CLEARANCE: Top Secret
- Sep 26, 2008
- Reaction score
Most of that refers to satellite-to-satellite photography. That's the capability that they deleted. I'm 99% sure that the MMU sentence they deleted refers to its ability to be used to inspect Soviet satellites close up. The MMU got transferred to NASA's Gemini program instead.Michel Van said:Thx for Link, George Allegrezza
It Interesting to what is Blacked in Text
of course the Resolution of MOL optical system, because it was used on next generation spy sats
but this quite puzzling
P-7-- Remote Maneuvering Unit. To evaluate the astronaut's ability to control the Remote Maneuvering Unit (RMU) the rest of sentences is black out
mention of A memo Between Generals about MOL, but the File reference number in black out
A name of a NRO Comptroller is black out in the entire text.
Department of Defense would undertake to develop MOL with a BLACK OUT capability, either manned or unmanned.
They also agreed that a flight demonstration of the unmanned system would be conducted nine months after the first manned flight.
MOL, it said, would produce photos containing sufficient detail to determine the performance characteristics, capabilities and
limitations of important enemy weapons. It also could provide intelligence of BLACK OUT and contribute "to the monitoring of any arms limitaticn agreement."
Steve Pace said:It's kind of funny how fast the Skylab orbiter was thrown together and how it became a MOL of its own. -SP
I quote byeman, the end of Apollo programme was essentially a political issue (due too complex reasons to be explained now).Byeman said:
On Monday look at The Space Review. I'll have an article there about MOL's cost overruns and schedule slips. It was started as a $1.5 billion program, but by 1969 one estimate was that it would cost $3.1 billion. And the launch date for the first manned flight had slipped by 3.5 years to mid-1972.archipeppe said:I quote byeman, the end of Apollo programme was essentially a political issue (due too complex reasons to be explained now).Byeman said:
The start of MOL was also a political issue wanted by McNamara to cease the X-20 programme, while the end of MOL was due essentially to technical reasons (the unmanned satellites CORONA and the upcoming HEXAGON) had almost the same performances of MOL/DORIAN without the complication (and the the cost) of having manned crew on orbit rather than having a good ground segment with skilled operators on Earth.
There is no sense repating the same question all over again and again.
Byeman said:No it would not, just stop with this. Why do you keep repeating this?
Because i have write this at the beginning,BEFORE that i have remember that was an other topic on this subjct (that I went to resume).archipeppe said:There is no sense repating the same question all over again and again.
Right.Was a proposal,but NASA was not interested.
MORL was two very different proposals mind you. One was based on using the MOL as a basis and a Titan as a launch vehice, (with the assumption it would 'compliment' the USAF MOL program) and the other was actually a Saturn-1 (Apollo Lunar Adapter Module section being a 'dry' lab and using part of the SIVB as a 'wet' lab expansion) based system that NASA prefered. One major reason being that the Saturn MORL could use either Gemini or Apollo for servicing and crew transfer while the Titan MORL could use Gemini but not Apollo without extensive, (and expensive) modifiction.MORL was from begin a dry workshop and to be launch with Saturn IB (Saturn V for higher orbit or Mars fly by)
it had to use spent S-IVB stage either as counterweight for Rotation for artificial Gravitation experiment or as test bed for wet workshop.
What happen to MORL is unclear to me, but NASA switch to S-IVB Wet workshop under AAP, i think it's because Apollo hardware since MORL used Gemini hardware
Eh, not so much really. Consider for a moment that the MOL was "low-cost" BECAUSE it was also low capability compared to what the Saturn/SIVB system. Whereas Skylab hosted three crews over 24 weeks between 1973 and 1874 ONE (1) Titan MOL/MORL would have supported only ONE (1) crew for around 20-30 days before having to return to Earth and expend the Titan-MORL.It's interesting speculation what had happen if NASA took MOL as "low cost" Alternative to AAP after Capitol Hill cut founding in 1967 budget.
but that for section for What If and Speculations in this forum
Hello, my name is Robert E Andrews and I had the good fortune of working in the aerospace business from its early stage in the ’50s through the end of the century.
I attended Drexel University in Philadelphia after high school, matriculating into the mechanical engineering major. I didn’t like this field, lost interest, and dropped out after two years. However, during these years, I did learn a skill that gave me employment. I got a job with the helicopter pioneer Frank Piasecki as a draftsman. I also applied for work with General Electric’s new Missiles and Space Department in Philadelphia, which was located just across the street from Drexel.
In June of 1958, I got a letter from GE asking that I come in for an interview. My supervisor at Piasecki encouraged me to go. He realized working for a big company like GE would offer me many career opportunities. I got the GE job working in the Navigation and Control Engineering drafting room.
I found out that all employed in engineering here required a Secret clearance. So, I was placed in a small room by myself with a drafting table and remained isolated for about six weeks. After my clearance was granted, I moved into the main drafting room with about sixty other draftsmen, designers, and lofts men. (A loftsman develops full scale patterns, or drawings, of complex shapes.)
One of my early assignments was to lay out a printed circuit board. My electrical engineer gave me a schematic and identified each part type, be it a TO5 transistor, carbon resistor, tantalum foil capacitor, et cetera. My task was to fit all the components on a fixed size board and connect them according to the schematic with copper circuit runs on the back of the board. These were the days of single sided boards and jumper wires were not allowed. I took to this like a duck to water. I was given more boards to layout and did well.
My supervisor observed that I was anxious to learn new things. He assigned me to the Discoverer project to develop system schematics, interconnection diagrams, and wire harness definition. I was working for the Electrical Systems engineer. His was a very responsible and highly visible position. And like most engineers working in this new field, he was in his early 20’s, just three years older than me. There were senior engineers in management positions, but there were no senior spacecraft engineers. Everyone was learning on the job.
I was going to be briefed on a highly classified program called CORONA. He told me that what I was about to learn, I could not discuss with anyone who was not also cleared for this information. I could not talk about this with family, friends, or other GE employees forever.
Discoverer was started in early 1958. Officially, it was a US Air Force program to launch payloads into space and recover them. The Discoverer spacecraft included the Agena upper stage, manufactured by Lockheed, atop a Thor rocket. General Electric was responsible for the satellite recovery vehicle, or SRV, mounted on the nose of the spacecraft. Discoverer was scheduled for its first launch in early 1959 from Vandenberg Air Force Base on the central California coast.
As part of my introduction to the Discoverer program, I was taken to the monkey lab. The Discoverer cover story was that it was a biological experiment to see how monkeys would perform under the conditions of spaceflight. So there were technicians and medical employees in this room full of screaming caged monkeys trying to train them to do simple tasks like hitting a switch when a light came on so they would get a piece of apple. What a terrible place that stunk to high heaven. I hoped I never had to interface with this group again.
It was a KH-7. And like Lunar Orbiter, it was to use a discontinued system and not state of the art.My favorite one is UPWARD, where an Apollo was to drag a freakkin' KH-8 spysat in lunar orbit (in place of a LM so no landing) to get pictures as detailed as LRO... 40 years in advance, 1969 instead of 2009.