01.07.2014 Views

Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in ... - The Black Vault

Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in ... - The Black Vault

Exploring the Unknown: Selected Documents in ... - The Black Vault

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Explor<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Unknown</strong> 523<br />

might be, or as I would normally try to do, but this is by choice and <strong>the</strong> moment is<br />

not important. <strong>The</strong> important po<strong>in</strong>t is that you hear <strong>the</strong> ideas directly, not after<br />

<strong>the</strong>y have filtered through a score or more of o<strong>the</strong>r people, with <strong>the</strong> attendant risk<br />

that <strong>the</strong>y may not even reach you.<br />

[2]<br />

Manned Lunar Land<strong>in</strong>g Through Use of Lunar Orbit Rendezvous<br />

<strong>The</strong> plan. - <strong>The</strong> first attachment [Document II-16] outl<strong>in</strong>es <strong>in</strong> brief<br />

<strong>the</strong> plan by which we may accomplish a manned lunar land<strong>in</strong>g through use of<br />

a lunar rendez vous, and shows a number of schemes for do<strong>in</strong>g this by means<br />

of a s<strong>in</strong>gle C-3, its equivalent, or even someth<strong>in</strong>g less. <strong>The</strong> basic ideas of <strong>the</strong><br />

plan were presented before various NASA people well over a year ago, and were<br />

s<strong>in</strong>ce repeated at numerous <strong>in</strong>terlaboratory meet<strong>in</strong>gs. A lunar land<strong>in</strong>g program<br />

utiliz<strong>in</strong>g rendezvous concepts was even suggested back <strong>in</strong> April. Essentially, it had<br />

three basic po<strong>in</strong>ts: (1) <strong>the</strong> establishment of an early rendezvous program <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Mercury, (2) <strong>the</strong> specific <strong>in</strong>clusion of rendezvous <strong>in</strong> Apollo developments, and<br />

(3) <strong>the</strong> accomplishment of lunar land<strong>in</strong>g through use of C-2’s. It was <strong>in</strong>dicated<br />

<strong>the</strong>n that <strong>the</strong> two C-2’s could do <strong>the</strong> job, C-2 be<strong>in</strong>g referred to simply because<br />

NASA booster plans did not go beyond <strong>the</strong> C-2 at that time; it was mentioned,<br />

however, that with a C-3 <strong>the</strong> number of boosters required would be cut <strong>in</strong> half,<br />

specifically only one.<br />

Regrettably, <strong>the</strong>re was little <strong>in</strong>terest shown <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> idea - <strong>in</strong>deed, if any, it<br />

was negative.<br />

Also (for <strong>the</strong> record), <strong>the</strong> scheme was presented before <strong>the</strong> Lund<strong>in</strong><br />

Committee. It received only bare mention <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>al report and was not discussed<br />

fur<strong>the</strong>r (see comments below <strong>in</strong> section entitled “Grandiose Plans “).<br />

It was presented before <strong>the</strong> Heaton Committee, accepted as a good<br />

idea, <strong>the</strong>n dropped, ma<strong>in</strong>ly on <strong>the</strong> irrelevant basis that it did not conform to <strong>the</strong><br />

ground rules. I even argued aga<strong>in</strong>st present<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> plan consid ered by <strong>the</strong><br />

Heaton Committee, largely because it would only br<strong>in</strong>g harm to <strong>the</strong> rendezvous<br />

cause, and fur<strong>the</strong>r argued that if <strong>the</strong> committee did not want to consider lunar<br />

rendezvous, at least <strong>the</strong>y should make a strong recommendation that it looks<br />

promis<strong>in</strong>g enough that it deserves a separate treatment by itself - but to no avail.<br />

In fact, it was mentioned that if I felt sufficiently strong about <strong>the</strong> matter, I should<br />

make a m<strong>in</strong>ority re port. This is essentially what I am do<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

We have given <strong>the</strong> plan to <strong>the</strong> presently meet<strong>in</strong>g Golov<strong>in</strong> Committee on<br />

several occasions.<br />

In a rehearsal of a talk on rendezvous for <strong>the</strong> recent Apollo Con ference,<br />

I gave a brief reference to <strong>the</strong> plan, <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> benefit derivable <strong>the</strong>refrom,<br />

know<strong>in</strong>g full well that <strong>the</strong> review<strong>in</strong>g committee would ask me to withdraw any<br />

reference to this idea. As expected, this was <strong>the</strong> only item I was asked to delete.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!