Feb 18 1965
From The Space Library
RANGER VIII lunar probe successfully executed a midcourse maneuver that corrected the path established at launch and aimed it for impact on the moon in the Sea of Tranquillity, an area centered 2.6° north of the lunar equator and 24.8° west of the moon's north-south line. Signal for the maneuver was radioed from earth to activate commands previously stored in the spacecraft's computer. At that time, the 808-lb. photo probe was 99,281 mi. from earth, traveling toward the moon at 4,100 mph. First command ordered the spacecraft to roll 11.6°; the second ordered the pitch maneuver of 151.7°; the third commanded the motor to burn for 59 sec. Then, after the spacecraft was ordered to break its attitude stabilization locks on the sun and earth, a "go" command was transmitted and RANGER VIII executed the maneuver in about 27 min. The correction completed, the spacecraft reacquired its stabilization locks and continued on its course. One measure of the accuracy of the maneuver was the current expected impact time on the moon: Feb. 20 at 4:57:30 a.m. plus or minus 60 sec. The original planned time was 4:57:30 a.m. The photo probe's initial course would have missed the trailing edge of the moon by 1,136 mi. (NASA Transcript; L.A. Times, Miles, Wash, Post, 2/19/65; Appel, NYT, 2/19/65; UPI, Phil. Eve. Bull., 2/18/65; AP, Chic. Trib., 2/19/65; Av. Wk.. 2/22/65, 34)
Dr. George E. Mueller, NASA Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight, reviewing overall manned space flight objectives and reporting on the Gemini and Apollo programs in testimony before the House Committee on Science and Astronautics, said: "Chronologically, the first objective of manned space flight is to establish man's capabilities in space, Next is the establishment of a national competence for manned space flight, including the industrial base, trained personnel, ground facilities, flight hardware, and operational experience, Next, we use this capability for further space explorations and for other purposes, Finally, accomplishment of all these objectives brings about United States leadership in space. . . In 1964, we concentrated our efforts on Gemini ground tests and accomplished the first flight test, Filling the pipeline with hard- ware and carrying out development testing of subsystems were the major Apollo activities, Now in 1965, we have entered a year that will be devoted to Gemini flight test operations and the conduct of Apollo system development tests. "Looking at the remainder of the decade, 1966 will be the year when we learn new space flight techniques in the Gemini Program, and conduct unmanned earth-orbital flight tests of the Apollo/Saturn IB space vehicle. In 1967, Gemini will be available as an operational system and we will carry out manned earth-orbital flights of the Apollo/ Saturn V space vehicle. Manned flights of the Apollo/Saturn V space vehicle are scheduled for 1968, leading to the beginning of manned lunar missions before the end of the decade. "... I want to emphasize again that Apollo is an orderly program. The buildup of the Apollo effort has proceeded over more than three and a half years to its full strength. It is not a crash program. "The duration of Apollo, as we reported to the Congress last year, is one of the longer United States research and development programs, resulting in a schedule that permits rapid, orderly progress. The Apollo priority is high but not overriding. Parallel and backup development efforts are limited. Flight testing is being carried out on a logical basis, and only after all possible tests are conducted on the ground. "Efficient use of available resources is a major consideration in the conduct of the Apollo program, whereas a crash program follows the most expeditious course regardless of cost. "Finally, crash programs typically have goals beyond the existing state of technology and pursue these goals under the pressure of having to achieve a technological breakthrough. Apollo, on the other hand, harnesses current technology in the development of launch vehicles, spacecraft and facilities to permit effective space exploration. The greatest challenges in Apollo, in fact, are in the integration of those systems and the men who must fly them as well as the provision of ground operational support, and the overall management of this enterprise." Dr. Mueller said that data received and analysis continued in 1964 regarding radiation and the lunar surface indicated that these matters were of less importance than had been previously deduced: ". . . First, the chance of a significant solar event occurring during a mission is very low. Second, if the worst solar flare previously observed had occurred during an Apollo mission, the maximum dose that could have been received at the blood forming organs by astronauts in the command module would have been about 10 per cent of the allowable safe dose, rather than 15 per cent as estimated last year. "Regarding the lunar surface, the data from RANGER VII have been very helpful. The large area photography has indicated the probability that there are many areas of the moon's surface where the design of the lunar excursion module is adequate with respect to surface slope and roughness... ." (Testimony ; NASA Auth. Hearings, 53-134)
NASA Langley Research Center announced it would negotiate with Ling-Temco-Vought, Inc., an $8 million incentive contract to provide complete system management for the Scout launch vehicle. The contract would continue support services and materials LTV had provided under several contracts. It would include systems engineering, logistic support, operational support, test program support, payload coordination, preflight planning, data reduction and analysis, standardization and configuration control, reliability and quality assurance, vehicle modification, checkout, and delivery. (NASA Release 65-54)
NASA awarded a $10,940,000 contract to Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc., for mission integration and launch services of Delta launch vehicles at Cape Kennedy. The cost-plus-fixed-fee contract covered the calendar year 1965. (NASA Release 65-52)
Saturn V launch vehicle retro-motors developed 100,000 lbs. of thrust in test of the solid-propellant motors at USAF Arnold Engineering Development Center for NASA. (AFDC)
ComSatCorp met with representatives of aerospace companies it had invited to discuss specifications for 24 communications satellites for a proposed DOD satellite system, Previously ComSatCorp had indicated it would contract with the Hughes Aircraft Co. to build the satellites. But when the Philco Corp. protested to the FCC, the FCC required ComSatCorp to give Philco and other competitors a chance to show their capabilities. (ComSatCorp; Weekley, Wash. Post, 2/17/65)
U.S.S.R. formally protested to Norway plans of the European Space Research Organization to establish a satellite tracking station in Spitsbergen. The U.S.S.R. said such a ground station for tracking space satellites could be used for "military purposes" in violation of the 1920 Spitsbergen treaty. Norway later rejected the Soviet charge. (NYT, 2/20/65, 2)
ComSatCorp filed with FCC a notice of a proposed $300,000 contract with AT&T for research data and consultant services on ground stations for the global communications satellite network. FCC was notified that ComSatCorp had analyzed and evaluated other proposals and had held subsequent discussions with those making proposals. (ComSatCorp)
The U.S. was pressing the U.S.S.R. for clarification of its view that it did not violate the nuclear test ban treaty with an underground explosion that released radioactivity. The large underground test took place Jan. 15 in the Semipalatinsk region of Soviet Central Asia, Four days later the U.S. announced that it had detected radioactive debris from the explosion over the Sea of Japan. (NYT, 2/19/65, 17)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
