All posts by Kaye Dee

Science / Space Race

[April 8, 1968] Ups, Downs and Tragedy: An Eventful Month in Space (Gagarin's crash, Zond-4, OGO-5, Apollo-6)

1 Comment


by Kaye Dee

Despite the continued hiatus in human spaceflight on both sides of the Iron Curtin, March and early April have been a busy time in space exploration. But, sadly, I have to commence this review with the tragic news that Colonel Yuri Gagarin, the first person in space, was killed in a plane crash during a training flight on 27 March. Very little is currently known about the circumstances surrounding Gagarin’s death, which has occurred just one month shy of the first anniversary of the loss of Cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov in the Soyuz-1 accident.

Loss of a Space Hero
There have long been rumours that the Soviet leadership refused to allow Gagarin to fly high performance jets or make another spaceflight due to his invaluable propaganda status as Cosmonaut No. 1. However, it seems that since Gagarin completed an engineering degree in February, he had finally been allowed to resume flight status and was undertaking training flights to regain his lapsed jet pilot qualifications.

According to an official government commission investigating the crash, Col. Gagarin was flying a two seat MiG-15 trainer with Colonel Vladimir Seryogin, 46, described as an experienced test pilot and instructor on the training flight. Taking off at 10 a.m., Gagarin and Seryogin apparently flew east 70 miles from Moscow. After completing the training flight, around 10.30, Gagarin radioed that he was returning to base. The plane was then at 13,000 feet. A minute later ground control could not establish contact.

A MiG-15UTI, the same type as the aircraft Gagarin was flying at the time of the crash

An air search began, and a helicopter found the wreckage in a forest. The plane had dived into the ground at an angle of 65 to 70 degrees and was destroyed, killing both men. No information as to the cause of the crash has so far been forthcoming, but a story has been circulated that Gagarin heroically sacrificed himself, refusing to bail out of his stricken aircraft to guide it away from crashing in a populated area. How much truth there is to this, or whether it is pure propaganda, cannot be determined at this time.

Cosmonaut No. 1 is “flying through space forever”
Following an autopsy, the bodies of Gagarin and Seryogin were cremated the day after the crash and the ashes returned to Moscow, where the urns lay in state for 19 hours in the Red Banner Hall of the Soviet Army. Thousands are reported to have filed past to pay their respects to the world’s first space traveller. Thousands more lined the streets as the flower-covered urns, borne on a caisson drawn by an armoured troop carrier, moved slowly to Red Square along a 2½-mile route. The funeral procession included the Gagarin and Seryogin families and the highest leaders of the Soviet state and Communist Party.

The funeral procession for Gagarin and Seryogin making its way towards Red Square

Gagarin and Seryogin were both interred in the Kremlin Wall, behind Lenin's Tomb in Red Square. In what is said to be a rare honour, car horns, factory whistles and church bells sounded in unison as the urn bearing Gagarin's ashes was inserted into a niche in the red brick wall. Then the nation fell still for a minute of silence, followed by a final salvo of cannon fire. A day of national mourning was also declared, the first time this has ever been done in the USSR for someone not a national leader. President Johnson, UN Secretary General U Thant and other world leaders sent messages of condolence. John Glenn sent a personal letter of sympathy to Col. Gagarin’s wife Valentina.

Seryogin and Gagarin buried side by side in the Kremlin Wall. Their various honours and awards are displayed before their portraits

Gagarin was just 34 years old when he died, leaving two young daughters, aged nine and seven. He was based at the cosmonaut training centre near Moscow, involved in training other cosmonauts when not engaged in official duties as a public figure. Little is known about Col. Seryogin, but he has been described as a Hero of Soviet Union and the commander of an air unit. It is unknown if he is also a member of the Soviet cosmonaut corps or has any other role in the Russian space programme.

Gagarin’s words upon landing after his space flight were “I could have gone on flying through space forever”. Though he never returned to space in this life, his spirit surely resides in the cosmos now.

Making up Lost Ground?
The somewhat mysterious Zond-4 unmanned spacecraft was launched on 2 March. A TASS news agency announcement of the launch described Zond-4 as an “automatic station”, “designed to study the outlying regions of near-earth space.”

Thanks to my friends at the Weapons Research Establishment, here is a photo of a Proton rocket, rumoured to be the type used to launch Zond-4.

TASS reported that Zond-4 was put into an initial 170-mile parking orbit, before being sent on a “planned flight” further into space, apparently reaching the environs of the Moon. According to my contacts at the WRE, Zond 4’s flightpath reached an apogee of 240,000 miles, “comparable to lunar altitude”.

No further information was released by TASS about the mission, which has occurred several years after previous launches in the Zond series: Zond-1 was launched in April 1964, Zond-2 in November that year, and Zond-3 in July 1965. “Zond” is the Russian word for “probe” and these earlier spacecraft were apparently planetary or lunar missions. Could Zond-4 actually have been an attempt by the Soviet Union to make up lost ground with a test of the new Soyuz spacecraft, presumably redesigned or modified following the failed Soyuz-1 mission last year?

Does this cutaway illustration represent mysterious Zond-4? My WRE friends think it might!

It would hardly be the first time that the Soviet Union has concealed real purpose of a space mission behind the name of a different spacecraft series. (paging Mr. Kosmos/Cosmos!). As the Soyuz vehicle is believed to be the USSR’s answer to Apollo, a test of an improved spacecraft out to lunar distance would certainly make sense at this time, with the Apollo 6 mission (see below) testing out the Apollo Command and Service Modules just a few days ago.

Whatever its mission, Zond-4 returned to Earth on 9 March, but there was no official communique on the conclusion of the flight. This silence suggests that the re-entry failed in some way and that the spacecraft was either destroyed on re-entry or crashed on landing. If Zond-4 was a test of the Soyuz vehicle, could its loss have been due to a repeat of the parachute failure that doomed Soyuz-1 last year? If this was the case, it does not bode well for the USSR getting its lunar programme back on track in time to challenge the United States in the race for the Moon.

Go, OGO-5!
Just two days after the launch of Zond-4, the United States launched the latest satellite in its Orbiting Geophysical Observatory (OGO) series of scientific satellites. OGO-5 soared aloft on 4 March, establishing itself in a highly elliptical orbit with a 170 mile perigee and a 92,105 mile apogee. The orbital inclination was 31.1 degrees, with the satellite taking 3796 minutes to complete one orbit. The 1,347 lb satellite carries more experiments than any other automated spacecraft to date.

OGO-5 First day Cover and informational insert, courtesy of my Uncle Ernie, the philatelic collector

OGO-5 is primarily devoted to observation of the Earth’s upper atmosphere and its interaction with conditions in the space environment. Like earlier OGO satellites, it carries instruments for studying solar flares (which can also detect cosmic X-ray bursts) and a gamma-ray detector. This will enable it to examine the hazards and mysteries of Earth's space environment at a time when radiation-producing flares on the Sun are intensifying. It will also chart magnetic and electric forces in space, measure gases in Earth's upper atmosphere, investigate the Aurora Borealis over the North Pole and listen for the puzzling radio noises that have been detected from the planet Jupiter.  Each of OGO-5’s predecessors is still operational at this time, so let’s hope the latest Orbiting Geophysical Observatory also has a long life ahead of it.

Apollo 6: NASA Keeps Moving Forward
If Zond-4 has been an un-announced trial of the USSR’s Soyuz lunar spacecraft, Apollo-6 has been NASA’s very public test flight of the Saturn-5 rocket and some of the modifications to the Apollo Command Module.

Launched on 4 April, Apollo-6 marked the second test flight of the massive Saturn-5 launch vehicle, crucial for reaching Moon. The primary objective of the mission was to test the performance of the Saturn-5 and the Apollo spacecraft, the first time that the Command and Service Modules (CSM) would be fully tested in space. In particular, the mission was intended to demonstrate that the Saturn-5’s S-IVB third stage could send the entire Apollo spacecraft (CSM and Lunar Module) out to lunar distances. Although things didn’t go quite to plan, Apollo-6 did accomplish its basic objectives.

An All-Up Test Flight
The Apollo 6 launch vehicle was the second flight-capable Saturn-5, AS-502, its simulated payload equal to about 80% of a full Apollo lunar spacecraft. The CSM it carried was a Block I (Earth-orbit mission) type, with some Block II (lunar mission) modifications. According to NASA “more than 140 tests since last October showed modifications of the Apollo spacecraft since the 1967 disaster had drastically reduced the hazard to life”.

Possibly the most important modification was a new crew hatch, intended to be tested under lunar return conditions. This new hatch incorporated the heat shield and crew compartment hatches of the original Apollo design into a single hatch, called the "unified" design. This has been in response to the Apollo-1 investigation board finding that the dual hatches were too difficult to open in case of emergency and had contributed to the deaths of the crew.

Apollo-6's redesigned unified hatch, photographed during a post-flight inspection of the Commend Module

Like the earlier Apollo-5 test flight, Apollo-6 carried a simulated Lunar Module (LM) which lacked the descent-stage landing gear. It also had no flight systems, and its fuel and oxidiser tanks were liquid-ballasted. While the LM remained inside the Spacecraft-Lunar Module Adapter throughout the flight, its ascent stage was instrumented to determine the craft’s structural integrity and the vibration and acoustic stresses to which it was subjected.

Apollo-6's "legless Lunar Module", formally called the Lunar Test Article LTA-2R

A few weeks prior to launch, NASA announced that, to further reduce fire hazards that contributed to the deaths of Apollo-1 astronauts, it intended to change to a mixture of 60% oxygen and 40% cent nitrogen in the Command Module, while the spacecraft and its crew are on the ground and during launch. Once their spacecraft left the launch pad, the astronauts would switch to pure oxygen. Since the gas mixture will be used in the spacecraft only during ground operations, NASA has not planned any change in the existing environmental control system, so the decision did not affect the Apollo 6 mission.

Apollo 6: What Was Planned
The original Apollo 6 mission plan intended to send the CSM and simulated lunar module into a trans-lunar trajectory. (That trajectory, although passing beyond lunar orbit distance, would not encounter the Moon, which was in another part of its orbit at the time.) The Saturn-5’s S-IVB third stage would be fired for trans-lunar injection, with the CSM separating from the S-IVB soon after. The Service Module engine would then fire to slow the CSM, reducing its apogee to 11,989 nmi.

NASA illustration showing the CSM and LM inside the Spacecraft-Lunar Module Adapter, as they would be at trans-lunar injection

The CSM would then return to Earth as if it had experienced “direct-return” abort during a Moon mission. As it returned, the SM engine would fire again, accelerating the CSM to simulate the conditions that an Apollo spacecraft would encounter on its return from the Moon: a re-entry angle of −6.5 degrees and velocity of 36,500 ft/s. The entire test flight was planned with a duration of about 10 hours.

Not Quite Going to Plan
After the launch was delayed for some days due to problems with guidance system equipment and fuelling, Apollo 6 made a smooth lift-off from Kennedy Space Centre. However, during the last ten seconds of first stage firing, the vehicle severely experienced a type of longitudinal oscillation known as “pogo”. Pogo occurs when a partial vacuum in a rocket’s fuel and oxidiser feed lines reaches the engine firing chamber, causing the engine to “skip”. The pogo phenomenon is well-known, since rockets have experienced it since the early days of spaceflight, and it occurred in launchers such as Thor and Titan II (used for the Gemini program).

While the Apollo-4 Saturn-5 also experienced a mild form of pogo, Apollo-6 was subjected to extreme pogo vibrations. It appears that these oscillations, travelling along the length of the huge Moon rocket, caused multiple problems with the vehicle. Two engines in the second stage shut down early, although the vehicle's onboard guidance system was able to compensate by burning the remaining three engines for 58 seconds longer than planned. The S-IVB engine also experienced a slight performance loss and had to burn for 29 seconds longer than usual. Intense vibrations were felt in the Command Module that could have caused injuries had a crew been onboard. There was also some superficial structural damage to the Spacecraft Lunar Module Adaptor (SLA). A chase plane image of the Apollo-6 launch, taken at approximately the time of the pogo oscillations. It shows an area of discoloration on the SLA indicative of superficial damage and what appears to be falling pieces of debris, perhaps a panel or two shaken lose by the pogo vibrations

The underperformance of the apparently pogo-damaged engines resulted in the third stage being inserted into an elliptical parking orbit, rather than the planned 100 nmi circular orbit. Although Mission Control decided that this did not prevent the mission from continuing, when the vehicle was ready for trans-lunar injection, the apparently damaged S-IVB engine failed to restart.

Repeating Apollo-4
Without the ability to continue with the original flight plan, Mission Control decided to complete some of the mission objectives by adopting a flight plan similar to that of Apollo-4. The SM's Service Propulsion System (SPS) was used to raise the spacecraft into an orbit with a 11,989 nmi apogee, from which it would re-enter. However, the SPS engine did not have enough fuel for a second burn to accelerate the atmospheric re-entry and the spacecraft was only able to enter the atmosphere with a velocity of 33,000 ft/s, instead of the planned 36,500 ft/s that would simulate a lunar return.

With the SM was jettisoned just before atmospheric re-entry, the CM splashed down 43 nmi from the planned landing site north of Hawaii, ten hours after launch. It was recovered by the USS Okinawa.

A Rocket's Eye View
Unlike earlier unmanned missions, the Apollo-6 Saturn-5 was fitted with several cameras intended to be ejected and later recovered. Three of the four cameras on the first stage failed to eject and were lost and only one of the two cameras on the second stage was recovered. Fortunately, this camera provided spectacular views of the separation of the first and second stages.

Two spectacular views of the interstage between the first and second stages falling away, taken from Apollo-6's second stage camera. How amazing that we can now see events happening during a launch that cannot be observed from the ground!

The CM also carried two cameras: a motion picture camera, intended to be activated during launch and re-entry and a 70mm still camera. Unfortunately, as the technical issues meant that the mission took about ten minutes longer than planned, the re-entry events were not filmed. However, the still camera, pointed at the Earth through the hatch window provided impressive photos of parts of the United States, the Atlantic Ocean, Africa, and the western Pacific Ocean. Advanced film and filters, improved colour balance and higher resolution have provided images that are a significant improvement on the photographs taken on previous American crewed missions and demonstrated that future imagery from space will be useful for cartographic, topographic, and geographic studies.

A view of the Dallas-Fort Worth area in Texas, taken from the Command Module's 70mm still camera. Special thanks to the Australian NASA representative for providing me with rush copies of these incredible Apollo-6 images for this article

What’s Next for Apollo?
NASA announced in mid-March that its first Earth-orbiting Apollo mission will be launched on a Saturn 1 vehicle and spend as long as ten days in orbit. The flight, which could come as early as mid-August, will be crewed by astronauts Walter Schirra, Donn Eisele and Walter Cunningham. If that mission goes well and the Saturn-5 is cleared for manned launchings, astronauts James McDivitt, David Scott and Russell Schweickart will ride a Saturn-5 into Earth orbit two or three months later to conduct flight test of the lunar module.

Following the return of Apollo-6, Apollo Programme Director Samuel C. Phillips said, “there's no question that it's less than a perfect mission”, although the Saturn-5’s demonstration of its ability to reach orbit despite the loss of two engines, was “a major unplanned accomplishment”. However, Marshall Space Flight Centre Director Wernher von Braun has recognised that the “flight clearly left a lot to be desired. … We just cannot go to the Moon [with this problem],” referring to the extreme pogo experienced on the flight. This means that solving the pogo phenomenon is now a major priority for NASA in order to keep the Apollo program on track and bolster confidence in the Saturn-5 vehicle. Can they do it? 








1 Comment Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race

[January 24, 1968] On Track for the Moon (Apollo 5 and Surveyor 7]

Leave a comment



by Kaye Dee

As we approach the first anniversary of the shocking loss of the crew of Apollo 1, the success of the recent Apollo 5 mission reminds us that the spirit of Grissom, White and Chaffee lives on as NASA continues developing and testing the technology to make a manned lunar landing a reality.

Apollo 1's Legacy
Although the fire that engulfed Apollo 1 and killed its crew destroyed its Command Module, the accident took place on the launchpad during a launch simulation, and fortunately the Saturn IB booster intended to loft that mission into orbit remained undamaged. Because that AS-204 vehicle was the last Saturn IB with full research and development instrumentation, NASA decided that this rocket would be re-assigned to Apollo 5, the much-delayed first test flight of the Lunar Module – the spacecraft essential for successfully landing astronauts on the Moon – while manned Apollo missions continue on hold.

From LEM to LM
The spacecraft we now call the Lunar Module (LM) became part of the Apollo programme in 1962, when NASA decided to adopt the technique of lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) for its Moon landing missions. First proposed in 1919 by Ukrainian engineer and mathematician Yuri Kondratyuk, the LOR technique uses two spacecraft that travel together to the Moon and then separate in lunar orbit, with a lander carrying astronauts from orbit to the Moon’s surface. The LOR method allows the use of a smaller and lighter lander than the large, all-on-one spacecraft originally proposed for Apollo, and also provides for greater flexibility in landing site selection.

An early diagram comparing the size of a lunar landing vehicle using the Direct Ascent method of reaching the Moon and a LOR lunar excursion vehicle

The version of lunar orbit rendezvous suggested to NASA by engineer John C. Houbolt called for a landing vehicle consisting of two parts: a landing stage, that would accomplish the descent from orbit and remain on the Moon’s surface, and an ascent stage that would carry the astronauts back to the main spacecraft in orbit. This design gave us the Command Service Module as the Moon orbiting spacecraft, and what was originally called the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM, pronounced as a word, not as the individual letters) as the vehicle that would land astronauts on the Moon.

Dr. Houbolt illustrating the main spacecraft needed for his Lunar Orbit Rendezvous proposal for the Apollo programme

In June 1966, NASA changed the name to Lunar Module (LM), eliminating the word “excursion”. My friends at the WRE tell me that this was because there were concerns that using “excursion” might make it sound like the lunar missions were frivolous, and so reduce support for the Apollo programme! Despite the official name change, the astronauts, as well as staff at Grumman, still call it “the lem”, which certainly feels easier to say.

Delays…Delays…
However, the two-stage LEM/LM has proved much harder to develop and manufacture than the contractor Grumman originally anticipated, because of the complexity and level of reliability required of the hardware. Originally, NASA planned for the automated test flight of LM-1, the first Lunar Module, to occur in April 1967, but the delivery of the spacecraft was repeatedly delayed: the two stages of LM-1 did not arrive at Cape Kennedy until late June last year.

The separately-crated stages of LM-1 arriving at Kennedy Space Centre on board a Super Guppy cargo plane. The stages were mated to each other four days later

A team of 400 engineers and technicians then checked out the spacecraft to ensure that it met specifications. The discovery of leaks in the ascent stage propulsion system meant that the ascent and descent stages were demated and remated multiple times for repairs between August and October. LM-1 was finally mounted on its Saturn IB booster on 19 November and a launch date was set for the latter part of January 1968.

LM-1, encased in its SLA, being hoisted up for mounting on its launch vehicle

Lift Off at Last!
Although the launch was delayed for 10 hours when the countdown was held up by technical difficulties, Apollo 5 finally lifted off on 22 January 1968 (23 January for us here in Australia). The mission was designed to test the LM's descent and ascent propulsion systems, guidance and navigation systems, and the overall structural integrity of the craft. It also flight tested the Saturn V Instrument Unit.

Because they would not be needed during the Apollo 5 test flight, LM-1 had no landing legs, which helped to save weight. NASA also decided to replace the windows of LM-1 with aluminium plates as a precaution, after one of the windows broke during testing last December. Since the mission was of short duration, only some of LM-1’s systems were fully activated, and it only carried a partial load of consumables. 

LM-1's "legless" configuration is clearly seen in this view of it during checkout at Kennedy Space Centre

The Apollo 5 flight did not include Command and Service Modules (CSM), or a launch escape tower, so pictures of the launch vehicle show it to look more like its predecessor AS-203 than AS-202, which tested the CSM. The Apollo 5 stack had an overall height of 180ft and weighed 1,299,434 lbs. The LM was contained within the Spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter (SLA), located just below the nose cap of the rocket. The SLA consists of four panels that open like petals once the nose cap is jettisoned in orbit, allowing the LM to separate from the launcher.

The Saturn IB worked perfectly, inserting the second stage and LM into an 88-by-120-nautical-mile orbit. After the nose cone was jettisoned, LM-1 coasted for 43 minutes 52 seconds, before separating from the SLA into a 90-by-120-nautical-mile orbit. NASA’s Carnarvon tracking station in Western Australia tracked the first six orbits of the mission, while the new Apollo tracking station at Honeysuckle Creek, near Canberra, followed LM-1’s first orbit.

Putting LM-1 Through its Paces
Since it had no astronaut crew, the LM-1 test flight had a mission programmer installed, which could control the craft remotely. The first planned 39-second descent-engine burn commenced after two orbits, only to be aborted by the Apollo Guidance Computer after just four seconds, as the spacecraft was not travelling at its expected velocity. Exactly why this occurred is now being investigated. Of course, if there had been a crew onboard, the astronauts would probably have been able to analyse the situation and decide whether the engine should be restarted.

Instead, Mission Control, under Flight Director Gene Kranz, decided to conduct the engine and "fire-in-the-hole" tests under manual control, as without these test firings the mission would be deemed a failure. The "fire in the hole" test verified that the ascent stage could fire while attached to the descent stage, a procedure that will be used to launch from the Moon’s surface, or in the event of an aborted lunar landing. It involves shutting down the descent stage, switching control and power to the ascent stage, and firing the ascent engine while the two stages are still mated.

Apollo 5 Flight Director Gene Kranz (right) with future Lunar Module crew Astronauts McDivitt (left) and Schweickart (centre) discussing LM-1's control issues

Both the ascent and descent engines were fired multiple times during the flight to demonstrate that they could be restarted after initial use. Eight hours into the mission, a problem with the guidance system did cause the ascent stage to spin out of control, but the vital engine test burns had been completed by then. LM-1 also demonstrated its ability to maintain a stable hover, and the guidance and navigation systems controlled the spacecraft's attitude and velocity as planned.

At the conclusion of the flight testing, the separated ascent and descent stages were left in a low orbit, with the anticipation that atmospheric drag would naturally cause their orbits to decay so that the craft would re-enter the atmosphere. The ascent stage re-entered and was destroyed on 24 January, but as I write the descent stage is still in orbit.

Another Step on the Road to the Moon
NASA considers that the LM performed well during its test flight, and have deemed Apollo 5 a success. One wonders now if the second unmanned test flight with LM-2, planned for later this year, will need to go ahead. NASA also plans to return astronauts to space with a test flight of the redesigned Command Module in September this year. Once that goal is accomplished, every part of the Apollo system will have been tested in spaceflight and it will finally be “Go!” for astronauts to shoot for the Moon. I can’t wait!

Lunar map showing the landing sites of all the successful Surveyor missions

So Long Surveyor!
As the Apollo programme powers forward, the last of NASA’s automated lunar exploration programmes is coming to an end, with Surveyor 7 now in operation on the Moon. The Surveyor project was developed with the goal of demonstrating the feasibility of soft landings on the Moon's surface, ensuring that it would be safe for Apollo crews to touch down in their Lunar Modules. The Surveyor landings have complemented the Lunar Orbiter programme (which drew to a close in the latter part of last year), which imaged the Moon from orbit, mapping the lunar surface and providing detailed photographs of many proposed Apollo landing sites.

Making It Safe for a LM Landing
Of the seven Surveyor missions, five achieved their objectives, returning valuable data and images from the lunar surface. Surveyor 1, launched on 30 May (US time) in 1966, was the first American spacecraft to soft land on the Moon (following the successful landing of the USSR’s Luna 9 on 31 January that year), returning 11,237 images of the lunar surface. Unfortunately, its successor, Surveyor 2, failed in September 1966, impacting onto the lunar surface when a malfunction of the guidance system caused an error in the mid-course correction as it travelled to the Moon.

Surveyor 1's panorama of the lunar surface, which captured its shadow, cast by the light of the Earth

Surveyor 3, which lifted off on 17 April 1967, was the first to conduct in-situ experiments on the lunar soil, using its extendable arm and scoop. The spacecraft also returned over 6,000 images, including the famous "Surveyors Footprint" shot, showing its footpad on the lunar surface. The probe had a lucky escape as it tried to land: a problem with its descent radar caused the descent engine to cut off late, resulting in the lander bouncing twice on the lunar surface before settling down to a final safe landing!

Surveyor 3's footprint and footpad on the lunar surface, showing how it bounced on landing. The extendable arm and scoop are visible on the left of the picture

Just three months later, in July, Surveyor 4 was not so lucky. After a textbook flight to the Moon, contact was lost with the spacecraft just 2.5 minutes before touchdown in the Sinus Medii (Central Bay) region and it crashed onto the lunar surface. It’s believed that the solid-fuel descent engine may have exploded.

Launched on 8 September, Surveyor 5 also encountered engine problems on descent to the lunar surface, with a leak in the spacecraft's thruster system. Fortunately, it survived to make a safe landing and returned over 20,000 photographs over three lunar days. Instead of a sampler arm, Surveyor 5 carried an alpha backscattering experiment, and had a bar magnet attached to one landing pad. It carried out the first off-Earth soil analysis and made one of the most significant finds of the Surveyor missions — that the Moon's surface is likely basaltic, and therefore suitably safe for human exploration.

Surveyor 5's alpha backscattering experiment, sometimes described as a chemical laboratory on the Moon

Surveyor 6 landed safely near the Surveyor 4 crash site in November 1967 carrying an instrument package virtually identical to Surveyor 5. The spacecraft transmitted a total of 30,027 detailed images of the lunar surface, as well as determining the abundance of the chemical elements in the lunar soil. As an additional experiment, Surveyor 6 carried out the first lift-off from the Moon. Its engines were restarted, lifting the probe 12 ft above the lunar surface, and moving it 8 ft to the west, after which it landed again safely, and continued its scientific programme. 

Surveyor 7 – a Last Hurrah!
The successful completion of the Surveyor 6 mission accomplished all the goals that NASA had set for the Surveyor programme as an Apollo precursor. The JPL Surveyor team therefore decided that for the final mission they would aim for a riskier landing site, in the rugged highlands near the Tycho Crater. The engineers gave Surveyor 7 a less than 50-50 chance of landing upright due to the rough terrain in the area!

Tycho crater was the challenging landing site for NASA's last Surveyor mission

Launched on 7 January, Surveyor 7 is the last American robot spacecraft scheduled to land on the Moon before the Apollo astronauts. Its instrument package combines all the experiments used by its predecessors, in order to determine if the rugged terrain would be suitable for a future Apollo landing site.

During its first lunar day, the spacecraft’s camera has returned more than 14,000 images, including some views of the Earth! One of Surveyor 7’s innovations is the use of mirrors to obtain stereoscopic lunar photos. Laser beams directed at the Moon from two sites in the United States have also been recorded by cameras aboard Surveyor 7.

A view of the Earth captured by Surveyor 7's camera

Getting a Scoop
Surveyor 7’s versatile soil mechanics surface sampler is a key instrument on this mission. Designed to pick up lunar surface material, it can move samples around while being photographed, so that the properties of the lunar soil can be determined. It can also dig trenches up to 18 inches into the lunar surface to determine its bearing strength and squeeze lunar rocks or clods. The sampler is a scoop with a container which can be opened or closed by an electric motor. The scoop has a sharpened blade and includes two embedded magnets, to search for ferrous minerals and determine the magnetic characteristics of the lunar soil. So far, the moveable arm and scoop have performed 16 bearing tests, seven trenching tests, and two impact tests.

Only a few Surveyor 7 pictures are currently available, but this view of Surveyor 3 digging a trench into the Moon's surface shows how the scoop carries out this task

The scoop is mounted below the spacecraft’s the television camera so that it can reach the alpha-scattering instrument in its deployed position and move it to another selected location. In fact, the scoop helped to free the alpha-scattering instrument when it failed to deploy on the lunar surface. It has also been used to shade the alpha-scattering instrument and move it to different positions to evaluation other surface samples. During 36 hours of operation between January 11 and January 23, 1968, the sampler has performed flawlessly. Soil analyses have been conducted, as well as experiments on surface reflectivity and surface electrical properties. 

Surveyor 7 is now “sleeping” through its first lunar night. If it survives this period of intense cold, hopefully it will continue to produce significant results during its next lunar day. But if it doesn’t, the scientists and engineers at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory are already describing the Surveyor programme as a “treasure house of information for landing a man on the Moon before the end of this decade”. This has to be a fitting epitaph for any space mission.








No comments Leave A Comment
Fashion, music, politics, sports

[December 26, 1967] The Prime Minister is Missing! (Disappearance of Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt)

3 Comments



by Kaye Dee

Christmas is supposed to be a time of family celebration, but this year in Australia it has instead become a time of national mourning following the tragic disappearance of our Prime Minister, Mr. Harold Holt. The country is in shock as we come to terms with the loss of a relatively new national leader in an apparent drowning accident.

A Fateful Swim
The full circumstances surrounding the Prime Minister’s disappearance have yet to be established. What we do know is that on Sunday 17 December Mr. Holt was swimming off Cheviot Beach, south of the Victorian state capital of Melbourne, when he was lost to the view of friends onshore after swimming out into deep water and apparently being swamped by a large wave.

The Prime Minister’s love of the ocean is well known: he and his wife have beachside holiday homes in Queensland and at Portsea, not far from Cheviot Beach.  A strong swimmer, fond of skindiving and spearfishing, Mr. Holt apparently claimed to “know Cheviot beach like the back of my hand”, and to be familiar with its sometimes treacherous offshore currents. While skindiving on an earlier visit, Mr. Holt had once recovered a porthole from the wreck of the SS Cheviot, the ship which broke up and sank near the beach, due to its dangerous currents, with the loss of 35 lives on 20 October 1887.

On 17 December, while spending the weekend at Portsea, Mr. Holt and four companions decided to stop at remote Cheviot Beach for a swim before lunch when returning from a drive. The water conditions were rough and only one of Holt’s companions ultimately went into the water with him.  Mr. Holt swam out into deep water and may have been caught in a rip current when he disappeared. Mrs. Gillespie, one of the group who remained on the shore, saw Mr. Holt disappear, describing it as “like a leaf being taken out […] so quick and final”.

A Desperate Search
The Prime Minister’s disappearance sparked “one of the largest search operations in Australian history”. Three amateur divers initially tried to brave the heavy seas but found them too turbulent. They were soon joined by the Victoria Police, deploying helicopters, watercraft, police divers, and two Navy diving teams. By the end of the day, more than 190 personnel were involved. However, the leader of one of the Navy teams apparently believed that “any chance of finding the Prime Minister was lost by the Sunday night”.

Despite this gloomy assessment, the number of searchers eventually increased to more than 340, including 50 divers, working in extremely difficult weather and sea conditions. The intense search continued until December 21, but was then scaled back, although the quest to find Mr. Holt’s body still continues.

Readers outside Australia may be wondering how the leader of the country could go swimming without being accompanied by a security detail. Australian leaders have traditionally not employed bodyguards or other protective measures and Mr. Holt similarly refused a security detail when he first assumed the Prime Ministership: he considered it was unnecessary and might distance him from the public. Although a couple of incidents in mid-1966 resulted in Holt grudgingly accepting a single bodyguard for his official duties, he continued to refuse any protection while on holiday, considering it a violation of his privacy. (Nasty rumour has it that he also wanted to conceal the extramarital affairs he has been suspected of indulging in). Thus, he was unaccompanied by any official security during his weekend break.
The first searchers combing Cheviot Beach, looking for any clue to the Prime Minister's disappearance

A Man of the Twentieth Century
The third Australian Prime Minister to die in office, Mr. Holt was a relatively young man, only 59. The first of our national leaders to be born in the Twentieth Century, Holt believed it was his responsibility as Prime Minister “to reflect the modern Australia to my fellow countrymen, to our allies and the outside world at large”. Mr. Holt became Prime Minister when he assumed the leadership of the incumbent Liberal Party in January 1966.

A lawyer and political lobbyist before being elected to the Federal Parliament, Mr. Holt was an enthusiastic sportsman and swimmer, as well as an effective orator, making him a sharp contrast with his Prime Ministerial predecessors and most of his parliamentary colleagues. His popularity with the public was reflected in his crushing victory in the elections of late 1966.  Mr. Holt (right), at Parliament House, during his period as Treasurer to his predecessor, Sir Robert Menzies (left)

With extensive political and governmental experience, serving as a Minister in several critical portfolios, Mr. Holt helped to transform post-War Australia into a modern democracy that now sees itself as more than just an outpost of the British Empire.

His important economic reforms have included the creation of the Reserve Bank of Australia and the introduction of decimal currency. As Prime Minister he also promoted significant political reforms, including the nation-building post-war immigration scheme; dismantling the shameful White Australia policy (which largely precluded non-white people from immigrating to Australia); and amending the Constitution to give the Federal Government responsibility for Aboriginal affairs. This latter change means that Australia’s first inhabitants can now be counted in the national census for the first time. (Yes, I’m embarrassed to say that until this year, our Constitution did not recognise Aboriginal Australians as citizens or count them in the population of the country!)

Mr. Holt supported Australia’s membership of INTELSAT and the expansion of the NASA tracking station networks in Australia. In June this year, he became the first Australian Prime Minister to make a satellite broadcast, appearing in the special “Australia Day” programme from Expo 67 in Montreal. In March, he officially opened the Manned Space Flight Network station at Honeysuckle Creek, near Canberra, which will play a major role in the Apollo Moon programme. While there, he received as a special gift from the staff, a portrait generated by one of the station computers! Mr. Holt's computer-generated portrait. It took the staff at the NASA Honeysuckle Creek tracking station about 20 hours to programme the computer to produce this image.

Turning Our Eyes to Asia
Mr. Holt also had the foresight to recognise that, in a region of politically unstable nations, Australia needs to be better engaged with Asia and the Pacific. Earlier this year, he said in Parliament that “geographically we are part of Asia, and increasingly we have become aware of our involvement in the affairs of Asia – our greatest dangers and our highest hopes are centred in Asia's tomorrows”.

Prime Minister Holt at the South East Asian Treaty Organisation's meeting in Manila in October 1966

As Prime Minister, Mr. Holt's first overseas trip was to South-East Asia in April 1966, visiting Malaysia, Singapore, South Vietnam, and Thailand. This year, he toured Cambodia, Laos, South Korea, and Taiwan, and had planned future visits to other Asian nations.

Of course, in considering Australian involvement in Asia, we cannot ignore the ongoing conflict in Vietnam. Fervently opposed to Communism, Mr. Holt’s approach to national security emphasised countering Communist expansion. This lay behind his interest in encouraging greater engagement with Asia and his government’s expansion of Australia's involvement in the Vietnam War. In March 1966, Prime Minister Holt tripled the number of Australian troops in Vietnam to around 4,500, which included 1,500 conscript national servicemen: since October this year, with the most recent announcement of a troop increase, there are now over 8,000 Australian military personnel stationed in South Vietnam.
Although Mr. Holt’s expansion of Australia’s involvement in the Vietnam conflict was initially popular – and has been considered a key factor in his landslide election victory last year – the tide of public opinion has been turning against the war in recent months, especially as greater numbers of young men, conscripted into national service through a “birthday lottery” system that many people consider unfair, are being sent overseas to fight.

“All the Way with LBJ!”
The Vietnam War has dominated Australian foreign policy since Mr. Holt became Prime Minister, as he believed that “unless there is security for all small nations, there cannot be security for any small nation”. Believing that the United States provides a critical “shield” for Asian and South Pacific nations against Communist aggression, Mr. Holt cultivated a close relationship between Australia and America and formed a strong personal friendship with President Johnson, whom he had first met in 1942, when Mr. Johnson visited Melbourne as a naval officer.

In 1966, Mr. Holt visited the U.S. twice. On his first visit, he made a comment at a White House address that has become somewhat controversial here in Australia. While apparently intending the remark to be taken as a “light-hearted gesture of goodwill”, Mr. Holt’s comment that “you have an admiring friend, a staunch friend that will be all the way with LBJ” (a reference, I’m told, to the slogan used in Mr. Johnson's 1964 presidential campaign), was seen by many in Australia as sycophantic and embarrassingly servile.

Despite the controversy, I suspect that this jingle-like phrase will become one of Mr. Holt’s best-known utterances. It certainly appeared again when President Johnson made the first ever visit to Australia by a serving US President in October 1966. The President toured five cities, being greeted by both large crowds of the curious and anti-war demonstrators. I accompanied my sister and her family to join the crowds lining the motorcade route in Sydney, as I was certainly interested to get a glimpse of a US President!

Changing of the Guard
No trace of Mr. Holt was found by the evening of 18 December. At 10 p.m. that day the Governor-General announced that the Prime Minister was presumed dead. Since the country cannot be left without a leader, Mr. John McEwen, the leader of the junior government coalition party, the Country Party – and therefore the Deputy Prime Minister – has been sworn in as the interim Prime Minister, and the Liberal party will elect a new leader, and thus a new Prime Minister, early in the new year. Although Mr. Holt’s body still has not been found, a memorial service was held on 22 December, at St Paul's Anglican Cathedral, Melbourne. There were 2,000 people within the cathedral, while thousands more lined the nearby streets and listened through a public-address system. The funeral was broadcast on radio and television and, also via satellite to the United States, the UK and Europe. This was the first major satellite broadcast from Australia of a significant local news event. Interim Prime Minister McEwen with international dignitaries at Harold Holt's memorial

International dignitaries and heads of state attended the memorial service, including Charles, Prince of Wales (representing Her Majesty the Queen), the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader of the UK, the UN Secretary General and President Johnson. Seven Prime Ministers and Presidents from Asian and Pacific Countries also attended, in addition to foreign ministers and ambassadors from many countries in the region and the Commonwealth.

A Tragic Accident, Suicide or Something More Sinister?
Without a body, no definitive conclusions can be reached as to what happened to the Prime Minister. The official view, and it seems that of his family, close friends and colleagues, is that Mr. Holt overestimated his swimming ability and went literally out of his depth in dangerous conditions, resulting in a tragic accidental drowning. Other possibilities include that he may have suffered a heart-attack or other sudden medical issue in the water (although his health was generally good), been stung by a deadly jellyfish (yes, we do have them in Australia), or attacked by a shark.

Some allegations have been raised that Mr. Holt committed suicide due to a number of political difficulties and controversies that have arisen in recent months. However, his wife and friends have rejected this as uncharacteristic of his personality. Already, outlandish theories have also been advanced for the Prime Minister’s disappearance, including suggestions that he has faked his own death in order to run off with a mistress, or that he has been assassinated by the CIA (but one would have to ask why, since he was so pro-American). As long as no body is found, I suspect that the mystery of Prime Minister Holt’s disappearance will continue to haunt, and fascinate, Australia – and that the bizarre theories will continue.

In the meantime, Australia mourns the loss of a forward-looking leader and the promise he might have represented.










3 Comments Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race

[November 12, 1967] Still in the Race! (Apollo-4, Surveyor-6, OSO-4 and Cosmos-186-188)

Leave a comment



by Kaye Dee

As I noted in my previous article, October was such a busy month for space activity that I had to hold over several items for this month. But November has already provided us with plenty of space news as well. Even though both American and Soviet manned spaceflight is currently on hold while the investigations into their respective accidents continue, preparations for putting astronauts and cosmonauts on the Moon are ongoing and the Moon race is still on!

“Oh, it’s terrific, the building’s shaking!”

Opening the door to human lunar exploration needs an immensely powerful booster, and the successful launch of Apollo-4 a few days ago on 9 November has demonstrated that NASA has a rocket that is up to the task. Although the Saturn 1B rocket intended to loft Apollo Earth-orbiting missions has already been tested, Apollo-4 (also designated SA-501) marked the first flight of a complete Saturn V lunar launcher.

The sheer power of the massive rocket took everyone by surprise. When Apollo-4 took off from Pad 39A at the John F. Kennedy Space Centre, the sound pressure waves it generated rattled the new Launch Control Centre, three miles from the launch pad, causing dust to fall from the ceiling onto the launch controllers’ consoles. At the nearby Press Centre, ceiling tiles fell from the roof. Reporting live from the site, Walter Cronkite described the experience: “… our building’s shaking here. Our building’s shaking! Oh, it’s terrific, the building’s shaking! This big blast window is shaking! We’re holding it with our hands! Look at that rocket go into the clouds at 3000 feet! … You can see it… you can see it… oh the roar is terrific!”

Firing Room 1 in the Launch Control Centre at Kennedy Space Centre, under construction in early 1966. The Apollo-4 launch was controlled from here

Could it be that the sound of a Saturn V launch is one of the loudest noises, natural or artificial, ever heard by human beings? (Apart, perhaps, from the explosion of an atomic bomb?) I hope I’ll get the opportunity to hear, and see, a Saturn V launch for myself at some point in the future.

The Power for the Glory

Developed by Dr. Wernher von Braun’s team at NASA’s George C. Marshall Space Flight Centre, everything about the Saturn V is impressive. The 363-foot vehicle weighs 3,000-tons and the thrust of its first-stage motors alone is 71 million pounds! No wonder it rattled buildings miles away at liftoff!

The F-1 rocket motor, five of which power the Saturn V’s S1-C first stage, is the most powerful single combustion chamber liquid-propellant rocket engine so far developed (at least as far as we know, since whatever vehicle the USSR is developing for its lunar program could have even more powerful motors).

The launcher consists of three stages. The Boeing-built S1-C first stage, when fully fuelled with RP-1 kerosene and liquid oxygen, has a total mass of 4,881,000 pounds. Its five F-1 engines are arranged so that the four outer engines are gimballed, enabling them to turn so they can steer the rocket, while the fifth is fixed in position in the centre. Constructed by North American Aviation and weighing 1,060,000 pounds, the S-II second stage has five Rocketdyne-built cryogenic J-2 engines, powered by liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. They are arranged in a similar manner to the first stage engines, and also used for steering. The Saturn V’s S-IVB third stage has been built by the Douglas Aircraft Company and has a single J-2 engine using the same cryogenic fuel as the second stage. Fully fuelled, it weighs approximately 262,000 pounds. Guidance and telemetry systems for the rocket are contained within an instrument unit located on top of the third stage.

Soaring into the Future

This first Saturn V test flight has been tremendously important to the ultimate success of the Apollo programme, marking several necessary first steps: the first launch from Complex 39 at Cape Kennedy, built especially for Apollo; the first flight of the complete Apollo/Saturn V space vehicle; and the first test of Apollo Command Module’s performance re-entering the Earth's atmosphere at a velocity approximating that expected when returning from a lunar mission. In addition, the flight enabled testing of many modifications made to the Command Module in the wake of the January fire. This included the functioning of the thermal seals used in the new quick-release spacecraft hatch design.

 
Up, Up and Away!

Apollo-4 lifted off on schedule at 7am US Eastern time. Just 12 minutes later it successfully placed a Command and Service Module (CSM), weighing a record 278,885 pounds, into orbit 115 miles above the Earth. This is equivalent to the parking orbit that will be used during lunar missions to check out the spacecraft before it embarks for the Moon.

After two orbits, the third stage engine was re-ignited (itself another space first) to simulate the trans-lunar injection burn that will be used to send Apollo missions on their way to the Moon. This sent the spacecraft into an elliptical orbit with an apogee of 10,700 miles. Shortly afterwards, the CSM separated from the S-IVB stage and, after passing apogee, the Service Module engine was fired for 281 seconds to increase the re-entry speed to 36,639 feet per second, bringing the CSM into conditions simulating a return from the Moon.


An image of the Earth taken from an automatic camera on the Apollo-4 Command Module

After a successful re-entry, the Command Module splashed down approximately 10 miles from its target landing site in the North Pacific Ocean and was recovered by the aircraft carrier USS Bennington. The mission lasted just eight hours 36 minutes and 54 seconds (four minutes six seconds ahead of schedule!), but it successfully demonstrated all the major components of an Apollo mission, apart from the Lunar Module (which is still in development) that will make the actual landing on the Moon’s surface. In a special message of congratulations to the NASA team, President Johnson said the flight “symbolises the power this nation is harnessing for the peaceful exploration of space”.

Goodbye Lunar Orbiters…

While Apollo’s chariot was readied for its first test flight, NASA has continued its unmanned exploration of the Moon, to ensure a safe landing for the astronauts. In August, Gideon gave us an excellent summary of NASA’s Lunar Orbiter programme, the first three missions of which were designed to study potential Apollo landing sites. Lunar Orbiter-3, launched back in February this year, met its fate last month when the spacecraft was intentionally crashed into the lunar surface on 9 October. Despite the failure of its imaging system in March, Lunar Orbiter-3 was tracked from Earth for several months for lunar geodesy research and communication experiments. On 30 August, commands were sent to the spacecraft to circularise its orbit to 99 miles in order to simulate an Apollo trajectory.

Lunar Orbiter-3 image of the Moon's far side, showing the crater Tsiolkovski

Each Lunar Orbiter mission has been de-orbited so that it will not become a navigation hazard to future manned Apollo spacecraft. Consequently, before its manoeuvring thrusters were depleted, Lunar Orbiter 3 was commanded on 9 October to impact on the Moon, hitting the lunar surface at 14 degrees 36 minutes North latitude and 91 degrees 42 minutes West longitude. Co-incidentally, Lunar Orbiter-4, which failed back in July and could not be controlled, decayed naturally from orbit and impacted on the Moon on 6 October. Lunar Orbiter-5, launched in August, remains in orbit.

…Hello Surveyor 6

A month after the demise of the Lunar Orbiters, NASA’s Surveyor-6 probe has made a much softer landing on the lunar surface, achieving a “spot on” touchdown in the rugged Sinus Medii (Central Bay – it’s in the centre of the Moon's visible hemisphere) on 10 November (Australian time; 9 November in the US). This region is a potential site for the first Apollo landing, but since it appeared to be cratered and rocky, mission planners needed to know if its geological structure (different to the ‘plains’ areas where earlier Surveyor missions have landed) could support the weight of a manned Lunar Module.

Only an hour after landing safely, Surveyor-6 was operational and sent back pictures of a lunar cliff about a mile from its landing point, which has been described as “the most rugged feature we have yet seen on the Moon”. The first panoramas from Surveyor indicate that the landing site is not as rough as anticipated, and seems suitable for an Apollo landing.

Deep Space Network stations in Australia are helping to support the Surveyor-6 mission, as well as Surveyor-5, that landed in the Mare Tranquilitatis (Sea of Tranquillity) in September and is still operational. Hopefully both spacecraft will survive the next lunar night, commencing two weeks from now. NASA plans to send one more Surveyor probe to the Moon, in January, so look out for a review of the completed Surveyor programme early next year.

Watching the Sun for Astronaut Safety

With the Sun moving towards its maximum activity late next year or early in 1969, and likely to still be very active when the Apollo landing missions are occurring (assuming that the programme resumes some time within the next 12 months), NASA has wasted no time in launching another spacecraft in its Orbiting Solar Observatory (OSO) series, to help characterise the effects of solar activity in deep space. A NASA spokesman was recently quoted as saying that “A study of solar activity and its effect on Earth, aside from basic scientific interest, is necessary for a greater understanding of the space environment prior to manned flights to the Moon”.

OSO-4 under construction

Launched on 18 October, OSO-4 (also known as OSO-D) is the latest satellite developed under the leadership of Dr. Nancy Grace Roman, NASA’s first female executive, who is Chief of Astronomy and Solar Physics. The satellite is equipped to measure the direction and intensity of Ultraviolet, X-ray and Gamma radiation, not just from the Sun, but across the entire celestial sphere.

The OSO-4 spacecraft, like its predecessors, consists of a solar-cell covered “sail” section and a “wheel” section that spins about an axis perpendicular to the pointing direction of the sail. The sail carries a 75 pound payload of two instruments that are kept pointing on the centre of the Sun. The wheel carries a 100 pound payload of seven instruments and rotates once every two seconds. This rotation enables the instruments to scan the solar disc and atmosphere as well as other parts of the galaxy. The satellite’s extended arms give it greater axial stability.

Hopefully, OSO-4 will have a long lifespan, producing data as solar activity increases across the Sun’s cycle, and enhancing safety for the Apollo and Soviet crews who will venture beyond the protection of the van Allen belts on their way to the Moon.

What are the Soviets Up To?

The USSR has been remarkably quiet about its manned lunar programme. One could almost think that they had given up racing Apollo to the Moon, if not for the rumours and hints that constantly swirl around. Rumours abounded at the time of the tragically lost Soyuz-1 mission that it was intended to be a space spectacular, debuting in the Soyuz a new, much larger spacecraft which would participate in multiple rendezvous and docking manoeuvres, and possibly even crew transfers, with one or more other manned spacecraft.

Such a space feat has yet to occur, but the mysterious recent space missions of Cosmos-186 and 188 suggest that the Soviets have something of the sort in mind for the future, and are still quietly working to develop the techniques that they will need for lunar landing missions and/or a space station programme.

It Takes Two to Rendezvous

On 27 October, Cosmos-186 was launched into a low Earth orbit, with a perigee of 129 miles and an apogee of 146 miles and an orbital period of 88.7 minutes. Cosmos-187 was launched the following day, and there has been speculation that it was intended to be part of a rendezvous and docking demonstration with Cosmos-186 but was placed into an incorrect orbit. However, as is so often the case with Cosmos satellites, the Soviet authorities only described their missions as continuing studies of outer space and testing new systems, so the actual purpose of this mission remains a mystery.


A rare Soviet illustration of what is believed to be the Cosmos-186-188 docking

However, Cosmos-186 was joined by a companion on 30 October, when Cosmos-188 was placed into a very similar orbit with a separation of just 15 miles. This clearly demonstrates the precision with which the USSR can insert satellites into orbit. The two spacecraft then proceeded to perform the first fully automated space docking (unlike the manual dockings performed by Gemini missions from Gemini-8 onwards), just an hour after Cosmos-188 was launched. Soviet sources, and some electronic eavesdropping by the now-famous science class at Kettering Grammar School in England, using surprisingly unsophisticated equipment, indicate that Cosmos-186 was the ‘active’ partner in the docking. It used its onboard radar system to locate, approach and dock with the ‘passive’ Cosmos-188.

While the two spacecraft were mechanically docked, it seems that an electrical connection could not be made between them, and no other manoeuvres appear to have been carried out while Cosmos-186 and 188 were joined together. Perhaps there were technical issues surrounding the docking, but an onboard camera on Cosmos-186 did provide live (if rather low quality) television images of the rendezvous docking and separation, and some footage was publicly broadcast.

After three and a half hours docked together, the two satellites separated on command from the ground and continued to operate separately in orbit. Cosmos-186 made a soft-landing return to Earth on 31 October, lending credence to the speculations that it was testing out improvements to the Soyuz parachute system, while Cosmos-188 reportedly soft-landed on 2 November.

Speculating on Soviet Space Plans

Was Cosmos-186 a Soyuz-type vehicle, possibly testing out modifications made to prevent a recurrence of the re-entry parachute tangling that apparently led to the loss of Soyuz-1 and the death of Cosmonaut Komarov? Building on speculations from the time of the Soyuz-1 launch, there have even been suggestions that Cosmos-186, while unmanned, was a spacecraft large enough to hold a crew of five cosmonauts. There is also speculation that Cosmos-188 may have been the prototype of a new propulsion system for orbital operations. Does this mean, then, that the USSR is planning some kind of manned spaceflight feat in orbit to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Communist Revolution? Or that it will soon attempt a circumlunar flight, to reach the Moon ahead of the United States?

Whatever their future plans may be, the automated rendezvous and docking of two unmanned spacecraft in Earth orbit shows that the USSR’s space technology is still advancing rapidly. The joint Cosmos 186-188 mission proves that it is possible to launch small components and assemble them in space to make a larger structure, even without the assistance of astronauts. This means that massive rockets like the Saturn V might not be required to construct space stations in orbit, or even undertake lunar missions, if the project is designed around assembling the lunar spacecraft in Earth orbit. Has the Cosmos 186-188 mission therefore been a hint of what the USSR's Moon programme will look like, in contrast to Apollo? Only time will tell…


No comments Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race

[October 28, 1967] Unveiling Venus – at Least a Little (Venera-4 and Mariner-5)

2 Comments



by Kaye Dee

Despite the hiatus in manned spaceflight missions while the Apollo-1 and Soyuz-1 accident investigations continue, October has been a very busy month for space activities – so much so that I’ve had to defer writing about some of this month’s events to an article next month!

Spaceflight Slowdown?

4 October saw the tenth anniversary of the launch of Sputnik-1, the Soviet satellite that surprised the world and ushered in the Space Age and the Space Race. Since that first launch, the pace of space exploration has been breathtaking, far surpassing what even its most ardent proponents in the 1950s anticipated.

In the famous Colliers’ “Man Will Conquer Space Soon” article series, reproduced even here in Australia, Dr Wernher von Braun predicted that the first manned mission to the Moon would not occur until the late 1970s

As part of the USSR’s Sputnik 10th anniversary celebrations, many space-focussed newspaper articles were published.  One of these, written by Voskhod-1 cosmonaut and engineer Dr. Konstantin Feoktistov, strongly hinted that Russia's next major space feat would be the launch of an orbiting space platform. This would certainly be an important development in establishing a permanent human presence in space and put the Soviet Union once again ahead in the Space Race, especially if the US and USSR lunar programmes are faltering.

Earlier this month, the head of the NASA, Mr James Webb, said it was increasingly doubtful that either the United States or the Soviet Union would land people on the Moon in this decade. He delivered a gloomy prognostication for the second decade of the Space Age, saying the entire US programme was “slowing down”. Mr. Webb criticised recent Congressional cuts of 10 per cent to the space-agency budget projected for the year ending next 30 June, saying that NASA was laying off over 100,000 people.

Administrator Webb also cast doubt on some proposed NASA planetary exploration missions. “The serious question is whether or not this country wants to start a Voyager mission to Mars in 1968”, he is reported to have said. The Voyager programme is a 10-year project that envisages sending two spacecraft to Mars (one to orbit around it, the other to land on its surface), with the additional possibility of landing a spacecraft on Venus and exploring Jupiter. These would undoubtedly be exciting missions that would reveal new knowledge about these planets, but Mr Webb said he had virtually no money for the Voyager programme as a result of the budget cut.

Parallel Planetary Probes: Venera-4 and Mariner-5

But possible future downturns in space activity can’t detract from this month’s big news: the safe arrival of two spacecraft at Venus!

Back in June, a suitable launch window meant that both the USSR and NASA sent spacecraft on their way to our closest planetary neighbour. First off the blocks was the Soviet Union, which launched its Venera-4 mission (generally known in the West as Venus-4) on 12 June from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. NASA’s Mariner-5 followed two days later, on 14 June, launched from Cape Kennedy.

Pre-launch photo of Venera-4

Venera-4 is the most recent Soviet attempt to reach the planet after Venera-2 and 3 failed to send back any data in March last year. There is some speculation that, since its previous Venus mission employed twin spacecraft, Russia may have also intended this Venus shot to be a two-spacecraft mission. It’s possible that the short-lived Cosmos 167 spacecraft, launched on 17 June, was Venera-4’s twin that failed to leave orbit, although with the secrecy that surrounds so much of the Soviet space program, who knows if we’ll ever get the truth of it? Venera-4 was itself first put into a parking orbit around the Earth before being launched in the direction of Venus. A course correction was performed on 29 July, to ensure that the probe would not miss its target.


Mariner-5 being prepared for launch

Mariner-5 is NASA’s first Venus probe since Mariner-2 in 1962. Originally constructed as a backup for the Mariner-4 Mars mission, that probe’s success meant that the spacecraft could be repurposed to take advantage of the 1967 Venus launch window. Interestingly, I understand from my friends at the Sydney Observatory that there were initial suggestions to send the Mariner back-up spacecraft to either comet 7P/Pons–Winnecke or comet 10P/Tempel, before the Venus mission was decided upon. While it’s useful to have additional data from Venus, it would have been fascinating to send an exploratory mission to a comet, since we know so little about these transient visitors to our skies. 

At its closest, Venus is just 36 million miles from Earth, but Mariner-5 followed a looping flightpath of 212 million miles, to enable it to fly past Venus at a distance of around 2,500 miles (about 10 times closer than Mariner-2’s flyby). Australia’s Deep Space Network (DSN) stations at Tidbinbilla, near Canberra, and Island Lagoon, near the Woomera Rocket Range, were respectively the prime and back-up monitoring and control stations for Mariner-5’s mid-course correction burn that placed it on its close flyby trajectory. 

Keys to Unlock a Mystery

Venus has always been a planet shrouded in mystery since its thick, cloudy atmosphere prevents any telescopic observation of its surface. For this year’s launch window, one could almost believe that Cold War tensions had been overcome and the USSR and USA had agreed to work together on a Venus exploration program, given that their two spacecraft effectively complement each other.

Venera-4’s mission was announced as “direct atmospheric studies”, with Western scientists speculating that this meant that it would follow Venera-3 in attempting to land on the planet’s surface. The spacecraft’s arrival at Venus has proved this speculation to be correct, and the few images of Venera-4 now available show the 2,436 lb spacecraft to be near-identical to Venera-3. 11 ft high, with its solar panels spanning 13 ft, Venera-4 carried a 1 metre (3 ft 3 in) spherical landing capsule that was released to descend through the atmosphere while the main spacecraft flew past Venus and provided a relay station for its signals.
Soviet models of the Venera-4 spacecraft and its descent capsule

The 844 lb descent capsule was equipped with a heat shield, capable of withstanding temperatures up to 11,000°C (19,800 °F) and had a rechargeable battery providing 100 minutes of power for the instruments and transmitter. During the flight to Venus the battery was kept charged by the solar panels of the carrier spacecraft. Supposedly, the entire Venera-4 probe was sterilised to prevent any biological contamination of Venus, but some Western scientists have cast doubt on this claim. The capsule was pressurized up to 25 atmospheres since the surface pressure on Venus was unknown until Venera-4’s arrival.
Picture of the Venera-4 descent capsule released by the USSR. Western scientists are wondering what that heat shield is made of

Information recently released by the Soviet Academy of Sciences has said that the descent vehicle carried two thermometers, a barometer, a radio altimeter, an atmospheric density gauge, 11 gas analysers, and two radio transmitters. Scientific instruments on the main body of the spacecraft included a magnetometer and charged particle traps, both for measuring Venus' magnetic field and the stellar wind on the way to Venus, an ultraviolet spectrometer to detect hydrogen and oxygen gases in Venus' atmosphere, and cosmic ray detectors.


Much smaller than Venera-4, the 5401b Mariner-5 was designed to flyby Venus taking scientific measurements: it was not equipped with a camera, as NASA considered this un-necessary in view of the planet’s cloud cover. NASA controllers initially planned a distant flyby of Venus, to avoid the possibility of an unsterilised spacecraft crashing into the planet, but the final close flyby was eventually chosen to improve the chances of detecting a magnetic field and any interaction with the solar wind.

As Mariner-4’s backup, Mariner-5 has the same basic body – an octagonal magnesium frame 50 in diagonally across and 18 in high. However, since it was heading to Venus instead of Mars, Mariner-5 had to be modified to cope with the conditions much closer to the Sun. Due to its trajectory, Mariner-5 needed to face away from the Sun to keep its high-gain antenna pointed at Earth. Its solar panels were therefore reversed to face aft, so they could remain pointed at the Sun. They were also reduced in size, since closer proximity to the Sun meant less solar cells were needed to generate the same level of power. Mariner-5's trajectory also required the high-gain antenna to be placed at a different angle and made moveable as part of the radio occultation experiment. A deployable sunshade on the aft of the spacecraft was used for thermal control, and Mariner-5 was fully attitude stabilized, using the sun and Canopus as references.
View from below showing the main components of Mariner-5

Mariner-5’s prime task was to determine the thickness of Venus’ atmosphere, investigate any potential magnetic field and refine the understanding of Venus’ gravity. Its suite of instruments included: an ultraviolet photometer, a two-frequency beacon receiver, a S-Band radio occultation experiment, a helium magnetometer, an interplanetary ion plasma probe and a trapped radiation detector. The spacecraft instruments measured both interplanetary and Venusian magnetic fields, charged particles, and plasmas, as well as the radio refractivity and UV emissions of the Venusian atmosphere.

During its 127-day cruise to Venus, Mariner-5 gathered data on the interplanetary environment. In September and October, observations were co-ordinated with measurements made by Mariner-4, which is on its own extended mission, following its 1965 encounter with Mars. Similar observations were made by Venera-4 during its flight to Venus, which found that the concentration of positive ions in interplanetary space is much lower than expected. 

Missions Accomplished

A few days before it arrived at Venus, the Soviet Academy of Sciences requested assistance from the massive 250 feet radio telescope at the Jodrell Bank Observatory in the UK, asking the facility to track Venera-4 for the final part of its voyage. This has provided Western scientists with some independent verification of Soviet claims about the mission. Jodrell Bank even announced the landing of the Venera-4 descent capsule more than seven hours before it was reported by the Soviet news agency Tass!

On 18 October, Venera-4’s descent vehicle entered the Venusian atmosphere, deploying a parachute to slow its fall onto the night side of the planet. According to a story that one of the Sydney Observatory astronomers picked up from a Soviet colleague at a recent international scientific conference, because there was still the possibility that, beneath its clouds Venus might be largely covered by water (one of the main theories about its surface), the capsule was designed to float if it did land in water. Uniquely, the spacecraft’s designers made the lock of the capsule using sugar, which would dissolve in liquid water and release the transmitter antennae in the event of a water landing.

Although the Venera-4 capsule had 100 minutes of battery power available and sent back valuable data as it fell through the atmosphere, Jodrell Bank observations, and the official announcement from Tass, indicated that the signal cut off around 96 minutes. While it was initially thought that this meant that the capsule had touched down on the surface, and there were even early reports claiming it had detected a rocky terrain, questions are now being raised as to whether it actually reached the surface, or if the spacecraft failed while still descending. Tass has said that the capsule stopped transmitting data because it apparently landed in a way that obstructed its directional antenna. A recording of the last 20 seconds of signal received at Jodrell Bank was delivered to Vostok-5 cosmonaut Valery Bykovsky during a visit to the radio telescope on 26 October. Perhaps once it is fully analysed, the question of the capsule’s fate will be clarified. Of course, if the landing is confirmed, Venera-4 will have made history with the first successful landing and in-situ data gathering on another planet.

Diagram illustrating the major milestones during the Mariner-5 encounter with Venus on 19 October
Mariner-5 swept past Venus on 19 October, making a close approach of 2,480 miles. At 02:49 GMT the Island Lagoon DSN station commanded Mariner 5 to prepare for the encounter sequence and 12 hours later its tape recorder began to store science data. Tracked by the new 200 in antenna at NASA’s Goldstone tracking station, Mariner reached its closest encounter distance at 17:35 GMT, and minutes later entered the “occultation zone” before passed behind Venus as seen from the Earth. 17 minutes later, Mariner-5 emerged from behind Venus and completed its encounter at 18:34 GMT.

The following day, Mariner-5 began to transmit its recorded data back to Earth. Over 72½ hours there were three playbacks of the data to correct for missed bits. Mariner-5's flight path following its Venus encounter is bringing it closer to the Sun than any previous probe and the intention is for to be tracked until its instruments fail.

A Peep Behind the Veil

So what have we learned about Venus from these two successful probes? There has long been controversy among astronomers as to whether Venus is a desert planet, too hot for life, or an ocean world, covered in water. The data from both Venera and Mariner has come down firmly on the side of the desert world hypothesis.
Astronomical artist Mr. Chesley Bonestell's 1947 vision of a desert Venus

The effects of Venus’ atmosphere on radio signals during Mariner-5’s occultation experiment have enabled scientists to calculate temperature and pressure at the planet's surface as 980°F and 75 to 100 Earth atmospheres. These figures disagree with readings from Venera 4 mission, which indicate surface temperatures from 104 to 536°F and 15 Earth atmospheres’ pressure, but both sets of data indicate a hellish world, with little evidence of water and an extremely dense atmosphere.

Venera has established that Venus’ atmosphere consists almost exclusively of carbon dioxide with traces of hydrogen vapour, very little oxygen, and no nitrogen. Mariner-5's data indicates that the atmosphere of Venus ranges from 52 to 87 per cent carbon dioxide, with both hydrogen and oxygen in the upper atmosphere: it found no trace of nitrogen. It detected about as much hydrogen proportionately as there is in the Earth's atmosphere. Mariner scientists, however, have pointed out that further analysis and refinements of both Russian and American data could clear up the apparent discrepancies.

Although Mariner’s instruments could not penetrate deeply enough into Venus’ atmosphere to obtain surface readings, they determined that the outer fringe of the atmosphere, where atoms were excited by direct sunlight, had a temperature of 700°F, below which was a layer close to Zero degrees, lying about 100 miles above the surface. Chemicals in the atmosphere, or electrical storms far more intense than those of Earth, give the night side of the planet an ashen glow.
A view of the Mariner-5 control room at JPL during the Venus encounter

A fascinating finding is that the dense atmosphere acts like a giant lens, bending light waves so they travel around the planet. Both American and Russian researchers agree that astronauts standing on the surface would feel like they were “standing at the bottom of a giant bowl”, with the back of their own heads a shimmering mirage on the horizon. Vision would be so distorted that the sun would appear at sunset to be a long bright line on the horizon: its light could penetrate the atmosphere, but not escape because of scattering, so that it would appear as a bright ball again for a time at sunrise until the atmosphere distorted its rays.

Neither spacecraft found any evidence of radiation belts comparable to the Van Allen belts around the Earth, and both established that Venus has only a very slight magnetic field, less than 1% that of the Earth. Observing how much Venus' gravity changed Mariner 5's trajectory established that Venus’ mass is 81.5 % that of Earth. Tracking of radio signals from Mariner-5 as it swept behind Venus, has shown that the planet is virtually spherical, compared with Earth's slightly pear-shape. (Other celestial mechanics experiments conducted with Mariner-5 obtained improved determinations of the mass of the Moon, of the astronomical unit, and improved ephemerides of Earth and Venus).

Life on Venus?

Although neither spacecraft was equipped to look for life on Venus, their findings will undoubtedly contribute to the growing scientific controversy over whether life does, or can, exist there. Based on its Venera results, the Soviet Union has said that Venus is “too hot for human life”, although Sir Bernard Lovell, the Director of Jodrell Bank Station, has suggested that future probes might find remnants of some early organic development, even if conditions today make life highly unlikely. However, German/American rocket pioneer and space writer Dr Willy Ley, has suggested there might be the possibility of “a very specialised kind of life on Venus”, possibly at the poles, which he believes would be cooler that the currently measured temperatures. The USSR’s Dr Krasilnikov has said that Earth bacteria could withstand the atmospheric pressure on Venus and might even be able to survive the intense heat. 


But just as Mariner-4 demolished fantasies of canals made by intelligent Martians, so the results from Venera-4 and Mariner-5, in allowing us a glimpse behind its cloudy veil, have swept aside any number of science fiction visions of Venus. Edgar Rice Burroughs’ verdant Amtor, with its continents and oceans, and Heinlein’s swampy Venus are no more. They have been replaced by a new vision of a hellish Venus, almost certainly inimical to life, with fiery storms raging in a dense, metal melting atmosphere which traps and bends light waves in a weird manner. I wonder where the SF writers of the future will take it?



2 Comments Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race, Science Fiction/Fantasy, TV

[August 22, 1967] Boldly Going Down Under (Star Trek, Spies and space in Australia)

Leave a comment



by Kaye Dee

Since Star Trek debuted in the US last year, I’ve been eagerly awaiting its appearance Down Under after reading all the fascinating episode reviews that my fellow writers have produced for the Journey.

As I’ve mentioned before , the arrival of overseas television programmes onto Australian screens can vary wildly, from a few months to several years after premiering in their home country, so I had no idea how long I might have to wait. Thankfully, this time it’s only taken about ten months for the adventures of the crew of the USS Enterprise to reach our shores, with the series premiering in Sydney on TCN-9, the flagship station of the Nine Network, on Thursday 6 July.

Who’s Watching Out for the Watchers?
Like the introduction of Doctor Who in Australia, Star Trek’s presence on our screens has had to pass the scrutiny of the Australian Film Censorship Board (AFCB), which reviews all foreign content for television broadcast in Australia – and like Doctor Who, it has not escaped unscathed. The good Doctor’s Australian premiere was delayed by the AFCB considering its early episodes not suitable for broadcast in a “children’s” timeslot. Other episodes have experienced censorship cuts of scenes considered scary for children, and the entire Dalek Masterplan story was even banned for being too terrifying! (I really must write a future article on the curious censorship of Doctor Who in Australia).

Similarly, The Man Trap , screened as the first episode in the US, has also been banned here, deemed unsuitable for the show’s 8.30pm timeslot due to its themes of vampirism! Apparently, the ACFB thinks Australian adults can’t handle a good, suspenseful horror-themed story at a decent viewing hour, even though it permits B-grade (or should that be Z-grade?) vampire and other horror movies to be screened after 10.30pm, as part of the Awful Movies show hosted by Deadly Earnest (the nom-de-screen of local television personality Ian Bannerman, seen above in character). However, that show plays on another network, so it is unlikely that we’ll see The Man Trap turn up there any time soon.

Meanwhile, the AFCB is still reviewing some of the first series episodes, but hopefully they won’t ban any more from screening in the normal Star Trek timeslot. However, the review process seems to have thrown any adherence to the US screening order out the window and the seven episodes shown so far have appeared in quite a different sequence. Commencing with The Corbomite Manoeuvre as the first episode, we’ve now seen Menagerie (parts 1 and 2), Arena, This Side of Paradise, A Taste of Armageddon and Tomorrow is Yesterday. Galileo Seven is scheduled for this coming Thursday. My favourite so far? Tomorrow is Yesterday : I'm always up for a time travel story.

This order may be at least partly based on what TCN-9 has available while the AFCB completes its reviews. But it could also be that the television station staff have been indulging in the apparently common practice (so I’m told by my friend at the Australian Broadcasting Commission) of picking episodes at random off the shelf, when no specific screening order has been defined. Still, as long as we get to see the rest of the episodes, in whatever order, I’ll be happy, even if we will only be watching them in black and white (as we’re not likely to get colour TV in Australia until the mid-1970s on current government planning).

A Sydney Exclusive For Now
Star Trek is only screening in Sydney at the moment, although it will be shown nationally later in the year on other Nine Network capital city stations. The reason for this broadcast strategy is not clear, but perhaps Nine is waiting to see how popular the series is in Australia’s largest market before scheduling it elsewhere? Even though the various Irwin Allen productions have had reasonable ratings on Australian television, science fiction is still seen as something of a gamble by Australian commercial broadcasters and Nine may not be as confident in its purchase of the series as it seems.

On the other hand, rumour has it that Mr. Kerry Packer, the son of the Nine Network’s chief shareholder, media baron Sir Frank Packer, is something of a science fiction fan – I do have it on good authority that he’s a fan of that wonderfully quirky British series The Avengers. Maybe Mr. Packer wants to enjoy Star Trek in his home market of Sydney first, before sharing it with the rest of the country?


Everyone Loves Mr. Spock
While the arrival of Star Trek hasn’t had a huge promotional campaign attached to it – unlike the debut of Mission:Impossible (see below) – Sir Frank has certainly made use of the resources of his Australian Consolidated Press magazines and newspapers to plug the series. The Australian Women’s Weekly, the country’s most popular women’s magazine, is rather conservative and not exactly known for embracing “out there” interests like science fiction. Yet its television critic, Nan Musgrove, gave Star Trek a very positive review in her column (and it does feel like a genuinely positive review, not just a promotion for a Packer interest).

A full page colour spread about Star Trek (above) has recently appeared in the 2 August issue and a further article about Mr. Nimoy’s Emmy nomination in the 9 August issue. Articles about Star Trek have also appeared in the Packer-owned TV Week magazine and Daily Telegraph newspaper.

The television critics of other newspapers and television guides have also generally reviewed the series favourably, although one did dismiss it rather scathingly (but then, I think he dislikes science fiction as a matter of principle!) Mr. Spock certainly stands out as the most intriguing and popular character to the reviewers, and to letter writers to the newspapers and magazines. Several have also commented very favourably on the multi-national nature of the Enterprise crew and the lack of racial prejudice in the series – these latter comments undoubtedly influenced by the racial unrest we’ve seen in the US in recent times.

Who's Watching?
I’ve not been able to obtain any ratings figures yet for these early Star Trek episodes, so it’s hard to really judge the show’s popularity with the viewing audience. But if what I’m hearing at the university is anything to go by, and what my sister and her husband tell me they are hearing at the hairdresser and at work, people who would not consider themselves science fiction fans (or even interested in science fiction) are watching Star Trek and enjoying it.

And it’s not just the adults that are watching Star Trek, either. My niece Vickie, who recently turned 10, asked to be allowed to stay up and watch Star Trek for her birthday (as her normal bedtime is 8.30pm). Her first episode was Arena – and she was so taken by it that she refused to go to bed at the usual time the following week, insisting that now she is a "big girl", she's old enough to stay up an extra hour one night a week! Well, how could we refuse a budding fan? So now she joins her parents and I in our new Thursday night routine of watching Hunter at 7.30, followed by Star Trek at 8.30pm.


Spies are All the Rage
Hunter, which precedes Star Trek (and commenced on the same evening that Star Trek premiered), is a new Australian-made spy drama from the Crawford Productions stable. Better known for its radio dramas and police show Homicide, Crawfords has decided to cash in on the current popularity of the espionage genre by producing a very slick, American-style spy drama based around the exploits of John Hunter, a Bond-like intelligence agent for an Australian security organisation, COSMIC (Commonwealth Office of Security & Military Intelligence Co-ordination).

Being on the Nine Network, Hunter has also been heavily promoted in the Packer-owned press, but nothing like the way in which the 0-10 Network has promoted the debut of its prize overseas spy-drama purchase, Mission: Impossible. Ahead of that show’s first screening at the end of June, TEN-10 in Sydney flew 50 journalists and celebrities down to Canberra on a specially chartered flight. The station’s guests were treated to an in-flight meal of champagne, fillet mignon and “super spy cocktails” (served by silver-mini-skirted hostesses), before enjoying an exclusive preview of the first episode, screened at the museum within the Royal Australian Mint! The 0-10 network must be expecting great things from Mission: Impossible, to spend so lavishly on its promotion. 

Crawfords has preferred to spend its Hunter budget, not on promotion, but on extensive location filming. This has included segments of its first six-part story, The Tolhurst File, being shot on location at the Woomera Rocket Range. Hunter is the first commercial television programme to receive permission to film at Woomera, and it’s rumoured that Hector Crawford himself made use of his high-level political connections to obtain the clearances – because right now Woomera is a very busy place indeed!

ELDO Launches at Woomera
Of course, I wouldn't let a piece on science fiction go by without a bit on actual science as well–and there is plenty to report.

It’s been over twelve months since I wrote an update on the activities of the ELDO programme. After the Europa F-4 launch was un-necessarily terminated by the Range Safety Officer in May last year, a replacement flight to test the all-up configuration of the three-stage vehicle had to be arranged. This took place on 15 November 1966, with an active Blue Streak first stage and inert dummies of the French second stage and West German third stage. The rocket’s dummy test satellite also carried instrumentation to measure the conditions that a real satellite would experience during launch.

Fortunately, this test flight was a complete success, reaching a height of over 60 miles. The dummy upper stages separated successfully from the active first stage, with all the vehicle’s components falling, as planned, into the upper region of the Simpson Desert, south-east of Alice Springs in the Northern Territory.

Not so successful, however, was the flight of Europa F-6, launched just a couple of weeks ago on 4 August. This mission was intended to be the first trial flight with active first and second stages (the third stage and satellite still being dummies). Initially planned for 11 July, the flight experienced 10 aborts and launch delays over more than two weeks due to systems problems and weather.

When the mission finally launched, while the first stage once again performed as planned, the French second stage failed to ignite. The cause of this failure is not yet known, but as many components of the French Coralie stage were reaching the end of their operational life due to the launch delays, investigations of the failure are focussed on this aspect. A reflight, already dubbed F6/2 is being scheduled for later this year, possibly November.

An "Australian" Astronaut
And Australia now has its "own" astronaut, in the person of Dr Phillip K Chapman, just this month selected as part of NASA's second group of 11 scientist-astronauts. Although Chapman, who is now an American citizen (as he had to be, in order to be eligible for the astronaut programme), will not fly as an astronaut wearing an Australian flag on his shoulder, we are all excited that he will probably participate in the Apollo Applications Program, which is planned to follow-on from the initial Apollo lunar landing program: maybe he will even get to walk on the Moon as the Apollo programme expands?

Originally from Melbourne, Chapman (seen here in the back row, extreme right) is one of the first two naturalised US citizens to be selected as an astronaut. A physicist and engineer, specialising in instrumentation, Chapman studied at the University of Sydney and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), from which he obtained a degree in aeronautics and astronautics.

Prior to his astronaut selection, Chapman's career has included studying aurorae in Antarctica, as part of the Australian expedition there during the International Geophysical Year. He also worked on aviation electronics in Canada before joining MIT as a staff physicist in 1961. Prior to his selection as an astronaut, Chapman has most recently been employed in MIT’s Experimental Astronomy Laboratory, where he worked on several satellites. I hope I'll have the opportuntiy to meet Dr Chapman some time soon, and I look forward to reporting on his future astronaut career. 

And while I wait for a real life Australian astronaut to make his first flight, I can at last enjoy the adventures of the crew of the USS Enterprise for myself – and hope that one day they'll add an Australian to its crew as well!



No comments Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race

[July 22, 1967] Getting the mail through (Australia introduces Postcodes)

1 Comment



by Kaye Dee

In my first article for the Journey, just over three years ago, I talked about rocket mail and flying postmen. Well, we haven’t seen either of them yet – despite continual promises that they are “only a few years away”. This month, though, Australia has taken a step into the future of postal technology with the introduction of Postcode, the new national mail sorting system.

Zipping the Mail Along
Postal codes are not exactly new. They were first developed in large cities like London (where they were introduced in 1857) to help improve the speed of mail sorting and delivery as populations and the size and complexity of cities grew.

Modern postal codes were first introduced in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1932, followed by Germany (1941), Singapore (1950) and Argentina in 1958. Britain began introducing its current postal code system in 1959, while the US Postal Service introduced the five-digit ZIP code in 1963. I was interested to learn as I prepared to write this article that the ZIP part of ZIP code is actually an acronym standing for Zone Improvement Plan. I always thought that it was just a play on the idea of zipping, or speeding, the mail along to its destination. Switzerland was the most recent country to introduce postal codes before Australia, in 1964.

Mechanising Mail Sorting
What made the Postmaster General’s Department (PMG), which manages all Australia’s postal, telephone and telegraph services, decide that we needed to follow suit and speed up our mail by using a postal code system? After all, Australia’s current population is only 11.87 million – less than the population of New York City, which I understand is about 15.6 million.

Until now, mail sorting in this country has primarily been done by skilled human sorters, who have a detailed knowledge of geographical localities, reading the address on each letter. However, there are about 8,000 delivery offices around the country, so getting the mail to its final destnations has required at least two or three stages of sorting.


Mail sorting at the Sydney General Post Office in 1964

Australia has long been a world leader in in postal service mechanisation, and as early as 1958, the PMG decided to introduce large-scale mechanical mail sorting systems across Australia. As the first stage of this plan, the Sydney Mail Exchange opened in the suburb of Redfern in 1965, to automate and centralise the mail sorting facilities for New South Wales. It’s the largest and most advanced mechanised mail centre in the Southern Hemisphere, and the new electronic equipment and technology is attracting Worldwide interest. I’ve even heard that the Mail Exchange’s design concept is being considered as a possible future system by the US Postal Service.


Sydey's ultra-modern new mail exchange, in the inner-city suburb of Redfern

Sydney is our largest city, and New South Wales, the most populous state, so it makes sense to introduce a new Postcode system to work in conjunction with the state-of-the-art electronic mail handling equipment at the Sydney Mail Exchange, through which so much mail passes. Postcodes simplify the sorting process, as the mail sorter is now a coding operator, who enters the postcode using their data entry terminal, enabling the letters to be rapidly sorted electronically and speedily despatched to their delivery offices.


The Sydney Mail Exchange's state-of-the-art data entry system for the new sorting computers. Conveyors drop individual letters in front of the operators, who then type the postcode or suburb identifying the letter’s destination

The computers controlling this process occupy a large amount of space in the Mail Exchange building. Similar mechanised sorting systems will be gradually introduced around the country over the coming years: they’ll be immediately able to take advantage of the Postcode system to speed their mail sorting, without many of the teething problems that have bedevilled the Sydney mail Exchange.

The Australian Postcode System
The Postcode system was introduced on Saturday, 1 July. The new four-digit number system replaces some earlier postal sorting systems, such as Melbourne's letter and number codes (e.g., N3, E5) and a similar system that has been in use in rural and regional New South Wales. Nearly 5,000 postcodes have been allocated across the country, to every city, town, suburb and small regional centre.

Postcodes have been allocated following a broad geographical pattern, with Postcode numbers for capital city suburbs beginning in the west and moving to the north, east and south. A similar pattern is followed for regional country areas. The first digit of the Postcodes in each station corresponds to radio station call signs for that state: 2 (New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory – our equivalent of the District of Columbia), 3 (Victoria), 4 (Queensland), 5 (South Australia), 6 (Western Australia), 7 (Tasmania) and 8 (Northern Territory).

I think this is a good idea because everyone knows the radio callsigns, so it will make it easier to remember Postcodes for their friends locally or interstate. Subscriber Trunk Dialing for telephones, which commenced last year, is also using the state radio call sign number as the basis of the dialing codes for each capital city, so I imagine that will help with remembering the direct dial codes too. 

Getting the Word Out

The first edition of the Postcode booklet, listing every national Postcode, is being distributed free by mail this month to every Australian household and business address. A total of 4.5 million booklets are expected to be distributed, along with a postcard identifying the recipient’s own postcode. Of course, with 5,000 postcodes to include in the booklet, and with some geographical oddities to contend with, it’s not surprising that diligent nit-pickers have already found faults in the booklet to complain about and have been writing carping letters to the editors of local and major state newspapers.

There has been extensive advertising about the new Postcode system in the newspapers and on television and radio, but so far, we have not been treated to a catchy jingle like the one that introduced us to decimal currency last year.

The PMG is hoping that if we all start using the Postcodes properly at the end of addresses, not only will it improve the speed of mail delivery, but that next year it will make it easier to introduce “post office preferred-size envelopes” as well, whose standardised sizes will further improve the speed of mechanised mail sorting! 

And then I can finally get my postcards from the Traveler in a timely manner!



1 Comment Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race

[June 28, 1967] Around the World in Two Seconds (Our World Global Satellite Broadcast)

4 Comments


by Kaye Dee

I love how our world is drawing closer every day to some of the amazing futures that science fiction has spread before us. I’ve written before about the importance of satellite communications in connecting this divided planet. Just two days ago, 24 countries around the globe were linked together in the first world-spanning live satellite broadcast, titled – appropriately enough – Our World.

Our World's visual symbol incorporates a modernised version of da Vinci's "Vitruvian Man", with arms encircling the globe, and vertical and horizontal lines representing longitude and latitude

Down Under Comes Up Live – from a town with no television!
For us in Australia, being instantaneously connected to the rest of the world through phone and television is a major step in breaking the “tyranny of distance” that has shaped our national history. Our first Satellite Earth Station was opened just last October in Carnarvon, a remote township in Western Australia, whose only other connection to the rest of the world is a phone line. It’s no wonder NASA wanted to provide a satellite connection back to the United States for its tracking station located there, using the INTELSAT communications network. Just after the station opened, a mishap with the launch of the first INTELSAT II satellite (Blue Bird) on 26 October placed the satellite into the wrong orbit, providing an opportunity for the first satellite broadcast from Down Under.


SES Carnarvon's unusual antenna, one of only four that have been built for the INTELSAT network. Officially described a 42-foot aperture cassegrain-fed folded-horn antenna, you can see why it's nicknamed the “sugar scoop”

According to my friend at the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC), some hasty calculations revealed that short segments of television broadcast could be relayed to the United Kingdom via INTELSAT II in its unplanned elliptical orbit. So the ABC and the BBC quickly put together a plan for a live telecast, called Down Under Comes Up Live, from Carnarvon – a town which doesn’t even have a television service!

Connection was the theme, and ordinary people were the stars of the show. The program reunited three families of British immigrants living in Carnarvon, two of whom who happened to be employees of the NASA tracking station, with their relatives in the BBC studios in London. It also included some interviews with local residents talking abut life in their remote community. Introducing new babies to family is a universal ritual, and it's delightful to see that it was one that played out in both Down Under Comes Up Live and Our World.

Down Under Comes Up Live was a direct one-way broadcast (a return signal was not possible for technical reasons) that was a complex undertaking (and a good rehearsal for our involvement in Our World). Without a local television station in Carnarvon, ABC outside broadcast vans and their technical staff made a 560 mile trip from Perth to produce the program. The vision was sent live to London from the satellite station, but the audio to and from London was transmitted separately by cable.

On Friday 25 November 1966, more than twelve minutes of television was broadcast to London. Although the program was seen live in the UK, rather ironically, we couldn’t see it live in Australia because there are no television links between Carnarvon and Perth. We had to wait for a few days to see this history-making program, once a film copy of the UK broadcast was flown back to Australia.

Incoming – Australia Day at Expo 67
Apart from a few test transmissions, it was just three weeks ago that we saw the first satellite broadcast into Australia – a live telecast of Australia’s ‘special day’ at Expo 67 in Montreal. This time the transmission came via NASA’s Applications Technology Satellite (ATS)-1. To support this program, NASA has established a temporary satellite station at Cooby Creek dam, about 14 miles north of Toowoomba in Queensland.

The picturesque setting for NASA's Cooby Creek tracking station that brought both Australia Day at Expo 67 and Our World to Australia via ATS-1

Several hundred thousand people around the country, including my sister’s family and I, watched live through the early hours of 7 June our time, as Australia took centre stage in Canada. The program commenced with Prime Minister Harold Holt officially opening the Australian Pavilion at the Expo. Special events for “Australia Day” included boomerang throwing, sheep-dog trials, wood chopping contests and tennis matches with members of the Australian Davis Cup team. Celebrity was an important theme for the variety concert, "Pop Goes Australia", which showcased Australian talent, including the internationally-known Rolf Harris and The Seekers.

The clarity of the satellite picture from Montreal was surprisingly good: I’ve heard that hundreds of viewers rang the ABC in Sydney wanting to be assured that the vision really was being broadcast live from Canada! I just wish I could find some decent reproductions to show you or had thought to take a picture on the screen of our TV set. 

Our World – joining hands (almost) around the planet
So, with just two satellite broadcasts under its belt, from 4.50am Australian Eastern Time on 26 June, Australia participated in the Our World program, helping to string Puck's "girdle around the world". We joined 13 other nations in providing television content for the first live global television broadcast, which instantaneously linked 24 countries on six continents via four communications satellites, with the signals travelling around the world in just 2 seconds!

The brainchild of the BBC, though produced under the auspices of the European Broadcasting Union, the global telecast was controlled from the BBC in London, with America’s National Educational Television in New York City feeding items from the United States, Canada, Mexico, Australia and Japan to the British Control Centre. Literally thousands of technicians handled the outside broadcasts and studio operations around the world. Satellite ground stations in Australia (NASA's Cooby Creek facility again), Japan, Canada, the United States, Britain and France transmitted sound and vision to and from the satellites. As each of the contributing countries provided commentary in their own language, there was also the necessity of rapidly translating the various languages, so that everyone in the receiving countries could understand what was being said.

The technical complexity of Our World is evident from this diagram, which shows just part of the world-wide links between television stations and satellites necessary to make the global broadcast a reality

Given the incredible technical complexity of the television transmission, it’s quite amazing that the two-hour program was carried through with very few technical problems – especially when the entire broadcast was televised live, with no filmed insertions or other previously produced material apart from the opening montage. We saw everything as it happened.

Our World was intended as a major achievement for both space technology and international relations, a bridge between East and West in these troubled times of wars cold and hot. Unfortunately, at the last minute, politics reared its ugly head and the USSR and several Eastern European nations that were originally going to participate pulled out of the broadcast just a few days before, as a protest against the recent war in the Middle East. This was disappointing and made for some hurried re-arrangement of parts of the program, but it didn’t dampen the mostly aspirational tone of the broadcast as a celebration of human achievement and hope for a more peaceful future. There was also the irony that a US segment about the Glassboro, New Jersey conference between American president Lyndon Johnson and Soviet premier Alexei Kosygin was still included in the broadcast, although – since the Our World producers insisted that no politicians could be shown – only an external view of the house where the conference was being held was televised.

New Babies and their World
The broadcast crossed countries, seas and time zones, and was presented as fusing “yesterday”, “today” and “tomorrow” (by dint of the different time zones around the world) into a globe-encircling “now”. The birth of several babies across the world opened the program, which was presented in a sense as a “survey” of the world into which these newborns are entering.

A baby in Mexico, born live on television for all the world to see!

The babies are introduced to their new world through several themes: This Moment's World (what people were doing are doing at that moment around the world); the Hungry World (what scientists are doing to attempt to solve or alleviate the hunger problem); the Crowded World (looking at proposed solutions to the population explosion); Aspiration to Physical Excellence (the continual attempt to develop physical skill); Aspiration to Artistic Excellence (the drive to excel in the arts); and the World Beyond (focussed on astronomy and space travel. Within these themes, vignettes of life and activity from around the world formed the tapestry of the program. Even if some of the actual presentation was, quite frankly, dull and pedestrian (the excitement was, after all, the fact that we were seeing something live from another part of the globe), I thought the concept was an interesting way to approach telling the story of our planet. If an extra-terrestrial civilisation one day happens to intercept this program as its signals travel through space, they'll learn a lot more about the reality of the Earth and its people from Our World than they will get from episodes of I love Lucy.

Everyday Life

The theme This Moment's World presented a panorama of people and activities in various parts of the globe, moving through evening in Europe to afternoon in New York City, with a visit to Tunis along the way. I loved the views of old and new parts of the city. We saw Marshall McLuhan being interviewed in a Toronto television control room, people swimming at the beach at lunchtime in Vancouver, Canada (making us Aussies all envious on a cold winter's morning) and workmen digging a subway at 4am in Japan. Since the program took place between 5.00 am and 7.00 am Australian Eastern time, our first contribution commenced at 5:22 am local time, with a visit to the Hammer Street Tram Depot in Melbourne, where the first tram of the day was departing to service Monday morning commuters. 

This segment was the first cross to the Southern Hemisphere and came directly after the broadcast from Japan. The switch from Japan to Australia was apparently the most technically complicated of the program, as the Japanese and Australian satellite stations had to switch immediately from transmission to receiving mode and back again. The material coming into Australia also had to be converted from the 525-line system to our 625-line format for local broadcast, while the segment going out of Australia had to be converted from 625 to 525-line in order to be sent back to the US and then on to London!

Sweden gave us the first – and almost the only – female presenter in the program!

Global Concerns
Australia also featured in the Hungry World theme, which concentrated on food production and the issues of feeding an ever-growing world population. In addition to items from the United States and a shrimp farm in Takamatsu, Japan, we visited the Canberra phytotron, a laboratory run by the national scientific research agency, CSIRO. In the phytotron, plants can be grown under a wide range of closely controlled climatic conditions. It’s claimed to be one of the world's finest and most up-to-date facilities for plant research, and a number of international scientists work there alongside local researchers.

The CSIRO phytotron's Director, Dr. Lloyd Evans, at work in his plant laboratory. Apparently, he often starts his workday at 5am, so he didn't have to get up earlier than usual for the show!

A couple of segments that were of interest to me in The Crowded World theme were a visit to Cumbernauld (near my father’s home town of Glasgow, Scotland), which was the recipient of an international award for best planning in a new town, and a glimpse of Habitat, a new concept of living accommodation, on display at Expo '67.

Human Achievement
In Aspiration to Physical Excellence, there were contributions from Rome, Sweden, France (where a parachutist made a dizzying free fall with a camera strapped to him), and Winnipeg, Canada, where a 16-year-old Butterfly champion attempted to beat her own world indoor swimming record.


We get to watch live as actors rehearse the wedding scenes from Italian director Franco Zefferelli's next film, Romeo and Juliet
Aspiration to Artistic Excellence included a visit to the Maeght Foundation museum of modern art in France, with artists Marc Chagall and Joan Miro, Leonard Bernstein and pianist Van Cliburn rehearsing Rachmaninoff's Third Piano Concerto. Opera singer Maria Callas, and painter Pablo Picasso also featured. In the context of this theme, it’s interesting to note that the Our World anthem, which accompanied the opening montage was composed by Frenchman Georges Delerue, whose musical score credits includes the recent Academy Award winning motion picture, A Man for All Seasons. He wrote the melody based on the rhythm established by the words “Our World”, sung in 22 different languages by the Vienna Boys’ Choir.

But the highlight of this theme has to be a ‘fly on the wall’ visit to a recording studio where the fabulous Beatles were recording their latest anthem “All You Need is Love”, which was specially written for the Our World broadcast! You can see them below, surrounded by their many friends in the music world, who came to the recording party and became informal backing singers. The black and white shot shows how we saw the FAB Four in the live broadcast, while the colour photo was taken just before the televised performance. 

 
Reaching for the Stars
The World Beyond theme took us to the heart of the Space Race, with a visit to Cape Kennedy to see a Saturn V Moon rocket on the pad being readied for its first flight. The telecast also came to a close on the theme of outer space, with a visit to Australia’s Parkes radio telescope – at 210 ft. the largest fully-steerable radio telescope in the world. Here we sat in on an observation of the most distant object currently known – a mysterious quasar only discovered last year by the Parkes telescope's director, Dr. John Bolton. It’s so far away that its light and radio signals take 13,000 million years to reach us!

An ABC cameraman, wearing a heavy jacket in the early morning winter cold, prepares for filming the Our World segment at the Parkes Radio Telescope.

So that was Our World. A fascinating mix of banality and creativity, made magical by the technology of the Space Age, and the knowledge that everyone watching was sharing the experience simultaneously with millions of others across our planet in a way that has never before been possible. With a worldwide audience estimated between 350 and 700 million, the broadcast was a potent demonstration of the potential reach of satellite television. I'm sure that before too long, satellite television from around the world will be a regular occurrence, bringing us news, sport, entertainment and major world events – and we here in Australia will have to get used to being up at all hours of the night to watch! But I wonder what will top this broadcast's incredible audience reach? The first manned landing on the Moon, perhaps?



4 Comments Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race

[April 26, 1967] Fallen Cosmonaut ( The Loss of Soyuz 1)

Leave a comment


by Kaye Dee

Back in November last year, while writing about Gemini 12, I asked “where are the Russians?”, since there had not been a manned Soviet space mission since Voskhod 2, in March 1965. I didn't expect that when I finally came to write about the next Soviet space flight, it would be to report the first death to occur during a space mission: an incident as deeply shocking as the Apollo 1 fire just three months ago. Sadly, the return of Soviet manned spaceflight and the introduction of its new Soyuz spacecraft (the name means “Union” in Russian) has been mared by the death of its crew and the destruction of the spacecraft itself.

Re-entry Mishap
Early yesterday (25 April Australian time), after more than twelve hours of silence about the mission, the official Soviet newsagency TASS announced that Cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov had been killed after the failure of the parachute on his Soyuz 1 spacecraft, following re-entry. As I write this, little is known about what actually happened, but it appears that the parachute lines became tangled in some way, preventing the chute from fully opening, so that the spacecraft smashed into the ground at high velocity. However, it is not clear whether Cosmonaut Komarov died before the spacecraft hit the ground, or whether he was killed on impact.


Newspaper article from the 25 April edition of The Canberra Times announcing the loss of Soyuz-1

New Spacecraft, Ambitious Mission
As is always the case with the USSR’s space programme, nothing was known about the Soviet Union’s latest space mission until it was safely in orbit. We now know that Soyuz 1 was the first flight of a new spacecraft, believed to be even bigger than the Voskhod, which, as we saw, could carry a crew of three. Moscow television has supposedly described the Soyuz as “huge”. Just as Mercury and Vostok, and Gemini and Voskhod, could be considered parallel programs, Soyuz is assumed to be the equivalent of Apollo, and part of the USSR’s Moon landing programme about which we know so little. Could the Soyuz be capable of carrying a crew of four, or even five cosmonauts?

Unconfirmed reports suggest that Soyuz 1 was intended to undertake a surprisingly ambitious mission for the shakedown flight of a new vehicle. The craft was apparently planned to rendezvous in orbit with at least one, and possibly two, other spacecraft, with between six and nine cosmonauts joining Komarov in space before the end of the mission. The low altitude of Komarov's orbits (the lowest to date in the Soviet manned programme), only 138 miles above the Earth, certainly hint that rendezvous and docking operations were included in the flight programme, as a low orbit conserves power resources. This would have been a significant spaceflight first indeed, especially if – as has also been rumoured – there were plans for a crew transfer between one of these other spacecraft and Soyuz 1.

Crew Transfers Planned?
The fact that Komarov was the only cosmonaut on board Soyuz 1 certainly gives the crew trasnfer rumour some credence, as cosmonauts from one or two other spacecraft could have transferred to Soyuz 1 to fill its empty crew couches. Of course, we have no idea whether this transfer would have taken place through a docking tunnel between two spacecraft, or via a spacewalk, since we know nothing about the Soyuz vehicle itself. However, unless the Soviet manned space programme has been conducting an equivalent to the Gemini programme in secret over the past two years, its cosmonauts have little rendezvous experience (apart from Vostok 3-4 and 5-6), no docking experience, and have conducted only one spacewalk, whereas NASA has firmly mastered these critical techniques needed for the Apollo Moon programme. Perhaps the USSR intended to start catching up by carrying out extensive practice of these techniques during this first Soyuz mission? Or perhaps they have largely ignored them because they are planning a completely different approach to their manned lunar programme?

The official photo of Cosmonaut Komarov, released when the Soyuz 1 mission was announced, shows him wearing a spacesuit similar to that worn by Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov when he made the world’s first spacewalk. This photo can be seen in the reproduction of the article from The Canberra Times, above. It offers an intriguing hint that Komarov himself was possibly intended to make a spacewalk, or swap into another spacecraft for his return to Earth. However, confusing the issue is the picture below, which shows Komarov walking to board Soyuz 1 wearing a flight suit (similar to the one he wore as commander of Voskhod 1) rather than a spacesuit.

Problems with the Soyuz Spacecraft?
So why didn’t this rumoured space feat take place? Soyuz 1 was launched on 23 April. No problems were publicly reported during the early orbits of the mission, and Cosmonaut Komarov sent greetings from space “to the hardworking Australian people”. In another message, he also slammed the Vietnam War, in which Australia is fighting alongside the United States and other allies, sending a propaganda broadcast from orbit: "My warm greetings to the courageous Vietnamese people, fighting with dedication against the bandit aggression of American imperialism for freedom and independence", he said.

Soyuz 1 returned from space on its 19th orbit, after just 27 hours in space. It seems unlikely that this was the intended mission duration if rendezvous/docking and spacewalks with multiple spacecraft were really planned. The shortness of the flight may therefore be an indication that there were problems with the spacecraft, which is not necessarily unexpected with the first flight of a new vehicle. No other spacecraft launched to rendezvous with Soyuz 1, so perhaps this aspect of the mission was abandoned when problems arose.

Reports from amateur space-trackers in Italy also claim that they picked up messages in which Komarov complained to the Soviet Mission Control that they were “guiding [him] wrongly” during re-entry. Whether problems with the Soyuz spacecraft in orbit were responsible for the parachute failure that caused Soyuz 1 to plummet to Earth is perhaps something that we may not know for decades, if ever, given the habitual secrecy of the Soviet space programme.


One of the few photos available showing what remained of Soyuz-1 after its imapct with the ground

Lost Cosmonaut
As commander of the earlier Voskhod 1 mission, Colonel Vladimir Komarov was one of the handful of Soviet cosmonauts already known to us in the West. At 40, he was the second oldest of the cosmonauts (after Voskhod 2 mission commander Pavel Belyayev) and the first cosmonaut to make two spaceflights. Said to be highly respected by his cosmonaut colleagues, Komarov overcame a heart murmur, similar to that which grounded Astronaut Donald K. "Deke" Slayton durng the Mercury programmme, and other medical issues to retain his place in the Soviet comsonaut team. He was
married with a 15-year old son and 9-year old daughter. Komarov's 38-year old wife wife, Valentina, has been quoted as saying that she did not even know her husband had been assigned to the Soyuz 1 flight until it was publicly announced after launch. The identity of the cosmonauts slated to fly the other other spacecraft due to be launched as part of Soyuz-1's mission is completeley unknown at this point.


Cosmoanut Komarov with his wife Valentina and daughter Irina

Accident or Incompetence?
Was the loss of Soyuz 1 and Cosmonaut Komarov’s death just a tragic accident? There are persistent rumours that the spacecraft was not actually ready to be flight tested, and that political pressure was brought to bear on the space programme to produce another significant achievement in advance of a major conference marking 50 years since the October Revolution. Another question that arises is whether or not the unexpected death in January 1966 of Chief Designer Sergei Korolev (whose identity was only revealed after he passed away), could have had any impact on the development of the Soyuz and its subsequent fatal first flight?

Professor Sergei Korolev, the formerly anonymous Chief Designer of the Soviet space programme

An Honoured Hero
Like the lost crew of Apollo 1, Col. Komarov is a hero of the quest to explore space and has been posthumously awarded his second Hero of the Soviet Union medal and Order of Lenin. A Kremlin statement expressed the "profound grief" of the Soviet leadership at Komarov's death, and was signed by the Communist Party Central Committee, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet and the
Council of Ministers. A ten-minute public announcement of Komarov's loss on Moscow television showed the Soviet space monument and a black-bordered version of the official photo of Komarov wearing his spacesuit, while Moscow radio is said to have played sombre music. Komarov’s funeral will be held today, after which his ashes will be interred in the Kremlin Wall. The United States requested permission from the Soviet authorities for two astronauts to attend the funeral as a mark of respect, but disappointingly this was turned down.

Presumably the USSR will now launch an accident investigation similar to that being conducted by NASA to find the causes of the Apollo 1 fire, and will place the Soyuz programme into a hiatus until the invetsigation is complete. With both participants in the Moon race now investigating tragic accidents that have led to the loss of astronaut and cosmonaut lives, will the Moon race ever resume? Or will both programmes instead return to spaceflight with different goals? Only time will tell…. 



No comments Leave A Comment
Science / Space Race

[January 28, 1967] "Fire in the cockpit!" (The AS-204 Accident)

1 Comment


by Kaye Dee

As I write this, I’m still in shock. It’s only a few hours since the news broke here in Australia of the tragic loss of the crew of Apollo 204 in a fire on the launchpad at Cape Kennedy, during a launch rehearsal. Spaceflight is difficult and dangerous – we know that. Astronauts Freeman, Bassett and See were killed in plane crashes during training; Armstrong and Scott had a narrow escape from inflight disaster during Gemini VIII.

Unconfirmed rumours abound of Soviet cosmonauts who died in unsuccessful space missions before Gagarin, and the Russians have probably had training accidents to which they have not yet admitted. When I wrote about Gemini VIII’s aborted mission, I asked if spaceflight was moving too fast. There’s certainly been a headlong rush on NASA’s part to get to the Moon ahead of the Soviet Union, so perhaps this tragedy is the answer to my rhetorical question.


The first image available showing the fire-ravaged interior of the Apollo 204 spacecraft

Details are still sketchy at this time, although no doubt more information about the accident will emerge in the coming days and weeks as investigations take place. But right now, let’s explore the background to the mission and what we know about the catastrophe.

The Lost Crew
Apollo 204 (AS-204) was intended to be the first manned test flight of the new Apollo Command and Service Modules, the spacecraft that will be used to carry the first NASA astronauts to the Moon within the next few years. As such, two experienced astronaut test pilots were assigned to the flight: USAF Lt. Colonels Virgil “Gus” Grissom, the Command Pilot, and Senior Pilot Edward White. Grissom was the United States’ second space traveller, flying the Mercury MR-4 mission. He also commanded the first manned Gemini mission, Gemini III. Rumour even has it that Grissom was already under possible consideration to command NASA’s first lunar landing mission. Lt. Col. White is famous as the first American to make a spacewalk, during Gemini IV. These veteran astronauts were joined for this mission by rookie US Navy Lt. Commander Roger Chaffee. Chaffee was selected as a member of the third astronaut group and specialised in communications: he had been a CapCom for both Gemini III and IV.


Official Apollo 204 crew portrait, including a model of the new Apollo Command Module which their mission was intended to test. Left to right Ed White, "Gus" Grissom and Roger Chaffee

The Apollo 204 back-up crew consists of experienced Mercury and Gemini astronaut Walter Schirra and first-time fliers Donn Eisele and Walter Cunningham. Astronaut Eisele had originally been assigned in Lt. Commander Chaffee’s role for the Apollo 204 mission but had to be replaced when he needed shoulder surgery in early 1966. I assume that once Apollo missions resume after the accident investigation, this crew will fly the first orbital mission that should have been accomplished by AS-204.

What’s in a Name?
The design for the official Apollo 204 patch, developed by the crew and illustrated by North American Rockwell artist Allen Stevens, carries the designation Apollo 1. At the time that it was approved by NASA, in June 1966, this was the flight’s official name. However, it seems that only recently some doubt arose as to whether the formal designation of the mission would be Apollo 1 after all, which is why it is presently being referred to as Apollo 204, or AS-204. I’ve heard from the Australian liaison officer at NASA, that just last week approval for the patch was withdrawn and that, if this accident had not occurred, the patch might have had to be redesigned, depending on the final mission designation.

But as it stands, the mission patch uses the American flag for a background, with a central image depicting an Apollo spacecraft in Earth orbit. The Moon appears to the right of the Earth, reminding us of the eventual goal of Project Apollo. The designation Apollo 1 and the names of the crew appear in a border around the central image, while the patch is edged with a black border – a touch that is poignantly even more appropriate in view of the loss of the crew. I do hope that this patch, and the designation Apollo 1, will be re-instated as the official insignia of this mission in honour of its lost crew.

The Mission that Should Have Been
The fire that has killed the Apollo 204 crew occurred during a preflight test ahead of a launch scheduled for 21 February. It was planned to be the first manned orbital test flight of the Apollo Command and Service Modules, launched on a Saturn IB rocket. The mission was to have tested launch operations, ground tracking and control facilities, as well as the performance of the Apollo-Saturn launch vehicle. Depending on how well the spacecraft performed, the mission might have lasted up to two weeks, perhaps equalling Gemini VII's record spaceflight and demonstrating that the Apollo spacecraft could function successfully for the duration of the longest Moon flights currently in planning.


The Apollo 204 crew in front of Pad 34, from which they should have launched, and where they have been killed

The Command Module allocated to Apollo 204, CM-012, was a so-called “Block I” version, originally designed before the lunar orbit rendezvous landing strategy was selected. Block 1 spacecraft aren’t able to dock with a lunar module, but future “Block II” versions will.

Was It a Lemon?
The Apollo Command and Service Modules are undoubtedly far more complex than any previously-built spacecraft, so it isn’t surprising that their development has had many teething problems. Over the last few months, I’ve heard from my former colleagues at the WRE that many issues with the Command Module became evident last year, especially when CM-012 was delivered to Kennedy Space Centre in August to be prepared for its flight. Even before it arrived, the Apollo 1 crew had expressed concerns to Apollo Spacecraft Program Office manager Joseph Shea about the quantity of flammable materials, such as nylon netting and Velcro, being used in the spacecraft cabin to hold tools and equipment in place. It seems that, even though Shea ordered these flammable materials removed, this may not have happened.


The Apollo 204 crew sent Program manager Jospeh Shea a parody of their crew portrait to express their concernes about the spacecraft. They are shown praying, and the picture carried the inscription: "It isn't that we don't trust you, Joe, but this time we've decided to go over your head"  

When CM-012 arrived at Kennedy Space Center, there were still 113 significant planned engineering changes to be completed, and another 623 engineering change orders were made following delivery! This suggests that many issues with the spacecraft design were still being resolved. Apparently, the engineers in charge of the spacecraft training simulators just couldn’t keep up with all these changes, and I’ve heard that Lt. Colonel Grissom expressed his frustration about this by bringing a lemon from a tree at his home and hanging it on the simulator.


CM-012, at that time designated Apollo 1, arriving at Kennedy Space Centre

There were several problems with the environmental control unit in the Command Module, which was twice returned to the manufacturer for designed changes and repairs. During a high-speed landing test, when the Command Module was dropped into a water tank to simulate splashdown, its heat shield split wide open, and the ship sank like a stone! There were also apparently concerns about a propellant tank in the Service Module that had ruptured during pre-delivery testing. NASA had it removed and tested at Kennedy Space Centre to be sure there were no further problems. 

CM-012 finally completed a successful altitude chamber test on 30 December and was mated to its Saturn IB launch vehicle on Pad 34 at Cape Kennedy on 6 January. So, was this particular spacecraft a lemon – an accident waiting to happen? Or has this tragedy shown that the design of the Apollo Command Module is inherently flawed? We’ll undoubtedly have to wait for the results of the accident investigation before we know the answer.

Countdown to Disaster
At this point, we still know very little about the disastrous fire or what led to its breakout, but my WRE colleagues have helped me put together some information accident from their contacts at NASA. The fire broke out during what had apparently been a trouble-plagued launch simulation known as a "plugs-out" test. This kind pre-flight simulation is intended to demonstrate that the spacecraft will operate as it should on internal power, detached from all cables and umbilicals, and successfully carrying out this test was essential for confirming the 21 February launch date.


The AS-204 crew in the CM simulator on 19 January, as part of their preparations ahead of the "plugs out" test

Almost as soon as the astronauts entered the Command Module, there were problems when Grissom experienced a strange odour in his oxygen supply from the spacecraft, which delayed the start of the test. Problems with a high oxygen flow indication that kept triggering the master alarm also caused delays. There were also serious communications issues: at first, it was Command Pilot Grissom experiencing difficulty speaking with the control room, but the problems spread to include communications between the operations and checkout building and the blockhouse at complex 34, forcing another hold in the simulated countdown.

Fire Erupts
It was not until five and a half hours after the simulation began that the countdown finally resumed, and when it did instruments apparently showed an unexplained rise in the oxygen flow into the crew’s spacesuits. Within seconds, there were calls from the spacecraft indicating that a fire had broken out in the cabin and that the astronauts were facing a serious emergency, trying to escape. The final transmission from inside the spacecraft ended with a cry of pain.

Of course, there are emergency escape procedures for the Command Module, but with the triple spacecraft hatch, it requires at least 90 seconds to get it open, and it seems that the crew had never been able to accomplish the escape routine in that minimum time. There is some evidence that Lt. Col. White was trying to carry out his assigned emergency task of opening the hatch, but in the pure oxygen atmosphere of the spacecraft, the fire became incredibly intense very rapidly and rising internal pressure would have made it difficult, if not impossible to open the inward-opening hatch.


Picture taken shortly after the fire was extinguished showing the external damage to the Command Module caused by the hull rupture resulting from the fire

In less than 20 seconds from the first detection of the fire, the pressure inside CM-012 rose to the point where it actually ruptured the hull of the spacecraft, sending flame, heat and dense smoke into the pad service structure. The ground crew bravely tried to rescue the astronauts, but the dangerous conditions and unsuitable emergency equipment made it virtually impossible. Many were later treated for smoke inhalation. There were fears the CM had exploded, and that the fire might ignite the solid fuel rocket in the launch escape tower above it. If this happened, it could set fire to the entire service structure.

It took about five minutes for the ground crew to finally get the spacecraft hatch open, but their efforts were in vain, as the astronauts were already dead. The exact cause of death has yet to be determined: it may have been physical burns from the fire, or carbon monoxide asphyxia, from the fire's by-products.

Whatever the cause, three brave men have died, and an exhaustive investigation of the fire and its causes will now take place as part of the accident investigation. Exactly what effect this tragedy will have on the future of the Apollo programme will very much depend upon the findings of that investigation. If the design of the Command Module is found to be intrinsically flawed, the necessary redesigns could delay the programme for years, causing NASA to miss President Kennedy’s deadline for a Moon landing, and allowing the Soviet Union to overtake the United States again in the Space Race.

Grissom and White have both said in past interviews that they recognized the possibility that there could be catastrophic failures and accidents in spaceflight and that they accepted that possibility and continued with their work. I’d just like to give the last word in this article to Astronaut Frank Borman, who said in a 1965 interview "I hope that the people in the US are mature enough that when we do lose our first crews they accept this as part of the business". It would not honour the loss of the Apollo 204 crew if this tragedy led to the termination of the Apollo programme.



1 Comment Leave A Comment