Space Rocket History Logo
Space Rocket History Podcast Welcome to the Space Rocket History podcast

Episodes Tagged with "Charles Frick"

Posted on April 2, 2015

Langley’s brochure for the Golovin Committee described Lunar landers of varied sizes and payload capabilities.  There were illustrations and data on a very small lander that was able to carry one man for 2 to 4 hours on the moon.  There was an “econo...

Early design concepts of C-1 and C-5 versions of the Saturn launch vehicles

NASA announced selection of the lunar-orbit-rendezvous landing technique at an 11 July 1962 press conference. left to right James E. Webb, Robert C. Seamans, Jr., D. Brainerd Holmes, and Joseph F. Shea

Harry C. Shoaf (Space Task Group Engineering Division 15 November 1961 of a proposed lunar lander to be used with an advanced version of the Mercury spacecraft

concept of a small lunar lander during descent to the surface of the moon, as proposed by Langley Research Center employees in October 1961

Posted on April 9, 2015

Posted on April 23, 2015

The Apollo contract specified a shirt-sleeve environment. For this reason, North American was told not to include in its design a hatch that opened by explosives, like Mercury’s. An accidentally blown hatch in space would cause an instant vacuum and ...

The impact facility at North American was used to drop-test the CM

Selection of Little Joe II completed the Apollo family of launch vehicles.

Scott Carpenter, John Glenn, and Walter Schirra in 1963 inspect a full-scale mock up of the Apollo CM

North American Aviation Stormy,

Interior of a partial full-scale mockup of the Apollo command module

major parts of the command module structure

Posted on April 30, 2015

Posted on May 7, 2015

“The contractor role in Houston was not very firm. Frankly, they didn’t want us. There were two things against us down there. Number one, it was a Headquarters contract, and it was decreed that the Space Centers shall use GE for certain things; and n...

General Electric employees monitor activities of a spacecraft test in the automatic-checkout-equipment spacecraft control room in 1965

comparison of spacecraft and launch vehicle configuration

Apollo tracking network in 1966. Radar stations with large antennas for continuous tracking and communications were at Goldstone, California; Madrid, Spain; and Canberra, Australia

Posted on May 14, 2015

…From the information they gathered on the existing technical problems, Disher and Tischler concluded that prospects were only one in ten that Apollo would land on the moon before the end of the decade….

Full-scale model of the command module, above- the strake aerodynamic devices may be seen at either side of the spacecraft just above the aft heatshield

Removing LM from S=IVB stage

On 16 November 1963 in Cape Canaveral’s Blockhouse 37, NASA’s new manned space flight chief George Mueller

Communications with the moon as the earth turned. Astronauts on the moon’s surface also could talk to one another

Posted on May 21, 2015

Max Faget’s position was that considering the difficulty of the job,  if each mission was successful half the time, it would be well worth the effort.  But Gilruth thought that was too low.  He want a 90% mission success ratio and a 99% ratio for Ast...

download

The cabin section (or primary structure) of the CM is assembled at North American in 1965

The CM probe would slip into the LM’s dish-shaped drogue, and 12 latches on the docking ring would engage, to lock the spacecraft together, airtight

Full-scale model of the service module, resting on a mockup of a spacecraft-lunar module adapter, with panels off to reveal part of the internal arrangement

Jettison of the launch escape system (right) after successful launch, also pulls away the boost protective cover that protects the windows from flame and soot

On the drawing of the launch escape system at upper right, the canard aerodynamic devices are near the top of the escape tower