MOL discussion

[Blackstar]

All of the this came seemingly crashing down in early June of 1969, when the Nixon administration announced the cancellation of the Manned Orbital Laboratory. While the public announcement stated that the whole program was being cancelled, the (initial) internal guidance was to continue the work on the covert contract for the camera payload. A four-stage plan was devised, which included as Stage II "(...) a competition between MOL and HEXAGON contractors, to select best configuration/performance/cost (...)".

I'll post more on the "conclusion" of the story later ...

This is interesting stuff. From around 1969-1971 there was discussion of a Very High Resolution (VHR) satellite, possibly using MOL/DORIAN optics and the HEXAGON return capsules. This was apparently unofficially referred to as HEXADOR, although that appears to have been one option and there may have been others. Certainly, even after MOL was canceled, there was an expectation that future systems would have larger optics, so large optics production and testing facilities were going to be needed at some point.

NRO probably also had industrial base concerns as well. They wanted healthy contractors that could compete with each other. So keeping the contractors funded at some level even without a big program underway was in their interests.

[LittleBird]

Boeing is selling the former Douglas Huntington Beach facility

https://goo.gl/maps/QD4jceqPfLQ8ieXs7

There is some original art showing the cutaway of that building. It shows how they stacked the various components inside there. MOL was a long vehicle, so a lot of components had to be stacked on top of each other vertically.

I think NRO like the artwork so much it was reused as part of the collage used as a section divider in the MOL compendium document.

[Blackstar]

I think NRO like the artwork so much it was reused as part of the collage used as a section divider in the MOL compendium document.

I think that cutaway is in color. They had some nice artwork of that building.

[LittleBird]

I think NRO like the artwork so much it was reused as part of the collage used as a section divider in the MOL compendium document.

I think that cutaway is in color. They had some nice artwork of that building.

I'm afraid that's only place I've seen it, don't know where colour version is.

[Blackstar]

I think NRO like the artwork so much it was reused as part of the collage used as a section divider in the MOL compendium document.

I think that cutaway is in color. They had some nice artwork of that building.

I'm afraid that's only place I've seen it, don't know where colour version is.

Found it.

[LittleBird]

About the "distraction": sure, CCAFS would never launch MOL because of the well-known launch azimuth issues with Florida. 57 degree or 62 degrees at best, but never, ever 90 degrees.
 

Presumably that was true when MOL's mission had firmed up to be DORIAN/KH-10.

Is it obvious that was true right from the start, when it notionally had a much wider mission ? And also wouldn't flying it only from the WTR have been a rather obvious-but I guess unavoidable-tipoff as to what its actual mission was ?

Turns out that people were in fact worried about precisely this issue, and that in early '64 some urged that MOL should be launched from the Cape. See below from Berger history in MOL compendium version.

I'm wondering if the final choice of WTR only was in fact not made until mid-1965.

[Blackstar]

Turns out that people were in fact worried about precisely this issue, and that in early '64 some urged that MOL should be launched from the Cape. See below from Berger history in MOL compendium version.

I'm wondering if the final choice of WTR only was in fact not made until mid-1965.

Martin's comment there is really a bit of a mind-bender: if they launch from Vandenberg, people would conclude it was a reconnaissance satellite because that's the only reason to launch from there. So instead they should launch from the Cape. Er... but shouldn't the mission requirements drive the launch site decision? They were never going to launch a photo-reconnaissance satellite from the Cape, because it could not go into polar orbit that way. (And by extension, if they did put it into polar orbit from the Cape--at a major hit to the payload capability--people would still conclude that it was a reconnaissance satellite because of the orbit itself, not the launch site.)

[LittleBird]

Turns out that people were in fact worried about precisely this issue, and that in early '64 some urged that MOL should be launched from the Cape. See below from Berger history in MOL compendium version.

I'm wondering if the final choice of WTR only was in fact not made until mid-1965.

Martin's comment there is really a bit of a mind-bender: if they launch from Vandenberg, people would conclude it was a reconnaissance satellite because that's the only reason to launch from there. So instead they should launch from the Cape. Er... but shouldn't the mission requirements drive the launch site decision? They were never going to launch a photo-reconnaissance satellite from the Cape, because it could not go into polar orbit that way. (And by extension, if they did put it into polar orbit from the Cape--at a major hit to the payload capability--people would still conclude that it was a reconnaissance satellite because of the orbit itself, not the launch site.)

... So one solution is to launch from WTR but do a few launches from ETR as well ... that'll fool 'em ;-) [see grabs below, and attached doc, #59 in the NRO MOL set.].

Not quite sure when this dates from but it suggests there was definite interest for a while in having some real East Coast crewed launches, not just the boilerplate one.

[libra]

Turns out that people were in fact worried about precisely this issue, and that in early '64 some urged that MOL should be launched from the Cape. See below from Berger history in MOL compendium version.

I'm wondering if the final choice of WTR only was in fact not made until mid-1965.

Martin's comment there is really a bit of a mind-bender: if they launch from Vandenberg, people would conclude it was a reconnaissance satellite because that's the only reason to launch from there. So instead they should launch from the Cape. Er... but shouldn't the mission requirements drive the launch site decision? They were never going to launch a photo-reconnaissance satellite from the Cape, because it could not go into polar orbit that way. (And by extension, if they did put it into polar orbit from the Cape--at a major hit to the payload capability--people would still conclude that it was a reconnaissance satellite because of the orbit itself, not the launch site.)

Such "logic" made my brain bleed in pain...

[LittleBird]

Turns out that people were in fact worried about precisely this issue, and that in early '64 some urged that MOL should be launched from the Cape. See below from Berger history in MOL compendium version.

I'm wondering if the final choice of WTR only was in fact not made until mid-1965.

Martin's comment there is really a bit of a mind-bender: if they launch from Vandenberg, people would conclude it was a reconnaissance satellite because that's the only reason to launch from there. So instead they should launch from the Cape. Er... but shouldn't the mission requirements drive the launch site decision? They were never going to launch a photo-reconnaissance satellite from the Cape, because it could not go into polar orbit that way. (And by extension, if they did put it into polar orbit from the Cape--at a major hit to the payload capability--people would still conclude that it was a reconnaissance satellite because of the orbit itself, not the launch site.)

Such "logic" made my brain bleed in pain...

My impression is that while thought was being given to launching at least the odd mission from the ETR in Doc #59, which is 1st Jan 1965, by October of that year it was clear that MOL launches would be from  WTR only, see grab below and attached doc, #174, the October 1965 monthly report.

[LittleBird]

OK ... looks as if it is as I thought ... i.e. both Atlantic and Pacific Missile Ranges (AMR and PMR) were initially considered. Here's an Aerospace Corp presentation on MOL from 17th Jan 1964 which  explicitly considers AMR and PMR launches, and notes "use of AMR launch facilities with minimum modification" as part of the programme philosophy.  Doc is #9 in the NRO MOL set.

So I guess it was indeed the case that the relevance of ETR disappeared as the mission solidified around KH10/DORIAN to the eventual exclusion of everything else.

[Edit: Intriguingly, wrt another topic from upthread, they were also planning to use Transtage at that point.]

[Edit 2: There's a longer version of the same briefing in document #7, also now attached, this has the speaker notes for the first slide which makes  it clear that the AMR launches were at that stage seen as R&D.]

[Blackstar]

OK ... looks as if it is as I thought ... i.e. both Atlantic and Pacific Missile Ranges (AMR and PMR) were initially considered. Here's an Aerospace Corp presentation on MOL from 17th Jan 1964 which  explicitly considers AMR and PMR launches, and notes "use of AMR launch facilities with minimum modification" as part of the programme philosophy.  Doc is #9 in the NRO MOL set.

So I guess it was indeed the case that the relevance of ETR disappeared as the mission solidified around KH10/DORIAN to the eventual exclusion of everything else.

[Edit: Intriguingly, wrt another topic from upthread, they were also planning to use Transtage at that point.]

[Edit 2: There's a longer version of the same briefing in document #7, also now attached, this has the speaker notes for the first slide which makes  it clear that the AMR launches were at that stage seen as R&D.]

It's probably the kind of thing that is buried in the documents, but I wonder to what extent they thought about test flights to test the human spaceflight systems, as opposed to carrying operational equipment? If in 1964 they thought that they might do a test flight or two that would primarily test the life support and other systems needed to support the astronauts, there's no reason to do that in polar orbit. But as the program moved more towards being operational almost from the first flight, they pushed this stuff together. Test the stuff on the ground extensively and expect it to work right on orbit.

They probably experienced some pressure from the robotic side--although CORONA did a few test flights before carrying a camera, GAMBIT flew with an operational camera from the start (although that crumpled Atlas that folded on the pad was apparently a GAMBIT flight without a camera).

My point is that the MOL program probably felt the need to get operational quickly, without doing many test flights. And that meant polar orbits and Vandenberg.

[LittleBird]

OK ... looks as if it is as I thought ... i.e. both Atlantic and Pacific Missile Ranges (AMR and PMR) were initially considered. Here's an Aerospace Corp presentation on MOL from 17th Jan 1964 which  explicitly considers AMR and PMR launches, and notes "use of AMR launch facilities with minimum modification" as part of the programme philosophy.  Doc is #9 in the NRO MOL set.

So I guess it was indeed the case that the relevance of ETR disappeared as the mission solidified around KH10/DORIAN to the eventual exclusion of everything else.

[Edit: Intriguingly, wrt another topic from upthread, they were also planning to use Transtage at that point.]

[Edit 2: There's a longer version of the same briefing in document #7, also now attached, this has the speaker notes for the first slide which makes  it clear that the AMR launches were at that stage seen as R&D.]

It's probably the kind of thing that is buried in the documents, but I wonder to what extent they thought about test flights to test the human spaceflight systems, as opposed to carrying operational equipment? If in 1964 they thought that they might do a test flight or two that would primarily test the life support and other systems needed to support the astronauts, there's no reason to do that in polar orbit. But as the program moved more towards being operational almost from the first flight, they pushed this stuff together. Test the stuff on the ground extensively and expect it to work right on orbit.

[...]

My point is that the MOL program probably felt the need to get operational quickly, without doing many test flights. And that meant polar orbits and Vandenberg.

Yes. In the first grab below the briefers from Aerospace are in early '64 and assuming that a series of ETR-launched R&D flights occur, and following the party line that MOL is a multipurpose mission and only if  these demonstrate a need for an operational mission will the WTR ones occur. Incidentally they are describing the 2 pressure vessel and Transtage MOL that sounds very much like the concept that appeared in some of the most widely shown artwork, explaining why it looked like that (second grab). [Edit: I have added a couple of grabs from doc #7 in the NRO MOL set that show the Transtage quite clearly]

By late '65, as you say, it had all, er, telescoped and DORIAN was going to have to work on orbit essentially without an R&D phase.

[libra]

Or maybe - maybe - the ETR flights were for non-NRO, non-spysat missions BEFORE the spooks were brought into an USAF program.
We know MOL started in the vaning days of DynaSoar (December 1963) or even earlier, perhaps mid-1962 (from memory); and yet the "familiar" mission of a manned / spysat / NRO only came later.

Early on MOL was to be "USAF space station, period" - but struggled to find a valuable role. And then at some point the NRO & reconnaissance mission kind of wiped out all the others.

In the days BEFORE the NRO and its reconnaissance missions, it made some sense to have MOL flying outside polar orbit: and thus ETR might have been an option for 28.5 or 51 or 57 or 63 degree inclination missions (picking familiar orbital inclinations but could have been any number below 63 degrees).

[LittleBird]

Or maybe - maybe - the ETR flights were for non-NRO, non-spysat missions BEFORE the spooks were brought into an USAF program.
We know MOL started in the vaning days of DynaSoar (December 1963) or even earlier, perhaps mid-1962 (from memory); and yet the "familiar" mission of a manned / spysat / NRO only came later.

Early on MOL was to be "USAF space station, period" - but struggled to find a valuable role. And then at some point the NRO & reconnaissance mission kind of wiped out all the others.

In the days BEFORE the NRO and its reconnaissance missions, it made some sense to have MOL flying outside polar orbit: and thus ETR might have been an option for 28.5 or 51 or 57 or 63 degree inclination missions (picking familiar orbital inclinations but could have been any number below 63 degrees).

Yes in the sense that in 1964 the slides I've attached above were Aerospace briefing on a more general white USAF programme-they are well worth reading through to get a flavour, I'd suggest the more comprehensive version, doc #7.

But nonetheless NRO was involved from the outset, the spooks as you put it didn't just show up in 1965, and if you read the Berger history in either its original or Compendium version you'll see that photo recon was being considered early on as  *a* mission, just not *the* mission. There are several memos from McMillan for example in his NRO capacity. And it may be that NRO's role was always more central in reality.

What I do think is that flying even some MOL missions from the ITL would have helped to justify a very expensive facility that as you noted earlier was destined to be underused.

[Blackstar]

But nonetheless NRO was involved from the outset, the spooks as you put it didn't just show up in 1965, and if you read the Berger history in either its original or Compendium version you'll see that photo recon was being considered early on as  *a* mission, just not *the* mission. There are several memos from McMillan for example in his NRO capacity. And it may be that NRO's role was always more central in reality.

I have not read through all that material, but an interesting question would be why all the other experiments were deleted from MOL and the focus became solely the high-resolution mission. Was it:

-there just is not enough room/time/expendables to do anything else
or
-they did not want to mix anything else with the high-priority operational reconnaissance mission

Something that would be neat to model (and I don't have the ability to do it) is just how busy the astronauts would be with the operational reconnaissance mission. They would be able to sleep when the Soviet Union was mostly in darkness. But I get the sense that they would be really busy in general. There may simply have been no ability to do anything else during the mission.

[LittleBird]

But nonetheless NRO was involved from the outset, the spooks as you put it didn't just show up in 1965, and if you read the Berger history in either its original or Compendium version you'll see that photo recon was being considered early on as  *a* mission, just not *the* mission. There are several memos from McMillan for example in his NRO capacity. And it may be that NRO's role was always more central in reality.

I have not read through all that material,

I shouldn't have given the impression that I have, as all I've done is skim Berger and browse the large collection of pdfs that accompanied its rereleased version - the MOL Compendium. I think that the recent short history by Courtney Homer of NRO's CSNR adds something though, attached below, although I'm sure it appeared upthread, see especially chapter 1.

I've attached a few grabs below, first is further to my comment that NRO were involved from the outset, at least from late 1963 if not before, it shows  McMillan's concerns about  programme's emphasis, but also notes that NRO had been sponsoring Eastman Kodak research on manned vs unmanned imagery from December 1963.


 

but an interesting question would be why all the other experiments were deleted from MOL and the focus became solely the high-resolution mission. Was it:

-there just is not enough room/time/expendables to do anything else
or
-they did not want to mix anything else with the high-priority operational reconnaissance mission

Something that would be neat to model (and I don't have the ability to do it) is just how busy the astronauts would be with the operational reconnaissance mission. They would be able to sleep when the Soviet Union was mostly in darkness. But I get the sense that they would be really busy in general. There may simply have been no ability to do anything else during the mission.

Other two grabs from Homer history don't really explain how this narrowing down occurred but do give some idea of time scale over which it happened.

I was very interested to see McMillan alerting MOL people to relevance of large antennas in space though, in mid 64, when RHYOLITE was in its infancy and CANYON not yet approved as far as I know.

[Blackstar]

I shouldn't have given the impression that I have, as all I've done is skim Berger and browse the large collection of pdfs that accompanied its rereleased version - the MOL Compendium. I think that the recent short history by Courtney Homer of NRO's CSNR adds something though, attached below, although I'm sure it appeared upthread, see especially chapter 1.

I've attached a few grabs below, first is further to my comment that NRO were involved from the outset, at least from late 1963 if not before, it shows  McMillan's concerns about  programme's emphasis, but also notes that NRO had been sponsoring Eastman Kodak research on manned vs unmanned imagery from December 1963.

It is possible that one issue was the size of any reconnaissance camera that was carried. Once they settled on such a large system, it limited all the other resources like mass, power, etc. They probably could have only kept the reconnaissance mission in their trade space for a limited time before they had to make a decision yes or no.

[LittleBird]

I shouldn't have given the impression that I have, as all I've done is skim Berger and browse the large collection of pdfs that accompanied its rereleased version - the MOL Compendium. I think that the recent short history by Courtney Homer of NRO's CSNR adds something though, attached below, although I'm sure it appeared upthread, see especially chapter 1.

I've attached a few grabs below, first is further to my comment that NRO were involved from the outset, at least from late 1963 if not before, it shows  McMillan's concerns about  programme's emphasis, but also notes that NRO had been sponsoring Eastman Kodak research on manned vs unmanned imagery from December 1963.

It is possible that one issue was the size of any reconnaissance camera that was carried. Once they settled on such a large system, it limited all the other resources like mass, power, etc. They probably could have only kept the reconnaissance mission in their trade space for a limited time before they had to make a decision yes or no.

I think that must be true. If you look at the early 1964 Aerospace briefing charts, document 7 in the MOL set, uploaded above, the camera is still quite small and part of a collection of recon experiments.

[Blackstar]

I think that must be true. If you look at the early 1964 Aerospace briefing charts, document 7 in the MOL set, uploaded above, the camera is still quite small and part of a collection of recon experiments.

Thanks for reminding me of that one. I have a vague memory of seeing it before.

Looking at it now, it looks like a combination of a CORONA camera and then a long focal length IR camera. If you assume that the IR camera runs much of the diameter of the Titan core stage, that's a long focal length. But at that time, IR was still rather primitive. I doubt that a long focal length is what you'd want for IR. Probably better to start out with something more modest. Plus, it's IR, so there would be issues with keeping it cold.