MOL discussion

[LittleBird]

-there were a lot of studies, a lot of them. In fact, it's sorta confusing because there were a bunch of different acronyms used for the various studies, like MOL, MORL, MTSS, SLOMAR, and a few others. That makes it difficult to understand what study was focused on what subject and when. But I'm not sure that this is something that we could ever really sort out, because there was so much overlap. They were figuring things out for themselves.

While I agree on the confusing acronyms, the situation is not quite that dire I believe.  My research has found several, declassified but mostly unknown, archival documents on MTSS and SLOMAR which will contribute to understanding the scope, goals and interactions. As you say, they were figuring things out. The MTSS results have already been written up as a draft article but polish and publish is a bit delayed due to other circumstances.

To close the loop on this hint, the article was published and I've created a thread for further discussion The Military Test Space Station (MTSS) 1959-1962 HTH

One thing I hope about your new article is that in time it will lead us closer to understanding what (if anything) NRO and its immediate and short-lived predecessor were doing, probably with Aerospace as intermediary, on this topic, before the beginning of MOL. The MOL histories begin and end in a way that seems just too tidy. The latter can be illuminated by evidence of MOL technology in subsequent programmes, but the former can really only be addressed by articles like yours (and Mike Mackowski's recent Quest piece which I think Blackstar talked about upthread).

[Blackstar]

Just rewatched this on The Smithsonian Channel. It is pretty good.

[LittleBird]

-there were a lot of studies, a lot of them. In fact, it's sorta confusing because there were a bunch of different acronyms used for the various studies, like MOL, MORL, MTSS, SLOMAR, and a few others. That makes it difficult to understand what study was focused on what subject and when. But I'm not sure that this is something that we could ever really sort out, because there was so much overlap. They were figuring things out for themselves.

While I agree on the confusing acronyms, the situation is not quite that dire I believe.  My research has found several, declassified but mostly unknown, archival documents on MTSS and SLOMAR which will contribute to understanding the scope, goals and interactions. As you say, they were figuring things out. The MTSS results have already been written up as a draft article but polish and publish is a bit delayed due to other circumstances.

To close the loop on this hint, the article was published and I've created a thread for further discussion The Military Test Space Station (MTSS) 1959-1962 HTH

One thing I hope about your new article is that in time it will lead us closer to understanding what (if anything) NRO and its immediate and short-lived predecessor were doing, probably with Aerospace as intermediary, on this topic, before the beginning of MOL. The MOL histories begin and end in a way that seems just too tidy. The latter can be illuminated by evidence of MOL technology in subsequent programmes, but the former can really only be addressed by articles like yours (and Mike Mackowski's recent Quest piece which I think Blackstar talked about upthread).

To remind us all why I am curious about what Aerospace might have been doing for NRO and for USAF on space stations before the onset of MOL, here's how  Aerospace summarised its role in mid-60s, in Doc 426 of the MOL set (attached). We chatted a bit about this in some of the posts following https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23864.msg2300022#msg2300022

I am particularly intrigued by the last grab where Aerospace seems to award itself the credit for the "Gemini ... laboratory module ... large-aperture optical system ... Titan III" combo, implying this was all present before late 1963. Did we know this ? Have I read the doc correctly ?

[Edit: By the way, happy to move this to new MTSS thread if people prefer.]