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

402 Project Apollo: Americans to the Moon
this. The thoughts expressed here may not be stated in as diplomatic a fashion
as they might be. . . . The important point is that you hear the ideas directly, not
after they have filtered through a score or more of other people” (II-15).
Houbolt attached a report to his letter summarizing the results of work done
by him and his associates at the Langley Research Center. (While Houbolt was
only one of the originators of the lunar rendezvous concept, he was its primary
spokesperson.) The report described the proposed mission plan:
A manned exploration vehicle is considered on its way to the moon. On
approach, this vehicle is decelerated into a low-altitude circular orbit
about the moon. From this orbit a lunar lander descends to the moon
surface, leaving the return vehicle in orbit. After exploration the lunar
lander ascends for rendezvous with the return vehicle. The return vehicle
is then boosted into a return trajectory to the earth, leaving the lander
behind.
The primary advantage of this approach was “the marked reduction in
escape weight required; the reduction is, of course, a direct reflection of the
reduced energy requirements brought about by leaving a sizable mass in lunar
orbit, in this case, the return capsule and return propulsion system.” With less
mass to carry to the Moon, Houbolt and his associates argued, a lunar landing
mission could be accomplished by a single Saturn C-3 launch vehicle with two F-1
engines in its first stage. (II-16)
Houbolt in May had written an initial letter directly to Seamans, and the first
reaction of NASA management was to discipline him for twice contacting Seamans
outside of approved channels. But George Low, now working for Brainerd Holmes
at NASA Headquarters, told Holmes that despite its tone, “Houbolt’s message is a
relatively sound one and I am forced to agree with many of the points he makes.”
Robert Gilruth and his associates in Houston were also beginning to see the
merits of designing two separate spaceships, one for the journey to lunar orbit
and return to Earth, the other only to land on the Moon. They began to do their
own studies of the concept. By the end of January, Brainerd Holmes’s deputy
Joseph Shea, after being briefed by Houbolt on what was becoming known at
the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (LOR) concept, noted that “Brainerd and I agreed
that LOR looks sufficiently attractive to warrant further study. He feels that the
study should be run from OMSF, rather than either Center, to provide a measure
of objectivity.” He added “We are also concerned that MSFC will be especially
negative with LOR because they have not studied it.” 20 (II-17)
Over the next four months, both the Manned Space Craft Center (MSC) at
Houston and the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) at Huntsville carried out
detailed studies of alternative rendezvous approaches to getting to the Moon.
The idea of developing a huge launch vehicle, Nova, to carry astronauts to the
Moon had by now lost favor as a feasible approach, mainly because it seemed
20. Murray and Cox, Apollo, pp. 120, 124–140.