Using a model at upper left, William Rector of General Dynamics Corp. describes the design his company proposed for the Apollo lunar mission

Spacecraft modules in this drawing were identified in the Space Task Group’s request for proposals from contractors for developing and producing the command module

Saturn 1 test

Saturn 1 test 2

mySuperLamePic_c1194b7fa9498eb5af694d8530d3ebf8

At lower left, E. E. Clark and Carlos de Moraes of the Martin Company display three of a dozen command module configurations considered before the choice of the one to the right

ASA’s second Administrator, James E. Webb (at center above), and George M. Low (right above) of NASA Headquarters receive a model of General Electric’s proposed vehicle

David G. Hoag, technical design director at the laboratory, examines the inertial measuring unit that would measure changes in Apollo spacecraft velocity when propulsion systems were fired

MIT Instrumentation Laboratory Director C. Stark Draper inspects a mockup of the Apollo guidance and control system in the September 1963

astronaut positions

John_Houbolt_and_LOR2

Earth Orbit Rendezvous

Apollo_Direct_Ascent

12-Second stage (S-IV)

11-Booster stage (S-I)

10-Proposed C-2

9-C-1 and earlier vehicles

8-Model of blockhouse at Launch Complex 34

7-Vehicles using Titan and Atlas stages

6-Saturn C

5-Saturn B

4-Preliminary concept of Launch Complex 34, Cape Canaveral

3-Early H-1 Engine

2-Thor-Jupiter engine

1-Proposed configuration of a clustered booster

Lifting the first stage from the transporter

Hoisting the stage in vertical attitude

Erecting the upper stages

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

16-Unloading Compromise in Florida

15-S-I and S-IV stages aboard the Compromise

14-Booster movement around Wheeler Dam

11-Launch Complex 34

10-Configurations of Saturn flight vehicles

9-Saturn Barge route

7-Six-engine configuration of the S-IV stage

6-Redesigned tail of the Saturn booster

5- The barge Palaemon

3-First horizontal mating of the Saturn vehicle

2-Movement of dummy S-IV stage to checkout

To assemble the large Saturns, NASA needed a plant, preferably one already built. The Michoud facility (above), close to New Orleans, suited the requirements

Saturn_SA1_on_launch_pad

Modules of the Apollo spacecraft were tested in Florida in the Manned Spacecraft Operations Building. Above, NASA officials Walt Williams, Merritt Preston, Kurt Debus, Brainerd Holmes, and Wernher von Braun

Maiden launch of the Apollo program- Saturn SA-1 from Cape Canaveral, 27 October 1961

First Saturn Launch

Liftoff of Saturn I. Note the long cable mast falling away on the right

mySuperLamePic_c001b3d7f61bec278243523bf2e79253

Abe Silverstein, NASA’s Director of Space Flight Development, is shown touring a rocket engine facility

1-Launch Complex 34, blockhouse interior

two landing techniques proposed for the direct ascent mode

SA-1

RendezvousMethods

proposed lunar-surface-rendezvous procedure, a propellant-transfer vehicle takes fuel from the tanker to a manned space vehicle. After loading the fuel, the two astronauts would fire the engine of their spacecraft to return to the earth

Major configuration changes in the Apollo spacecraft from May 1960 to July 1962

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

A ferry that would leave a command ship in orbit around the moon, visit the lunar surface, and then return to the command ship for the voyage back to the earth

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

Shea uses models to demonstrate how the lunar module would dock with the command module

Rocket Comparison

Lunar orbit insertion

REF: 2-903-6 SA-2 LAUNCH AT CAPE. IGNITION OF ROCKET (SATURN 1 VEHICLE)

SA-2 erected on launch pedestal

Wernher_von_Braun_confers_with_Brainerd_Holmes_and_Nicholas_Golovin

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

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

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

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

6-NASA engineers in 1964 decided that astronauts could stand in the lunar module cabin during the trip to the lunar surface. Note triangular windows

7-Proposed sleeping positions for astronauts on the moon

5-Mockup of lunar module cabin with seats

4-The drawing of the stage indicates positions of components

3-underside of the lunar module descent stage shows fuel tank installation

2-Administrator James Webb examines models of the lunar and command modules in docked position

1-Lunar module generations from 1962 (above left; the vehicle originally proposed by Grumman) to 1969

3-improved lunar module features – ladder, porch, hatch, and rendezvous window

2-he addition of a ladder on a landing gear leg made the task much easier

1- Astronauts found a knotted rope from the lunar module difficult to climb down (or up)

5-Removing the LEM

4-ApolloSpacecraftLMAdapterDiagram

3-Apollo_Spacecraft_diagram

2-Tm-1 mockup of the Lunar Module

1-lm-6-rendezvous-radar-antenna-assy-sm

4-SIV-SIVB

3-Saturn 1b-V

2-Cutaways

1- SIV_rocket_stage

3- 1230_Lunar_module_LTA-2_R

2-Disher_John_

1-Lunar_Module_diagram

2-NASA_Group_1_and_2_Astronauts_Photo_With_Autopens

2-Back row- See, McDivitt, Lovell, White, & Stafford. Front row- Conrad, Borman, Armstrong, & Young

1- Project_Mercury_AstronautsBack row- Shepard, Grissom, Cooper; front row- Schirra, Slayton, Glenn, Carpenter.

Group4Astronaut

4-Group 4 L-R- Garriott, Gibson. Front row, L-R- Michel, Schmitt, Kerwin.

3-Astronaut_Group_Three_-_GPN-2000-001476

5-Back row, from L-R- Swigert, Pogue, Evans, Weitz, Irwin, Carr, Roosa, Worden, Mattingly, Lousma. Front row, from L-R- Givens, Mitchell, Duke, Lind, Haise, Engle, Brand, Bull, McCandless

James_McDivitt_-_Gemini_4

Gemini 4

Gemini 4 Astronauts

Ed White

Gemini 4 astronauts

glenn-kennedy_300_241_s_c1

ST-69-4-63