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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

398 Project Apollo: Americans to <strong>the</strong> Moon<br />

Build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Spacecraft<br />

Meantime, NASA had been th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g about an advanced spacecraft called<br />

Apollo s<strong>in</strong>ce at least 1960. Thus <strong>the</strong> organization was quickly able to <strong>in</strong>itiate<br />

<strong>the</strong> procurement of <strong>the</strong> vehicle, even before it was known exactly how it would<br />

be used for <strong>the</strong> lunar land<strong>in</strong>g mission. By 28 July 1961, NASA had an approved<br />

procurement plan <strong>in</strong> place; 12 firms were identified as potential bidders. (II-13)<br />

Ultimately, only five bids for <strong>the</strong> contract were submitted. <strong>The</strong> competition for<br />

<strong>the</strong> Apollo spacecraft contract took place over <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g four months; on 28<br />

November, NASA announced that North American Aviation had been selected<br />

to build <strong>the</strong> vehicle. This turned out to be a controversial decision, particularly<br />

after problems with North America’s performance became known and it was<br />

discovered that <strong>the</strong> NASA Source Evaluation Board had identified <strong>the</strong> Mart<strong>in</strong><br />

Company as its preferred choice, with North American Aviation as a “desirable<br />

alternative.” 14 (II-20)<br />

Select<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Launch Vehicle<br />

While <strong>the</strong> basic elements of <strong>the</strong> Apollo spacecraft, with a three-person crew<br />

and two elements, (one hous<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> crew and <strong>the</strong> command center for <strong>the</strong> vehicle<br />

and <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hous<strong>in</strong>g propulsion and o<strong>the</strong>r systems) had been fixed s<strong>in</strong>ce 1960,<br />

it took NASA until <strong>the</strong> end of 1961 to select <strong>the</strong> launch vehicle for <strong>the</strong> Apollo<br />

missions to <strong>the</strong> Moon. <strong>The</strong>re were two reasons for this. One was that <strong>the</strong> “national<br />

space plan” conta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> 8 May Webb-McNamara memorandum had called<br />

for a collaborative NASA-Department of Defense effort to def<strong>in</strong>e a family of<br />

launch vehicles that could meet both agencies’ requirements and advance <strong>the</strong><br />

development of both liquid fuel and solid-fuel propulsion systems. While NASA,<br />

and particularly its rocket development team headed by Wernher von Braun,<br />

had experience only with liquid-fueled boosters, <strong>the</strong> Department of Defense was<br />

<strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> push<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> development of large solid-fuel rocket motors for various<br />

advanced military and <strong>in</strong>telligence uses. <strong>The</strong> focus of this plann<strong>in</strong>g effort was a<br />

“NASA-DOD Large Launch Vehicle Plann<strong>in</strong>g Group.” <strong>The</strong> group was directed by<br />

Nicholas Golov<strong>in</strong> of NASA; its deputy director was Lawrence Kavanaugh of DOD.<br />

<strong>The</strong> group started work <strong>in</strong> July 1961, and by <strong>the</strong> fall had become bogged down <strong>in</strong><br />

very detailed studies and deadlocked over <strong>the</strong> relative roles of liquid-fueled and<br />

solid-fueled boosters <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> lunar land<strong>in</strong>g program. Its f<strong>in</strong>al recommendations<br />

attempted to satisfy both NASA and DOD, and ended up pleas<strong>in</strong>g nei<strong>the</strong>r agency.<br />

(Volume II, II-20)<br />

In parallel with <strong>the</strong> Large Launch Vehicle study, NASA cont<strong>in</strong>ued to carry<br />

out its own analyses of what k<strong>in</strong>d of launch vehicles would be needed for Project<br />

Apollo. <strong>The</strong>se analyses were h<strong>in</strong>dered by a basic issue; NASA at <strong>the</strong> end of 1961<br />

had not yet selected <strong>the</strong> approach—called <strong>the</strong> “mission mode”—which it would<br />

14. For a history of <strong>the</strong> Apollo spacecraft, see Courtney G. Brooks, James M. Grimwood, and<br />

Loyd S. Swenson, Jr., Chariots for Apollo: A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft (Wash<strong>in</strong>gton, DC:<br />

National Aeronautics and Space Adm<strong>in</strong>istration Special Publication-4205, 1979).

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!