MOL discussion

[Jim]

My guess is that stuff went from Huntington Beach to MSFC in the middle of the night sometime in late 1969. Stuff like pressure vessels.

Wrong, it didn't.  Why do you keep insisting that the MDA was MOL related.

If you want to go by similarity and coincidences, the MDA is more likely Titan than MOL hardware.

MDA was the typical inhouse work that MSFC likes to do.  Much like Saturn I, Shuttle SRB hardware design, Ares I, Orion MSA, etc

[TJL]

According to the following info in Wikipedia there were supposed to be 5 manned launches in the MOL Program.
The note at the bottom indicated that the launch sites were VAFB as well as CCAFS.
Anyone know which (if any) of the manned flights were scheduled to be launched from Florida.
Also, were any other crews named besides the two noted below?
Thank you.

1970 December 1 - MOL 1 - First unmanned Gemini-B/Titan 3M qualification flight (Gemini-B flown alone, without an active MOL).
1971 June 1 - MOL 2 - Second unmanned Gemini-B/Titan 3M qualification flight (Gemini-B flown alone, without an active MOL).
1972 February 1 - MOL 3 - A crew of two (James M. Taylor, Albert H. Crews) would have spent thirty days in orbit.
1972 November 1 - MOL 4 - Second manned mission.
1973 August 1 - MOL 5 - Third manned mission.
1974 May 1 - MOL 6 - Fourth manned MOL mission. All Navy crew composed of Richard H. Truly and Robert Crippen.
1975 February 1 - MOL 7 - Fifth manned MOL.

Operational MOLs were to be launched on Titan IIIM rockets from SLC-6 at Vandenberg AFB, California and LC-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida

[Michael Cassutt]

According to the following info in Wikipedia there werwe supposed to be 5 manned launches in the MOL Program.
The note at the bottom indicated that the launch sites were VAFB as well as CCAFS.
Anyone know which (if any) of the manned flights were scheduled to be launched from Florida.
Also, were any other crews named besides the two noted below?
Thank you.

1970 December 1 - MOL 1 - First unmanned Gemini-B/Titan 3M qualification flight (Gemini-B flown alone, without an active MOL).
1971 June 1 - MOL 2 - Second unmanned Gemini-B/Titan 3M qualification flight (Gemini-B flown alone, without an active MOL).
1972 February 1 - MOL 3 - A crew of two (James M. Taylor, Albert H. Crews) would have spent thirty days in orbit.
1972 November 1 - MOL 4 - Second manned mission.
1973 August 1 - MOL 5 - Third manned mission.
1974 May 1 - MOL 6 - Fourth manned MOL mission. All Navy crew composed of Richard H. Truly and Robert Crippen.
1975 February 1 - MOL 7 - Fifth manned MOL.

Operational MOLs were to be launched on Titan IIIM rockets from SLC-6 at Vandenberg AFB, California and LC-40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida

At the time the program was cancelled, the number of planned manned missions was down to four -- don't have the cite handy, but fairly confident of the memory.

There were no crews assigned.  The information about Taylor as likely commander for #1 came from me twenty years ago, and was based on an interview I did with Walt Williams, ex-NASA, then Aero Corp, who was playing a major role in MOL flight ops.  Any other crews, even the supposed "all-Navy" one (a Navy-oriented mission wouldn't necessarily have had an all-Navy crew) are even more speculative speculation.

Michael Cassutt

[Blackstar]

According to the following info in Wikipedia there werwe supposed to be 5 manned launches in the MOL Program.
The note at the bottom indicated that the launch sites were VAFB as well as CCAFS.
Anyone know which (if any) of the manned flights were scheduled to be launched from Florida.

Note: Wikipedia entries are sometimes, occasionally, possibly, completely wrong.

[Archibald]

Whatever, four or five flights is not much considering how big an expense MOL was. I do hope more flights were to happen !

[kevin-rf]

Hey, Hexagon only flew 22 times over a 14 year period. Considering how expensive it was, a flight a year is realistic.

[Michael Cassutt]

Whatever, four or five flights is not much considering how big an expense MOL was. I do hope more flights were to happen !

Four manned flights were budgeted at the time the program was cancelled in June 1969.  Had MOL survived and gone into operation there would have been more -- at least, that was the hope.

MC

[Blackstar]

Hey, Hexagon only flew 22 times over a 14 year period. Considering how expensive it was, a flight a year is realistic.

Bad comparison. The reason there were so few HEXAGON missions was because they lasted a long time.

What was the longest HEXAGON mission? Something like 270 days. MOL could not last more than a month.

[Blackstar]

Whatever, four or five flights is not much considering how big an expense MOL was. I do hope more flights were to happen !

Four manned flights were budgeted at the time the program was cancelled in June 1969.  Had MOL survived and gone into operation there would have been more -- at least, that was the hope.

Yes. We don't have the programmatic files, but MOL probably followed a familiar trajectory--as the program cost went up, they decided to buy fewer units (see: SBIRS). So MOL could have started as six missions reduced to four. Had it been successful and useful, they might have bought additional ones.

But MOL was in a death spiral by around 1966. It kept costing more and the schedule kept slipping, and while that was happening the robotic spysats were getting better and better. So what good was MOL anyway? What was the point? What did it do that was worth the high cost?

[xraydeltaone]

A heat-shield hatch sure seems scary, but I wonder whether it's really as risky as it looks.  The Air Force did perform a successful flight test, after all.  Also, IIRC, on an early, unmanned Soyuz flight a plug at the center of the heat shield actually failed.  Although the crew cabin lost pressure, the temperature inside stayed within reasonable limits (I think I read about this in a Jim Oberg piece).

I didn't go back through the earlier pages in the thread, but if you check out the NOVA documentary "Astrospies" at the following link:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/astrospies.html

As you can see on the webpage, it's a screencap from the actual DoD footage of an MOL astronaut performing egress from the Gemini capsule and handling the heat shield hatch.

Of course, the program talks about Robert Lawrence, including an interview with his widow. It also interviews with nine MOL astros, including five of the seven who signed on with NASA after the program's closure. That includes Bobko, Fullerton, Hartsfield, Peterson, and Truly. Abrahamson, Crews, Herres, and Macleay also speak. Neubeck and Crippen are the only no-shows. Adams, Finley, Lawrence, Lawyer, Overmyer, and Taylor were all deceased by the time the documentary was made.

Also, keep a lookout in the footage of the Air Force test pilot schools, and you'll see some of the Group 3 and Group 5 astros in the background, like Collins, Engle, and Freeman.

[Jim]

DDay,
Great article, great artwork! Kudos on starting to tie up the loose ends.
The QUILL image begs the question you posed a year and a half ago: how would the MOL pilots have brought four buckets worth of film back in one Gemini capsule?

Well, we still don't know the answer. My guess is that they planned on conserving film, only taking pictures of high priority targets. As a result, they would not have taken a lot of pictures, and they would have sent some down in a small capsule and brought the rest with them in the Gemini.

The more you speculate about details like this, the more the whole thing starts to look dubious. Compare MOL to the KH-9, with its MASSIVE film supply and four buckets and you see that MOL just didn't make much sense. Why have a guy selectively taking pictures when you can just photograph everything and bring it all back?

I was relooking at this thread because I found a person involve with MOL and the mirrors.   I realized that MOL has at least one bucket.  In Giuseppe's diagram side view, it is in the pressurized section, on the "bottom", next the fluid tanks.

[Blackstar]

It only had one. I talked to some MOL astronauts about that.

[simonbp]

Would all the film have gone in the bucket, or did the crew bring any back in the Gemini?

[Blackstar]

Would all the film have gone in the bucket, or did the crew bring any back in the Gemini?

Both. I asked "Would you have any room?" And got a snort from the (famous) MOL astronaut. "Not much!"

[Archibald]

Folks,

In this month french astronomy ciel et espace (which is pretty serious) there's a story about an amateur stargazer with the name of Mike Clements that wants to build the largest amateur telescope in the world.
(another article on this, much less detailed. If anybody interested I may scan the Ciel&Espace article which is somewhat better)
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=22987812

Acording to Ciel et Espace, in the 80's Mike Clements obtained a 1.80 m mirror from an Itek employee named Vaughn that didn't wanted it to be destroyed (it's a bit more complex than that, but I haven't Ciel et espace on hand while typing)

I'm reminded of Blackstar Space Review article on the Multiple Mirror Telescope, whose six original mirrors aparently come from the MOL program in the late 70's.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1371/1

[Melt Run]

Folks,

In this month french astronomy ciel et espace (which is pretty serious) there's a story about an amateur stargazer with the name of Mike Clements that wants to build the largest amateur telescope in the world.
(another article on this, much less detailed. If anybody interested I may scan the Ciel&Espace article which is somewhat better)
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=22987812

Acording to Ciel et Espace, in the 80's Mike Clements obtained a 1.80 m mirror from an Itek employee named Vaughn that didn't wanted it to be destroyed (it's a bit more complex than that, but I haven't Ciel et espace on hand while typing)

I'm reminded of Blackstar Space Review article on the Multiple Mirror Telescope, whose six original mirrors aparently come from the MOL program in the late 70's.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1371/1

[quote author=Archibald link=topic=23864.msg1086636#msg1086636 date
This makes a great story but I tell you that the government guys wanted everything larger then a bucket of bolts accounted for. The idea of someone sneaking out the back door with a a 1.8 meter mirror stretches the limits of credibility.  There would indeed have to be a LOT more to the story. A 1.8 M just doesn't fit into a briefcase. BTW Mr Bill Vaughn was not in management.

[kevin-rf]

I'm reminded of Blackstar Space Review article on the Multiple Mirror Telescope, whose six original mirrors aparently come from the MOL program in the late 70's.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1371/1

As Blackstar has pointed out in prior threads, all we know about these MOL blanks is they are believed have been 72" flats when handed over to MMT. They where re-figured. Now what do you use a 72" flat for, and if used as a diagonal, how small is the mirror they are used with?

[Archibald]

Ok, I understand your skepticism, and respect it. Those NRO things are still shrouded in mystery... and classification. Are you interested by a scan of the article to try and make an opinion ?

[Proponent]

I'm reminded of Blackstar Space Review article on the Multiple Mirror Telescope, whose six original mirrors aparently come from the MOL program in the late 70's.
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1371/1

As Blackstar has pointed out in prior threads, all we know about these MOL blanks is they are believed have been 72" flats when handed over to MMT. They where re-figured. Now what do you use a 72" flat for, and if used as a diagonal, how small is the mirror they are used with?

I having trouble seeing how the MMT mirrors could have been intended for use as diagonals or "image reflecting mirrors", because an efficient diagonal would have to be elliptical in shape, not circular.

Since I can't think of a reason for a large, circular, flat mirror, I wonder whether  the plan might always have been to re-shape the mirrors after they had been cast flat, but MOL was cancelled before Corning got round to re-shaping them.

[Melt Run]

Ok, I understand your skepticism, and respect it. Those NRO things are still shrouded in mystery... and classification. Are you interested by a scan of the article to try and make an opinion ?

Skeptical yes but perhaps Bill was a contact that enabled a transfer. It would be very unusual to go to an individual. There has to be more to the story. Yes I would be interested in the article. Please email.
If you are interested in other large mirror transfers consider Magdalena Ridge Observatory. BTW Magdalena Ridge Mirror had nothing to do with Hubble.