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

Episodes Tagged with "J 2"

Posted on March 12, 2015

Just as launch complex 34 dwarfed its predecessors, Saturn’s checkout represented a new magnitude in launch operations. The Saturn C-1 stood three times higher, required six times more fuel, and produced ten times more thrust than the Jupiter. Its si...

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

Posted on March 18, 2015

No previous maiden launch had gone flawlessly, and the Saturn C-1 was considerably more complicated than any rocket launched thus far. Launch Operations Directorate officials gave the rocket a 75% chance of getting off the ground, and a 30% chance of...

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

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

Posted on June 11, 2015

Since the lunar module would fly only in space (earth orbit and lunar vicinity), the designers could ignore the aerodynamic streamlining demanded by earth’s atmosphere and build the first true manned spacecraft, designed solely for operating in the s...

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

Posted on July 9, 2015

The key to high-energy stages was to use liquid hydrogen as the fuel.  Liquid hydrogen fuel appealed to rocket designers because of its high specific impulse, which is a basic measure of rocket performance. Specific Impulse is the impulse delivered p...

4-SIV-SIVB

3-Saturn 1b-V

2-Cutaways

1- SIV_rocket_stage

Posted on August 20, 2015

Apollo Saturn 201 employed the Saturn IB launch vehicle, which  was the up-rated version of the Saturn I rocket flown in ten earlier Saturn-Apollo missions. It featured an upgrade of the first stage engines to increase thrust from 1,500,000 lb-ft of ...

AS-203_launch

AS-202_launch

AS-201_launch

Apollo-Saturn 201 mission – launch, recovery

Posted on January 28, 2016

The structural efficiency of the S-II stage, in terms of the weight and pressures taken by its extra-thin walls, was comparable only to the capacity of one of nature’s most refined examples of structural efficiency, the egg.

1=5s-ii-cut-away

1*9s-ii-exploded-view-sm

1-8s-ii-breakdown-sm

Posted on February 4, 2016

“The S-II stage was a nightmare the minute it was conceived, and it only got worse from there. During the course of its creation, it would grind up people and careers the way the transcontinental railway devoured laborers.  Though the methods and mat...

5-Test firing of a Saturn V second stage rocket S-II

6-s-ii-subassemblies

4-S-II_Inboard_1963

3-The S-II stage during stacking operations of Apollo 6 in the VAB

2-S-2 assembly building in Seal Beach, CA

1=7s-ii-cut-away-w-callouts

1=6s-ii-subassemblies-sm

1-Saturn_V_second_stage

Posted on February 25, 2016

The success of Apollo 4 gave good reason to believe that the Saturn V could be trusted to propel men into space. But NASA pushed on with its plans for a second unmanned booster flight, primarily to give the Pad 39 launch team another rehearsal before...

5-Apollo-6-1968-04-04

4-Apollo 6’s interstage falling away

3-Apollo6fireyExhaustPlume

2-Apollo_6_launch

1-The Lunar Module Test Article (LTA-2R) is being moved for mating with the spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter

0-apollo-6-final_0

Posted on March 30, 2016

Command Service Module-101 started through the manufacturing cycle early in 1966. By July, it had been formed, wired, fitted with subsystems, and made ready for testing. After the Apollo 1 fire in January 1967, changes had to be made, mainly in the w...

3-Apollo 7 Launch

2-Schirra, Eisele, and Cunningham (left to right) practice climbing out of the spacecraft into a life raft, to perfect recovery procedures

1-Saturn 205’s first stage rests on the pedestal at Launch Complex 34 before mating with other stages for launch