30, February 13, and November 21.)
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, April 28-May 18, 1963," p. 32; "Apollo
Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 21; GAEC, "Monthly Progress
Report No. 4," LPR-10-7, June 10, 1963, p. 2.
May 2
NASA, North American, Grumman, and RCA representatives determined the
alterations needed to make the CM television camera compatible with that
in the LEM: an additional oscillator to provide synchronization,
conversion of operating voltage from 115 AC to 28 DC, and reduction of
the lines per frame from 400 to 320.
NAA, "Apollo Monthly Progress Report," SID 62-300-44, July 1,
1963, p. 9.
May 3
At El Centro, Calif., Northrop Ventura conducted the first of a series
of qualification tests for the Apollo earth landing system (ELS). The
test article, CM boilerplate 3, was dropped from a specially modified
Air Force C-133. The test was entirely successful. The ELS's three main
parachutes reduced the spacecraft's rate of descent to about 9.1 meters
(30 feet) per second at impact, within acceptable limits.
MSC News Release 63-85, May 3, 1963; "Apollo Monthly Progress
Report," SID 62-300-13, p.l0.
A NASA tean inspected progress on Little Joe II in San Diego, Calif., May 6, 1963. Left to right, Walter C. Williams, MSC Deputy Director; Acting Apollo Project Manager Robert O. Piland; Convair Little Joe II Program Manager J. B. Hurt; and James C. Elms, MSC Deputy Director.
May 6
NASA authorized North American to procure carbon dioxide sensors as part
of the environmental control system instrumentation on early spacecraft
flights. (See March 5.)
Letter, H. P. Yschek, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Div.,
"Contract Change Authorization No. Forty-Three," May 6,
1963.
May 6
Astronauts M. Scott Carpenter, Walter M. Schirra, Jr., Neil A.
Armstrong, James A. McDivitt, Elliot M. See, Jr., Edward H. White II,
Charles Conrad, Jr., and John W. Young participated in a study in LTV's
Manned Space Flight Simulator at Dallas, Tex. Under an MSC contract, LTV
was studying the astronauts' ability to control the LEM manually and to
rendezvous with the CM if the primary guidance system failed during
descent. (See September and October 10, 1963, and April 24, 1964.)
MSC News Release 63-81, May 6, 1963.
May 7
MSC announced a reorganization of ASPO:
- Acting Manager:
- Robert O. Piland
- Deputy Manager, Spacecraft:
- Robert O. Piland
- Assistant Deputy Manager for CSM:
- Caldwell C. Johnson
- Deputy Manager for System Integration:
- Alfred D. Mardel
- Deputy Manager LEM:
- James L. Decker
- Manager, Spacecraft Systems Office:
- David W. Gilbert
- Manager, Project Integration Office:
- J. Thomas Markley
MSC Announcement No. 193, "Reorganization of the Apollo Spacecraft
Project Office," May 7, 1963.
May 10
The first meeting of the LEM Flight Technology Systems Panel was held at
MSC. The panel was formed to coordinate discussions on all problems
involving weight control, engineering simulation, and environment. The
meeting was devoted to a review of the status of LEM engineering
programs.
Memorandum, Gerald L. Hunt, MSC, to Chief, Flight Operations Div.,
"LEM Flight Technology System Meeting No. 1," May 20, 1963,
with enclosures.
May 10
MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth announced a division of management
responsibilities between operations and development within MSC. Walter
C. Williams, Deputy Director for Mission Requirements and Flight
Operations, would develop mission plans and rules, crew training, ground
support and mission control complexes, and would manage all MSC flight
operations. At the same time, he would serve as Director of Flight
Operations in the NASA Headquarters OMSF with complete mission authority
during flight tests of Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo. James C. Elms,
Deputy Director for Development and Programs, would manage all MSC
manned space flight projects and would plan, organize, and direct MSC
administrative and technical support.
MSC News Release 63-88, May 10, 1963.
May 10
NASA Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., directed that a
Communications and Tracking Steering Panel and a Working Group be
organized. They would develop specifications, performance requirements,
and implementation plans for the Manned Space Flight Network in support
of the Apollo flight missions.
Memorandum, Robert C. Seamans, Jr., NASA, to Director, Office of Manned
Space Flight, et al., "Functional organization to develop
specifications, performance requirements and implementation plans for
the Manned Space Flight Network," May 10, 1963.
Early in the Month
Grumman selected Space Technology Laboratories (STL) to develop and
fabricate a mechanically throttled descent engine for the LEM,
paralleling Rocketdyne's effort. (See February 27 and March 14.)
Following NASA and MSC concurrence, Grumman began negotiations with STL
on June 1.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, April 28-May 18, 1963," p. 32; "Monthly
Progress Report No. 4," LPR-10-7, p. 44; "Activity Report,
Apollo Spacecraft Project Office, May 16-June 13, 1963," p. 8.
May 14
Grumman submitted to NASA a Quality Control Program Plan for the LEM,
detailing efforts in management, documentation, training, procurement,
and fabrication.
GAEC, "Report No. 1, Grumman Monthly Quality Status Report for Lunar
Excursion Module," LPR-50-1, February 14, 1964.
May 15
Grumman, reporting on the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle's (LLRV)
application to the LEM development program, stated the LLRV could be
used profitably to test LEM hardware. Also included was a development
schedule indicating the availability of LEM equipment and the desired
testing period.
"Monthly Progress Report No. 4," LPR-10-7, p. 39.
May 15-16
Faith 7, piloted by Astronaut L. Gordon Cooper, Jr., was
launched from Cape Canaveral. An Atlas rocket boosted the Mercury
spacecraft into a 161.3 by 267 kilometer (100.2 by 165.9 statute mile)
orbit. After 22 orbits, Cooper manually fired the retrorockets and the
spacecraft reentered the atmosphere, landing safely in the Pacific Ocean
34 hours, 19 minutes, and 49 seconds after liftoff. Astronaut Cooper was
reported in good condition. Cooper's one-day flight turned out to be the
final Mercury flight. (See June 12.)
James M. Grimwood, Project Mercury: A Chronology (NASA
SP-4001, 1963), pp. 191-193.
May 20
In support of NASA's manned space flight programs, Ames Research Center
awarded a $150,000 contract to Westinghouse Electric Corporation for a
one-year study of potential physiological damage in space caused by
cosmic radiation.
NASA News Release 63-107, "NASA Awards Contract for Study of Space
Radiation," May 20, 1963.
May 20-22
At a meeting on mechanical systems at MSC, Grumman presented a status
report on the LEM landing gear design and LEM stowage height. (See
February and April 17.) On May 9, NASA had directed the contractor to
consider a more favorable lunar surface than that described in the
original Statement of Work. Accordingly, Grumman recommended an envelope
of LEM S-IVB clearance of 152.4 centimeters (40 inches) for a landing
gear radius of 457 centimeters (180 inches). Beyond this radius, a
different gear scheme was considered more suitable but would require
greater clearances. The landing gear envelope study was extended for one
month to establish a stowed height of the LEM above the S-IVB for
adapter design. (See June 3 and October 2.)
"Monthly Progress Report No. 4," LPR-10-7, p. 13.
May 22
Grumman representatives met with the ASPO Electrical Systems Panel
(ESP). From ESP, the contractor learned that the communications link
would handle voice only. Transmission of physiological and space suit
data from the LEM to the CM was no longer required. VHF reception of
this data and S-band transmission to ground stations was still
necessary. In addition, Grumman was asked to study the feasibility of a
backup voice transmitter for communications with crewmen on the lunar
surface should the main VHF transmitter fail.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," pp. 54-55;
"Monthly Progress Report No. 4," LPR-10-7, p. 21.
May 23
NASA Headquarters, MSC, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, MSFC, North American,
and Grumman agreed that the LEM and CSM would incorporate phase-coherent
S-band transponders. [The S-band system provides a variety of
communications services. Being phase-coherent meant that it could also
provide Mission Control Center with information about the vehicle's
velocity and position, and thus was a means of tracking the spacecraft.]
Each would have its own allocated frequencies and would be compatible
with Deep Space Instrumentation Facilities.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p.22; "Monthly
Progress Report No. 4," LPR-10-7, p. 21; MSC, "Consolidated
Activity Report for the Office of the Director, Manned Space Flight, May
19-June 15, 1963," p. 62; interview, telephone, Alfred B.
Eickmeier, MSC, March 5, 1970.
May 23
MIT suggested a major redesign of the Apollo guidance computer to make
the CM and LEM computers as similar as possible. NASA approved the
redesign and the Raytheon Company, subcontractor for the computer, began
work.
Raytheon Company, Space and Information Systems Div., "Quarterly
Technical Report No. 4," FR-3-87, April 1-June 30, 1963.
May 23-24
Meeting in Bethpage, N. Y., officials from MSC, Grumman, Hamilton
Standard, International Latex, and North American examined LEM-space
suit interface problems. This session resulted in several significant
decisions:
- Suit evaluation would include a vehicle mockup in an aircraft flying
zero and one-sixth g trajectories.
- The suit assembly emergency oxygen supply would serve also as the
backup pressurization and oxygen supply during crew transfer from the CM
to the LEM.
- The four-hour operating requirement for the portable life support
system (PLSS) should not be considered for normal operation.
- Pending final design of a waste management system, Grumman would
retain provisions for stowage of human wastes.
- The thermal garment would not normally be worn inside the LEM.
- The PLSS battery would be charged before earth launch.
- Prototype Apollo space suits were to be delivered to Grumman as soon
as possible for evaluation and vehicle design.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," pp. 59-60.
May 24
North American demonstrated problems with side-arm controller location
and armrest design inside the CM. Major difficulties were found when the
subject tried to manipulate controls while wearing a pressurized suit.
North American had scheduled further study of these design problems.
"Project Apollo Spacecraft Test Program, Weekly Activity Report
(Period 27 May 1963 through 2 June 1963)," p. 5.
May 28
MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth reported to the MSF Management Council
that the lunar landing mission duration profiles, on which North
American would base the reliability design objectives for mission
success and crew safety and which assumed a 14-day mission, had been
documented and approved. The contractor had also been asked to study two
other mission profile extremes, a 14-day mission with 110-hour
transearth and translunar transfer times and the fastest practicable
lunar landing mission.
MSF Management Council Meeting, May 28, 1963, Agenda Item 2, "Technical
Highlights," p. 4.
May 29
Grumman presented its LEM engineering and simulation plans to MSC,
stating that their existing facilities and contracted facilities at
North American in Columbus, Ohio, and at LTV would be used throughout
1963. Two part-task LEM simulators would be operational at Grumman early
in 1964, with a complete mission simulator available in 1965. MSC had
approved the contractor's procurement of two visual display systems for
use in the simulators.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," pp. 62, 63; GAEC,
"Monthly Progress Report No. 6," LPR-10-16, August 10, 1963,
p. 5.
May 29
The Operational Evaluation and Test Branch of MSC's Flight Operations
Division considered three methods of providing a recovery hoisting loop
on the CM: loop separate from the spacecraft and attached after landing,
use of the existing parachute bridle, and loop installed as part of the
CM equipment similar to Mercury and Gemini. Studies showed that the
third method was preferable. (See April 25-26.)
Memorandum, Christopher C. Kraft, Jr., MSC, to Mgr., ASPO, "Command
module recovery hoisting loop," May 29, 1963.
May 30
Rocketdyne reported to Grumman on the LEM descent stage engine
development program. Revised measurements for the engine were: diameter,
137 centimeters (54 inches); length, 221 centimeters (87 inches) (30.5
centimeters [twelve inches] more than the original constraint that
Grumman had imposed on Rocketdyne).
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," p. 61; "Apollo
Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 21.
During the Month
In its first estimates of reliability for the LEM, Grumman reported a
0.90 probability for mission success and 0.994 for crew safety. (The
probabilities required by NASA were 0.984 and 0.9995, respectively.)
"Monthly Progress Report No. 4," LPR-10-7, p. 26.
During the Month
After a detailed comparison of titanium and aluminum propellant tanks
for the LEM descent stage, Grumman selected the lighter titanium.
Ibid., p. 7.
During the Month
Grumman studied the possibility of using the portable life support
system lithium hydroxide cartridges in the LEM environmental control
system, and determined that such common usage was feasible. This
analysis would be verified by tests at Hamilton Standard.
Ibid., p. 12.
During the Month
Grumman completed the LEM M-1 mockup and began installing equipment in
the vehicle. Also, the contractor began revising cabin front design to
permit comparisons of visibility. (See September 16-18.)
Ibid., p. 8.
During the Month
NASA and General Dynamics Convair negotiated a major change on the
Little Joe II launch vehicle contract. (See February 18.) It provided
for two additional launch vehicles which would incorporate the attitude
control subsystem (as opposed to the early fixed-fin version). On
November 1, MSC announced that the contract amendment was being issued.
NASA Headquarters' approval followed a week later.
Little Joe II Test Launch Vehicle, NASA Project Apollo: Final
Report, Vol. I, p. 4-3; MSC News Release 63-223, November 1,
1963; MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the
Director, Manned Space Flight, October 20-November 16, 1963," p.
57.
MSC informed MSFC that the length of the spacecraft-Saturn V adapter had
been increased from 807.7 centimeters to 889 centimeters (318 inches to
350 inches). The LEM would be supported in the adapter from a fixed
structure on the landing gear. (See October 2.)
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 16.
June 3
North American announced that it had selected ITT's Industrial Products
Division to provide battery chargers for the CSM, designed for an
operational lifetime of 40,000 hours.
Space Business Daily, June 4, 1963, p. 712.
June 4
The $889.3 million definitive Apollo contract with North American was
delivered to NASA Headquarters for review and approval. The target date
for approval was extended to June 30. (See August 14.)
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," p. 33.
June 5
NASA announced that it would select 10 to 15 new astronauts to begin
training in October. Civilian applications were due July 1; those from
military personnel, prescreened by their services, were due July 15. New
selection criteria reduced the maximum age to 35 years and eliminated
the requirement for test pilot certifications.
NASA News Release 63-122, "NASA to Select New Astronauts,"
June 5, 1963.
June 6
The Operational Evaluation and Test Branch of MSC's Flight Operations
Division made the following recommendations on Apollo postlanding water
survival equipment:
- Development should continue on a three-man life raft for the Apollo
mission.
- A 12-hour-duration dye marker packet should be passively deployed on
impact. An additional 18 hours of dye marker should be stored in the
survival kit.
- Two radio beacons of the type being developed for Gemini should be
included in the survival kit.
- Water egress safety features in the Mercury and Gemini space suits
should be included in the Apollo space suit.
- All Apollo equipment which might be involved in water egress,
survival, and recovery situations should be configured for water
landings.
Memorandum, Christopher C. Kraft, Jr., MSC, to Mgr., ASPO, "Apollo
postlanding water survival equipment," June 6, 1963.
June 10
North American completed a backup testing program (authorized by MSC on
November 20, 1962) on a number of ablative materials for the CM
heatshield. Only one of the materials (Avcoat 5026-39) performed
satisfactorily at low temperatures. During a meeting on June 18 at MSC,
company representatives discussed the status of the backup heatshield
program. This was followed by an Avco Corporation presentation on the
primary heatshield development. As a result, MSC directed North American
to terminate its backup program. Shortly thereafter, MSC approved the
use of an airgun to fill the honeycomb core of the heatshield with
ablative material.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 15; MSC,
"Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, June 16-July 20, 1963," p. 69; MSC,
"Weekly Activity Report for the Office of the Director, Manned
Space Flight, June 16-22, 1963," p. 8.
June 10
NASA issued a $1,946,450 definitive contract to Aerojet-General
Corporation for Algol solid-propellant motors for GD/C's Little Joe II
vehicles.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," p. 33.
June 10
Christopher C. Kraft, Jr., of the MSC Flight Operations Division, urged
that an up-data link (UDL) (see January 17) be included on the LEM. In
general, the UDL would function when a great deal of data had to be
transmitted during a time-critical phase. It would also permit
utilization of the ground operational support system as a relay station
for the transmission of data between the CM and LEM. In case of power
failure aboard the LEM, the UDL could start the computer faster and more
reliably than a manual voice link, and it could be used to resume
synchronization in the computer timing system.
Memorandum, Christopher C. Kraft, Jr., MSC, to Mgr., ASPO,
"Up-Digital-Link to the Lunar Excursion Module," June 10,
1963.
June 12
A sketch prepared by John Gurley demonstrates the spacecraft's skip when entering the earth's atmosphere.
The Mission Analysis Branch (MAB) of MSC's Flight Operations Division
studied the phenomenon of a spacecraft's "skip" when
reentering the earth's atmosphere from lunar trajectories and how that
skip relates to landing accuracies. When an Apollo CM encounters the
earth's atmosphere (this study used 91,440 meters [300,000 feet] as the
practical altitude), the vehicle bounces or "skips" back
above the atmosphere. From this point, the spacecraft follows a
ballistic trajectory until it re-encounters the atmosphere. During this
skip portion of reentry, there is no control of the vehicle's flight
trajectory. The length of this skip is, therefore, determined by the
angle and speed at the start of this ballistic trajectory. The distance
of the skip in turn determines the spacecraft's landing area. Variations
in both speed and angle at the start of the skip thus are directly
related to landing accuracy, but the effect of these variations is felt
much more in shallow than in steep trajectories. In light of these
factors, MAB recommended that, for Apollo flights, the skip phase of
reentry be made at the steepest practicable angle consistent with
maximum allowable acceleration forces.
Memorandum, John R. Gurley, MSC, to Chief, Flight Operations Div.,
"A Study of Skip Range Sensitivities and Allowable Errors in Exit
Conditions Applicable to the Apollo Missions," June 12, 1963.
June 12
NASA Administrator James E. Webb, testifying before the Senate space
committee, said that NASA did not plan any further Mercury flights.
Project Mercury, America's first manned space flight program, thus was
ended.
Loyd S. Swenson, Jr., James M. Grimwood, and Charles C. Alexander,
This New Ocean: A History of Project Mercury (NASA SP-4201,
1966), p. 503.
June 12
D. Brainerd-Holmes announced his resignation as NASA's Deputy Associate
Administrator and Director of Manned Space Flight, effective sometime in
the fall. He had joined NASA in 1961 and was returning to industry.
NASA News Release 63-133, "Holmes Returns to Industry as Mercury
Concludes," June 12, 1963.
June 14
NASA Headquarters approved a definitive contract for $35,844,550 with AC
Spark Plug for the manufacture and testing of navigation and guidance
equipment for the CM. This superseded a letter contract of May 30, 1962.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," p. 33; NASA News
Release 63-136, "Contract Signed with AC Spark Plug for Apollo
Guidance System," June 14, 1963; AC Spark Plug, "Apollo
Guidance and Navigation System Participating Contractor Quarterly
Technical Progress Report," January 1963, p. 2-1.
June 14
MSC conducted the final inspection of the Little Joe II launch complex
at WSMR.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, May 19-June 15, 1963," p. 31.
June 14-15
At its plant in Binghampton, N. Y., Link Division of General Precision,
Inc., held a mockup review of the Apollo mission simulator. A number of
modifications in the instructor's console were suggested.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 40.
June 14-19
The Soviet Union launched Vostok V, piloted by Lt. Col.
Valery F. Bykovsky. Two days later Lt. Valentina V. Tereshkova, the
first spacewoman, followed in Vostok VI. Purposes of the
dual mission were to study the medical-biological effects of prolonged
space flight upon humans and to perfect spacecraft systems. On its first
orbit, Vostok VI came within about three miles of
Vostok V, apparently the closest distance achieved during
the flight, and established radio contact. Both cosmonauts landed safely
on June 19. The space spectacular featured television coverage of
Bykovsky that was viewed in the West as well as in Russia.
U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences,
Soviet Space Programs, 1962-1965; Goals and Purposes,
Achievements, Plans, and International Implications, Staff
Report, 89th Cong., 2nd Sess. (December 30, 1966), pp. 180-181.
June 16-July 20
MSC and Grumman assessed crew visibility requirements for the LEM. The
study included a series of helicopter flights in which simulated
earthshine lighting conditions and LEM window configurations were
combined with helicopter landings along representative LEM trajectories.
These flights simulated the LEM's attitude, velocity, range, and dive
angle in the final approach trajectory.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," p. 18; MSC,
"Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, June 16-July 20, 1963," p. 27.
June 16-July 20
MSC reported that crew systems engineers at the Center were assessing
feasibility of having the LEM crew stand rather than sit. MSC requested
Grumman also to look into having the crew fly the vehicle from a
standing position. The concept was formally proposed at the August 27
crew systems meeting and was approved at the NASA-Grumman review of the
LEM M-1 mockup on September 16-18.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, June 16-July 20, 1963," p. 77; "Monthly
Progress Report No. 6," LPR-10-16, p. 12; MSC, "Apollo
Spacecraft Project Office Activity Report, June 14-July 18, 1963,"
p. [15].
June 20
North American signed (and NASA approved) a definitive contract with
Allison Division of General Motors for the service propulsion system
propellant tanks.
MSC, "Weekly Activity Report for the Office of the Director, Manned
Space Flight, June 23-29, 1963," p. 6.
June 21-27
MSC met with those contractors participating in the development of the
LEM guidance and navigation system. (See October 18.) Statements of Work
for the LEM design concept were agreed upon. (Technical directives
covering most of the work had been received earlier by the
contractors.)
MSC, "Activity Report, Apollo Spacecraft Project Office, For Period
June 21-27, 1963,"
June 21-27
North American awarded a contract, valued at $2.8 million, to Avien,
Inc., to develop the steerable S-band antenna for the CSM. (See June
11-18, 1964.)
Ibid.; Space Business Daily, July 18, 1963, p.
95.
June 22
Relationship of SCS to other Apollo subsystems. (NAA drawing)
North American officially froze the design of the CM's stabilization and
control system.
"Abstract of Proceedings, Command Module Stabilization and Control
Systems Meeting No. 16," June 27, 1963, p. 1; MSC, "Activity
Report, Apollo Spacecraft Project Office, For Period June 21-27,
1963," p. 2.
June 25
MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth reported to the MSF Management Council
that the LEM landing gear design freeze was now scheduled for August 31.
Grumman had originally proposed a LEM configuration with five fixed
legs, but LEM changes had made this concept impractical. (See February
and April 17.) The weight and overall height of the LEM had increased,
the center of gravity had been moved upward, the LEM stability analysis
had expanded to cover a wider range of landing conditions, the cruciform
descent stage had been selected, and the interpretation of the lunar
model had been revised. These changes necessitated a larger gear
diameter than at first proposed. This, in turn, required deployable
rather than fixed legs so the larger gear could be stored in the Saturn
V adapter. MSC had therefore adopted a four-legged deployable gear,
which was lighter and more reliable than the five-legged configuration.
(See October 2.)
"Lunar Excursion Module Design Status" (undated), prepared for
Gilruth's presentation at the June 25, 1963, meeting of the MSF
Management Council, held at the Manned Spacecraft Center.
June 26
The first full-scale firing of the SM engine was conducted at the Arnold
Engineering Development Center. At the start of the shutdown sequence,
the engine thrust chamber valve remained open because of an electrical
wiring error in the test facility. Consequently the engine ran at a
reduced chamber pressure while the propellant in the fuel line was
exhausted. During this shutdown transient, the engine's nozzle extension
collapsed as a result of excessive pressure differential across the
nozzle skin.
MSC, "Consolidated Activity Report for the Office of the Director,
Manned Space Flight, June 16-July 20, 1963," p. 68.
June 26
MSC announced that it had contracted with the Martin Company to develop
a frictionless platform to simulate the reactions of an extravehicular
astronaut in five degrees of freedom-pitch, yaw, roll, forward-backward,
and side-to-side. MSC Crew Systems Division would use the simulator to
test and evaluate space suits, stabilization devices, tethering lines,
and tools.
MSC News Release 63-108, June 26, 1963.
June 28
A cluster of two Pioneer tri-conical solid parachutes was tested; both
parachutes failed. Because of this unsatisfactory performance, the
Pioneer solid-parachute program was officially canceled on July 15. (See
March 4.)
Letter, C. D. Sword, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Div.,
"Contract Change Authorization No. Twenty-Seven, Revision 1,"
July 15, 1963; "Apollo Spacecraft Project Office Activity Report,
June 14-July 18, 1963," p. [5].
June 28
NASA announced its concurrence in Grumman's selection of RCA as
subcontractor for the LEM electronics subsystems and for engineering
support. Under the $40 million contract, RCA was responsible for five
LEM subsystem areas: systems engineering support, communications, radar,
inflight testing, and ground support. RCA would also fabricate
electronic components of the LEM stabilization and control system.
[Engineers and scientists from RCA had been working at Grumman on
specific projects since February.]
NASA News Release 63-143, "RCA Subcontractor to Grumman for
LEM," June 28, 1963; "Monthly Progress Report No. 1,"
LPR-10-1, p. 2.
June 28
The CSM data storage equipment was modified to incorporate a fast-dump
capability. Data could thus be recorded at a low speed for later
playback at high speed to ground stations.
Letter, H. P. Yschek, MSC, to NAA, Space and Information Systems Div.,
"Contract Change Authorization No. Fifty-Nine," June 28,
1963.
During the Month
North American reported that mission success predictions continued to be
less than the apportioned values. For example, the environmental control
subsystem had a predicted mission reliability of 0.9805, compared to a
0.997675 apportionment.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," pp. 32, 33.
During the Month
Planning and final details of LTV abort simulation negotiations with
Grumman were completed. The abort experiments, to be conducted at LTV's
aerospace simulation facility in Dallas, Tex., were scheduled to begin
in October. (See April 24, 1964.)
GAEC, "Monthly Progress Report No. 5," LPR-10-11, July 10,
1963, p. 19.
During the Month
MSC reported that two portable life support systems would be stowed in
the LEM and one in the CM. Resupplying water, oxygen, and lithium
hydroxide could be done in a matter of minutes; however, battery
recharging took considerably longer, and detailed design of a charger
was continuing.
"Apollo Quarterly Status Report No. 4," pp. 24, 25.
During the Month
Grumman completed the LEM circuit design for suit and cabin pressure
control systems. Also the contractor formulated a detailed plan for the
evaluation of red and white cockpit lighting; equipment for the test had
already been received.
"Monthly Progress Report No. 5," LPR-10-11, pp. 13, 20.