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.

---

---