The (cancelled) second production run of Saturn Vs

astro said:
Archibald said:
Incidentally, I've found some bits of informations about Saturn 516 and 517.
It is already well known that the basic story is kind of
- long led items authorized to Boeing on July 25, 1967
- Webb "froze" Saturn production exactly a year later
- Paine shut it down definitively in January 1970
Click to expand...

What I presume you're referring to in January 1970 is the announcement of the cancellation of Apollo 20. I don't think that represents the definitive shutdown of Saturn production, though. It is an acknowledgement that because a second Saturn production run had not yet been authorized, there would be an extended gap in the availability of Saturn V's. Combined with the decision to make Skylab a dry workshop, that meant no Saturn would be available in time for Apollo 20, even after Apollo missions had been slowed to the rate of two per year.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Saturn V was not murdered brutally, it kind of died of a very slow agony. By 1972 the shift toward Shuttle was the definite nail in the coffin.
 
Archibald said:
astro said:
Regarding Baxter's novel Voyage, does anyone understand the logic for writing Scott Carpenter into the plot? He appears, if I remember correctly, as the commander of Apollo-N.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... are you sure of that ? Apollo-N commander was Charles "Chuck" Jones....
Click to expand...

Well, actually I'm not sure. It was a long time ago that I read the novel, and I no longer have a copy. Scott Carpenter does not appear at all?
 
I've been trying to catalogue the Saturn modified launch vehicles which were being studied at the height of the Apollo program. It shouldn't be too much of a surprise that they all fit into a single sequence.

Reassuringly, I've been able to find descriptions in official documents of all the vehicles referred to on Astronautix (and referenced to Scott's defunct Saturn: Development, Details, Derivatives and Descendants book project. The two caveats are that whilst I've found references to the Saturn IB equivalents using clustered 120-inch and 156-inch SRMs, I've not actually found the names Saturn IB-16 or Saturn IB-27 anywhere.

Incidentally, the Saturn INT-17 was to be the upper two stages of the Saturn V-3B - this is confirmed by NASA TM X-53723, which discusses the need to optimise the stages for both applications. The INT-17 would have been a very 'rockety' looking rocket indeed, with both stages stretched and reasonably large fins.

What's interesting is that I've not found any evidence of MLV 6 through 10, or for MLV 26. If, as it appears, there was a single series of Modified Launch Vehicle design studies, it stands to reason that these must have existed. If so, it's odd that they haven't surfaced - we can but hope that they're in some dusty box somewhere waiting to be called up from the archives.

There's some helpful clues in TM X-53723: the extensively referenced Boeing Studies of Improved Saturn V Vehicles and Intermediate Payload Vehicles (D5-13183) was the result of one of the study contracts (NAS8-20266) under this program. Since it's a Boeing report, it's no surprise that it doesn't feature the vehicles not having the S-IC stage. But contracts were also issued to North American (Contract NAS8-20265, report SID 66-1326) and Douglas (NAS8-20264, integrated into the Boeing and North American reports) for their stages, and to Martin (NAS10-3547, report CR-66-41) for facilities impact. Those reports, if available, might add material - particularly around the 'Saturn II' family.
 
Per lack of a better thread... a little comparison between "going to Mars, the NASA / Voyage way" and "going to Mars, SpaceX way"
The Ares stack is made of
-156-inch SRBs
-S-IC
-S-II (= a two-stage Saturn V with big boosters)
PLUS
-Apollo CSM
-Mars Excursion Module
-Habitation module
-S-II booster stage (Earth to Mars)
- large drop tanks (Earth to Mars)
-S-IVB booster stage (Mars to Earth)

A total of nine different rockets and ships and vehicles. Or even more if the Apollo CM / SM and drop tanks are counted separately.

Now, BFR+Starship...

BFR = 156-inch SRBs + S-IC (the lower stages to ascent from Earth surface to suborbital)

And Starship is... everything else !
- the S-II stage for the final push in Earth orbit
- the other S-II used as a boost stage to escape Earth
- the big tanks, also to escape Earth
- the habitat between Earth and Mars,
- CSM,
- and MEM altogether (!)
- the S-IVB boost stage to return Earth

Only TWO vehicles instead of NINE. The price to pay of course is massive refuelings at both ends of the trip: Earth orbit and Mars surface (via Zubrin methalox ISRU Sabatier trick).
 
Archibald said:
Per lack of a better thread... a little comparison between "going to Mars, the NASA / Voyage way" and "going to Mars, SpaceX way"
The Ares stack is made of
-156-inch SRBs
-S-IC
-S-II (= a two-stage Saturn V with big boosters)
PLUS
-Apollo CSM
-Mars Excursion Module
-Habitation module
-S-II booster stage (Earth to Mars)
- large drop tanks (Earth to Mars)
-S-IVB booster stage (Mars to Earth)

A total of nine different rockets and ships and vehicles. Or even more if the Apollo CM / SM and drop tanks are counted separately.

Now, BFR+Starship...

BFR = 156-inch SRBs + S-IC (the lower stages to ascent from Earth surface to suborbital)

And Starship is... everything else !
- the S-II stage for the final push in Earth orbit
- the other S-II used as a boost stage to escape Earth
- the big tanks, also to escape Earth
- the habitat between Earth and Mars,
- CSM,
- and MEM altogether (!)
- the S-IVB boost stage to return Earth

Only TWO vehicles instead of NINE. The price to pay of course is massive refuelings at both ends of the trip: Earth orbit and Mars surface (via Zubrin methalox ISRU Sabatier trick).
Click to expand...
No, there was only one type of in space propulsion stage, not S-II booster stage (Earth to Mars) and S-IVB booster stage (Mars to Earth). It used 4 or 5 of these same stages

Also, there will be more than one type of Starship. There will be a tanker Starship and many of them. There will be a Crew Mars Lander Starship, which will be on orbit refueled by the tankers. There will be a Cargo Mars Lander Starship, which will be on orbit refueled by the tankers. There likely will be a Crew Starship, which will deliver the crew, once the lander is completely refueled.
 
Last edited:
NASA Press Release


FOR RELEASE: IMMEDIATE August 2, 1968


RELEASE NO: 68-139


SATURN LAUNCH VEHICLE CURTAILMENT


The National Aeronautics and Space Administration stated today that it is in the process of stopping work on Saturn I vehicles numbered 215 and 216, "to the extent possible without involving uneconomical terminations." This means that no vehicles will be produced beyond No. 214.

With respect to the Saturn V launch vehicle, NASA has instructed contractors to take steps to terminate work on long lead time items that were being procured for vehicles numbered 516 and 517. This means there will be a time gap in the production of Saturn V launch vehicles when and if a decision is reached to resume production. Production of these boosters had been requested in NASA's FY 1969 Budget for follow-on utilization of the Apollo capacity beyond the manned lunar landing. The steps taken today are in anticipation of final decision related to future production.


-end- 8/2/68
 
Byeman said:
No, there was only one type of in space propulsion stage, not S-II booster stage (Earth to Mars) and S-IVB booster stage (Mars to Earth). It used 4 or 5 of these same stages
Click to expand...
Stephen Baxter's sci-fi novel VOYAGE uses one S-II and one S-IVB, but as far as I know that mission model is entirely unique to him and not directly based on any historical proposal.
 
Hi folks, I found these Saturn proposals at Ed Dempsey's Flickr site.
If these two posts are in the false topic, please let me know, so I can delete them or move them to a more suitable topic.
Boeing advanced Saturn proposal
Report cover from Boeing report on possible advanced Saturn options.
Click to expand...
Pictures:
https://flic.kr/p/2m2HkEr
View: https://flic.kr/p/2m2HkEr

https://flic.kr/p/2m2N4HY
View: https://flic.kr/p/2m2N4HY

https://flic.kr/p/2m2QVVi
View: https://flic.kr/p/2m2QVVi

Boeing S-1C stage recovery scheme. Even before the first Saturn I flew, engineers were designing methods by which the expensive booster stages could be recovered, refurbished, and reused. The Army's "Project Horizon" lunar base plan envisioned such a volume of launches that some such procedure would have been required, in order tolower5 operating costs. The low number of actual Saturn flights that NASA launched rendered the idea unworthy of the payload weight penalties for recovery gear.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Is there a pdf of that somewhere ? or only scattered bits on flicker ?

Thanks for sharing !

(PS. screw fluncker... fuc... flicker, damn it - that don't want me to download the picture. Listen to me you idiot thing: print screen is my friend, and you can't do anything about it. SCREW YOU)
 

Attachments

  • fluncker.png
    fluncker.png
    672.9 KB · Views: 45
Last edited:
uk 75 said:
I started a thread in Alternate History to try and tease out what might have happened in the 70s and 80s if NASA had not been blighted by Vietnam and Johnson rather than Nixon had been President from 1968 to 1972
Click to expand...
Is that the "Eyes Looking Skyward" fit? If so you should post a link to it.

On another note in regards to Rocketdyne the wikipedia article on it said that major components of the F-1 and J-2 were manufactured in Noesho, Missouri but it didn't elaborate as to what those components were does anyone know?

In regards to the F-1A IIRC before testing had ended they had modified one the turbo pump assemblies so that the thrust could be throttled.
 
www.drewexmachina.com

Rockets Falling from Orbit: The Saturn V That Launched NASA’s Skylab

In recent years, the uncontrolled reentries of the spent 22-metric ton core stages of China’s new Long March 5B heavy lift launch vehicle, used to orbit space station components, have made the news…
www.drewexmachina.com www.drewexmachina.com
NASA-funded studies had been performed for a two-stage version of the Saturn V known as the Saturn INT-21. In this configuration, the S-II stage and IU used to control the launch vehicle (which was normally carried on top of the S-IVB stage) were to be modified so that the IU would be carried on the top of the S-II. Additional modifications to the S-II stage would have provided it with a simple attitude control system for use after the stage’s five J-2 engines were shutdown. With proper venting of residual cryogenic propellants while the IU controlled the modified S-II stage, the spent stage could be directed towards a reentry over the Pacific Ocean once it had delivered its payload into orbit. Knowing the danger posed by these large derelict stages, a procedure was put into place by NASA to dispose of the spent S-IVB second stage of the Saturn IB rockets used to launch Skylab’s Apollo-based CSM ferries in order to minimize the risk that these ten-metric ton stages would make an uncontrolled reentry (see “SA-206: The Odyssey of a Saturn IB”).

Unfortunately, the modifications needed to create the Saturn INT-21 variant were not in the budget and could not be easily accommodated in the Skylab development schedule. Instead, the IU would remain mounted on top of the modified S-IVB stage that was the Skylab OWS leaving the spent S-II stage without any means of control once it delivered its payload into orbit. The S-II-13 second stage of the SA-513 launch vehicle assigned to orbit the Skylab OWS did receive a number of modifications for its mission. Many of these centered on the installation of nonpropulsive venting systems to allow residual cryogenic propellants and helium pressurant to be dumped overboard in order to maintain its distance from the OWS and minimize the risk of a catastrophic breakup of the stage once in orbit. Otherwise, the S-II-13 stage would be left to make an uncontrolled reentry after its orbit decayed months after its launch.
Click to expand...
 
And here is a similar document for SA-520. I've had to break it into pieces, because of the forum's limit on file size.
 

Attachments

  • 6801 SA-520--MSFC 1-17.pdf
    7.8 MB · Views: 14
  • 6801 SA-520--MSFC 18-34.pdf
    7.2 MB · Views: 7
  • 6801 SA-520--MSFC 35-51.pdf
    5.4 MB · Views: 7
  • 6801 SA-520--MSFC 52-68.pdf
    7 MB · Views: 9
If additional Satrutns were ordered, apart from completing the remaining Apollo and Skylab missions, what could they be used for?
 
RedLegion said:
If additional Satrutns were ordered, apart from completing the remaining Apollo and Skylab missions, what could they be used for?
Click to expand...
one were the Voyager Mars mission
a Saturn V would launch two large orbiter and lander to Mars

flow cheaper and better as Viking with Titan IIIE
 
Well in 1970 when they canned a few J-class missions, Charles Townes at the National Academies suggested to fly a few of them AFTER Skylab. Tom Paine refused for workforce and safety reasons, also Shuttle early expenses.
At the time Skylab was to fly in November 1972. By February 1971 when Apollo 14 returned, Paine was gone and Skylab was pushed to its final slot of May 1973.
Meanwhile the last three J-class missions were flown in July 1971 (Apollo 15) April 1972 (Apollo 16) and December 1972 (Apollo 17).

They could have however brought back Apollo 18 and crammed it before Skylab: with five months between the four missions.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom