Jump to content

55 Years Ago: One Year Before the Moon Landing


NASA

Recommended Posts

  • Publishers

In July 1968, much work still remained to meet the goal President John F. Kennedy set in May 1961, to land a man on the Moon and return him safely to the Earth before the end of the decade. No American astronaut had flown in space since the November 1966 flight of Gemini XII, the delay largely a result of the tragic Apollo 1 fire. Although the Apollo spacecraft had successfully completed several uncrewed test flights, the first crewed mission still lay three months in the future. The delays in getting the Lunar Module (LM) ready for its first flight caused schedule concerns, but also presented an opportunity for a bold step to send the second crewed Apollo mission, the first crewed flight of the Saturn V, on a trip to orbit the Moon. Using an incremental approach, three flights later NASA accomplished President Kennedy’s goal.

view of fire damage to cm at pad 34apollo 4 launchmating of lm1 to sla nov 22 1967apollo 6 recoveryLeft: The charred remains of the Apollo 1 spacecraft following the tragic fire that claimed the lives of astronauts Virgil I. “Gus” Grissom, Edward H. White, and Roger B. Chaffee. Middle left: The first launch of the Saturn V rocket on the Apollo 4 mission. Middle right: The first Lunar Module in preparation for the Apollo 5 mission. Right: Splashdown of Apollo 6, the final uncrewed Apollo mission.

The American human spaceflight program suffered a jarring setback on Jan. 27, 1967, with the deaths of astronauts Virgil I. Grissom, Edward H. White, and Roger B. Chaffee in the Apollo 1 fire. The fire and subsequent Investigation led to wholesale changes to the spacecraft, such as the use of fireproof materials and redesign of the hatch to make it easy to open. The early Block I spacecraft, such as Apollo 1, would now only be used for uncrewed missions, with crews flying only aboard the more advanced Block II spacecraft. The fire and its aftermath also led to management changes. For example, George M. Low replaced Joseph F. Shea as Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager. The first Apollo mission after the fire, the uncrewed Apollo 4 in November 1967, included the first launch of the Saturn V Moon rocket as well as a 9-hour flight of a Block I Command and Service Module (CSM). Apollo 5 in January 1968 conducted the first uncrewed test of the LM, and despite a few anomalies, managers considered it successful enough that they canceled a second uncrewed flight. The April 1968 flight of Apollo 6, planned as a near-repeat of Apollo 4, encountered several significant anomalies such as first stage POGO, or severe vibrations, and the failure of the third stage to restart, leading to an alternate mission scenario. Engineers devised a solution to the POGO problem and managers decided that the third flight of the Saturn V would carry a crew.

apollo 7 water egress training aug 5 1968apollo 7 stackingapollo 7 crew outside simulator kscLeft: Apollo 7 astronauts R. Walter Cunningham, left, Donn F. Eisele, and Walter M. Schirra participate in water egress training. Middle: Workers stack the Apollo 7 spacecraft on its Saturn IB rocket at Launch Pad 34. Right: Schirra, left, Cunningham, and Eisele stand outside the spacecraft simulator.

As of July 1968, NASA’s plan called for two crewed Apollo flights in 1968 and up to five in 1969 to achieve the first lunar landing to meet President Kennedy’s deadline, with each mission incrementally building on the success of the previous ones. The first mission, Apollo 7, would return American astronauts to space following a 23-month hiatus. Planned for October 1968, the crew of Walter M. Schirra, Donn F. Eisele, and R. Walter Cunningham would launch atop a Saturn IB rocket and conduct a shakedown flight of the Block II CSM in Earth orbit, including testing the Service Propulsion System engine, critical on later lunar missions for getting into and out of lunar orbit. The flight plan remained open-ended, but managers expected to complete a full-duration 11-day mission, ending with a splashdown in the Atlantic Ocean. Preparations for Apollo 7 proceeded well during the summer of 1968. Workers had stacked the two-stage Saturn IB rocket on Launch Pad 34 back in April. In KSC’s Manned Spacecraft Operations Building (MSOB), Schirra, Eisele, and Cunningham completed altitude chamber tests of their spacecraft, CSM-101, on July 26 followed by their backups three days later. Workers trucked the spacecraft to the launch pad on Aug. 9 for mating with the rocket. Among major milestones, Schirra, Eisele, and Cunningham completed water egress training in the Gulf of Mexico on Aug. 5, in addition to spending time in the spacecraft simulators at KSC and at the Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC), now NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.

apollo 9 crew during training jun 19 1968lm 3 arrives ksc super guppys ii stacking jul 24 1968Left: The original Apollo 8 crew of Russell L. Schweickart, left, David R. Scott, and James A. McDivitt during training in June 1968. Middle: Lunar Module-3 arrives at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida in June 1968. Right: In July 1968, workers in KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building stack the Saturn V rocket for the Apollo 8 mission.

The second flight, targeting a December 1968 launch, would feature the first crewed launch of the Saturn V rocket. The Apollo 8 crew of James A. McDivitt, David R. Scott, and Russell L. Schweickart would conduct the first crewed test of the LM in the relative safety of low Earth orbit. McDivitt and Schweickart would fly the LM on its independent mission, including separating the ascent stage from the descent stage to simulate a takeoff from the Moon, while Scott remained in the CSM. After redocking, Schweickart would conduct a spacewalk to practice an external transfer between the two vehicles. Workers completed stacking the three-stage Saturn V rocket (SA-503) in KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) on Aug. 14. The first component of the spacecraft, LM-3, arrived at KSC on June 9, while CSM-103, arrived on Aug. 12. Workers in the MSOB began to prepare both spacecraft for flight.

borman collins anders crew mar 1968lm 3 in msob aug 27 1968apollo 8 rollout oct 9 1968Left: The original Apollo 9 crew of William A. Anders, left, Michael Collins, and Frank Borman during training in March 1968. Middle: Lunar Module-3 during preflight processing at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida in August 1968. Right: Following the revision of the mission plans for Apollo 8 and 9 and crew changes, the Apollo 8 crew of James A. Lovell, Anders, and Borman stand before their Saturn V rocket as it rolls out of KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building in October 1968.

The third flight, planned for early 1969, and flown by Frank Borman, Michael Collins, and William A. Anders, would essentially repeat the Apollo 8 mission, but at the end would fire the SPS engine to raise the high point of their orbit to 4,600 miles and then simulate a reentry at lunar return velocity to test the spacecraft’s heat shield. On July 23, Collins underwent surgery for a bone spur in his neck, and on August 8, NASA announced that James A. Lovell from the backup crew would take his place. Later missions in 1969 would progress to sending the CSM and LM combination to lunar orbit, leading to the first landing before the end of the year. Construction of the rocket and spacecraft components for these future missions continued at various contractor facilities around the country.

kraft gilruth low in mcc during apollo 6slayton portraitdebus portraitvon braun portraitLeft: In Mission Control during the Apollo 6 mission, Director of Flight Crew Operations Christopher C. Kraft, left, Director of the Manned Spacecraft Center, now NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston Robert R. Gilruth, and Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager George M. Low. Middle left: Chief of Flight Crew Operations Donald K. “Deke” Slayton. Middle right: Director of NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida Kurt H. Debus. Right: Director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

Challenges to this plan began to arise in June 1968. Managers’ biggest concern centered around the readiness of LM-3. After its delivery to KSC on June 9, managers realized the vehicle needed much more work than anticipated and it would not meet the planned December Apollo 8 launch date. Best estimates put its flight readiness no earlier than February 1969. That kind of delay would jeopardize meeting President Kennedy’s fast-approaching deadline. To complicate matters, intelligence reports indicated that the Soviets were close to sending cosmonauts on a trip around the Moon, possibly before the end of the year, and also preparing to test a Saturn V-class rocket for a Moon landing mission.

Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager Low formulated a plan both audacious and risky. Without a LM, an Earth orbital Apollo 8 mission would simply repeat Apollo 7’s and not advance the program very much. By sending the CSM on a mission around the Moon, or even to orbit the Moon, NASA would gain valuable experience in navigation and communications at lunar distances. To seek management support for his plan, on Aug. 9 Low met with MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth, who supported the proposal. They called in Christopher C. Kraft, director of flight operations, for his opinion. Two days earlier, Low had asked Kraft to assess the feasibility of a lunar orbit mission for Apollo 8, and Kraft deemed it achievable from a ground control and spacecraft computer standpoint. Chief of Flight Crew Operations Donald K. “Deke” Slayton joined the discussion, and all agreed to seek support for the plan from the directors of KSC and of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, as well as NASA Headquarters (HQ) in Washington, D.C. That afternoon, the four flew to Huntsville and met with MSFC Director Wernher von Braun, KSC Director Kurt H. Debus, and HQ Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips. By the end of the meeting, the group identified no insurmountable technical obstacles to the lunar mission plan, with the qualification that the Apollo 7 mission in October concluded successfully. Von Braun had confidence that the Saturn V would perform safely, and Debus believed KSC could support a December launch.

Slayton called Borman, who was with Lovell and Anders conducting tests with their spacecraft in Downey, California. He ordered Borman to immediately fly to Houston, where he offered him command of the new circumlunar Apollo 8 mission, which Borman accepted. His crew would swap missions with McDivitt’s, who agreed to fly an Earth orbital test of the LM in February 1969, putting that crew’s greater experience with the LM to good use. The training challenge fell on Borman’s crew, who now had just four months to train for a flight around the Moon.

samuel phillips portraitgeorge mueller portraitpaine portrait w lmjames webb portraitLeft: Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips. Middle left: Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller. Middle right: Deputy Administrator Thomas O. Paine. Right: Administrator James E. Webb.

On Aug. 14, representatives from MSC, MSFC, and KSC attended a meeting in Washington with NASA Deputy Administrator Thomas O. Paine and Apollo Program Director Phillips, the senior Headquarters officials present as NASA Administrator James E. Webb and Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller attended a conference in Vienna. The group discussed Low’s proposal and agreed on the technical feasibility of accomplishing a circumlunar flight with Apollo 8 in December. During the discussion, Mueller happened to call from Vienna and when they presented him with the proposal, he was at first reticent, especially since NASA had yet to fly Apollo 7. He requested more information and more time to consider the proposal so he could properly brief Webb. Paine then polled each center director for his overall assessment. Von Braun, who designed the Saturn V rocket, stated that whether it went to the Moon or stayed in Earth orbit didn’t matter too much. Debus stated that KSC could support a Saturn V launch in December – as noted above, his team was already processing both the rocket and the spacecraft. Gilruth agreed that the proposal represented a key step in achieving President Kennedy’s goal, and emphasized that the mission should not just loop around the Moon but actually enter orbit. Following additional discussions after Webb’s return from Vienna, he agreed to the plan, but would not make a formal decision until after a successful Apollo 7 flight in October. NASA kept the lunar orbit plan quiet even as the crews began training for their respective new missions. An announcement on Aug. 19 merely stated that Apollo 8 would not carry a LM, as the agency continued to assess various mission objectives. Ultimately, the plan required President Lyndon B. Johnson’s approval.

llrv 1 accident may 6 1968 armstrong ejectinglta8 test irwin bull mar 2 1968apollo 2tv-1 testingapollo parachute testing at el centro jun 16 1968Left: Astronaut Neil A. Armstrong ejects just moments before his Lunar Landing Research Vehicle crashed. Middle left: Pilot Gerald P. Gibbons, left, and astronaut James B. Irwin prepare to enter an altitude chamber for one of the Lunar Module Test Article-8 (LTA-8) vacuum tests. Middle right: Astronauts Joe H. Engle, left, Vance D. Brand, and Joseph P. Kerwin preparing for the 2TV-1 altitude test. Right: One of the final Apollo parachute tests.

As those discussions took place, work around the country continued to prepare for the first lunar landing, not without some setbacks. On May 8, astronaut Neil A. Armstrongejected just in the nick of time as the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV) he was piloting went out of control and crashed. Managers suspended flights of the LLRV and its successor, the Lunar Landing Training Vehicle (LLTV), until Oct. 3. Astronauts used the LLRV and LLTV to train for the final few hundred feet of the descent to the Moon’s surface. On May 27, astronaut James B. Irwin and pilot Gerald P. Gibbons began a series of altitude tests in Chamber B of the Space Environment Simulation Laboratory (SESL) at MSC. The tests, using the LM Test Article-8 (LTA-8), evaluated the pressure integrity of the LM as well as the new spacesuits designed for the Apollo program. The first series of LTA-8 tests supported the Earth-orbital flight of LM-3 on Apollo 9 while a second series in October and November supported the LM-5 flight of Apollo 11, the first lunar landing mission. In June, using SESL’s Chamber A, astronauts Joseph P. Kerwin, Vance D. Brand, and Joe H. Engle completed an eight-day thermal vacuum test using the Apollo 2TV-1 spacecraft to certify the vehicle for Apollo 7. A second test in September certified the vehicle for lunar missions. July 3 marked the final qualification drop test of the Apollo parachute system, a series begun five years earlier. The tests qualified the parachutes for Apollo 7.

History records that Apollo 11 accomplished the first human landing on the Moon in July 1969. It is remarkable to think that just one year earlier, with the agency still recovering from the Apollo 1 fire, NASA had not yet flown any astronauts aboard an Apollo spacecraft. And further, the agency took the bold step to plan for a lunar orbital mission on just the second crewed mission. With a cadence of a crewed Apollo flight every two months between October 1968 and July 1969, NASA accomplished President Kennedy’s goal of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.

John Uri
NASA Johnson Space Center

View the full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By NASA
      NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) will transport the next astronauts that land on the Moon, including the first woman and first person of color, beginning with Artemis III. For safety and mission success, the landers and other equipment in development for NASA’s Artemis campaign must work reliably in the harshest of environments.
      The Hub for Innovative Thermal Technology Maturation and Prototyping (HI-TTeMP) lab at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, provides engineers with thermal analysis of materials that may be a prototype or in an early developmental stage using a vacuum chamber, back left, and a conduction chamber, right. NASA/Ken Hall Engineers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, are currently testing how well prototype insulation for SpaceX’s Starship HLS will insulate interior environments, including propellant storage tanks and the crew cabin. Starship HLS will land astronauts on the lunar surface during Artemis III and Artemis IV.
      Marshall’s Hub for Innovative Thermal Technology Maturation and Prototyping (HI-TTeMP) laboratory provides the resources and tools for an early, quick-check evaluation of insulation materials destined for Artemis deep space missions.
      “Marshall’s HI-TTeMP lab gives us a key testing capability to help determine how well the current materials being designed for vehicles like SpaceX’s orbital propellant storage depot and Starship HLS, will insulate the liquid oxygen and methane propellants,” said HLS chief engineer Rene Ortega. “By using this lab and the expertise provided by the thermal engineers at Marshall, we are gaining valuable feedback earlier in the design and development process that will provide additional information before qualifying hardware for deep space missions.”
      A peek inside the conductive test chamber at NASA Marshall’s HI-TTeMP lab where thermal engineers design, set up, execute, and analyze materials destined for deep space to better understand how they will perform in the cold near-vacuum of space. NASA/Ken Hall On the Moon, spaceflight hardware like Starship HLS will face extreme temperatures. On the Moon’s south pole during lunar night, temperatures can plummet to -370 degrees Fahrenheit (-223 degrees Celsius). Elsewhere in deep space temperatures can range from roughly 250 degrees Fahrenheit (120 degrees Celsius) in direct sunlight to just above absolute zero in the shadows.
      There are two primary means of managing thermal conditions: active and passive. Passive thermal controls include materials such as insulation, white paint, thermal blankets, and reflective metals. Engineers can also design operational controls, such as pointing thermally sensitive areas of a spacecraft away from direct sunlight, to help manage extreme thermal conditions. Active thermal control measures that could be used include radiators or cryogenic coolers.
      Engineers use two vacuum test chambers in the lab to simulate the heat transfer effects of the deep space environment and to evaluate the thermal properties of the materials. One chamber is used to understand radiant heat, which directly warms an object in its path, such as when heat from the Sun shines on it. The other test chamber evaluates conduction by isolating and measuring its heat transfer paths.
      NASA engineers working in the HI-TTeMP lab not only design, set up, and run tests, they also provide insight and expertise in thermal engineering to assist NASA’s industry partners, such as SpaceX and other organizations, in validating concepts and models, or suggesting changes to designs. The lab is able to rapidly test and evaluate design updates or iterations.
      NASA’s HLS Program, managed by NASA Marshall, is charged with safely landing astronauts on the Moon as part of Artemis. NASA has awarded contracts to SpaceX for landing services for Artemis III and IV and to Blue Origin for Artemis V. Both landing services providers plan to transfer super-cold propellant in space to send landers to the Moon with full tanks.
      With Artemis, NASA will explore more of the Moon than ever before, learn how to live and work away from home, and prepare for future human exploration of Mars. NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket, exploration ground systems, and Orion spacecraft, along with the HLS, next-generation spacesuits, Gateway lunar space station, and future rovers are NASA’s foundation for deep space exploration.
      For more on HLS, visit: 
      https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/human-landing-system
      News Media Contact
      Corinne Beckinger 
      Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala. 
      256.544.0034  
      corinne.m.beckinger@nasa.gov 
      Explore More
      8 min read Preguntas frecuentes: La verdadera historia del cuidado de la salud de los astronautas en el espacio
      Article 1 day ago 6 min read FAQ: The Real Story About Astronaut Health Care in Space
      Article 1 day ago 3 min read Ready, Set, Action! Our Sun is the Star in Dazzling Simulation
      Article 1 day ago
      r
      View the full article
    • By Space Force
      Over the past two years, the first U.S. space service component has tripled in size, established a 24/7 space watch cell and executed three Tier 1 Combatant Command exercises.

      View the full article
    • By NASA
      5 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      A prototype of a robot designed to explore subsurface oceans of icy moons is reflected in the water’s surface during a pool test at Caltech in September. Conducted by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, the testing showed the feasibility of a mission concept for a swarm of mini swimming robots.NASA/JPL-Caltech In a competition swimming pool, engineers tested prototypes for a futuristic mission concept: a swarm of underwater robots that could look for signs of life on ocean worlds.
      When NASA’s Europa Clipper reaches its destination in 2030, the spacecraft will prepare to aim an array of powerful science instruments toward Jupiter’s moon Europa during 49 flybys, looking for signs that the ocean beneath the moon’s icy crust could sustain life. While the spacecraft, which launched Oct. 14, carries the most advanced science hardware NASA has ever sent to the outer solar system, teams are already developing the next generation of robotic concepts that could potentially plunge into the watery depths of Europa and other ocean worlds, taking the science even further.
      This is where an ocean-exploration mission concept called SWIM comes in. Short for Sensing With Independent Micro-swimmers, the project envisions a swarm of dozens of self-propelled, cellphone-size swimming robots that, once delivered to a subsurface ocean by an ice-melting cryobot, would zoom off, looking for chemical and temperature signals that could indicate life.
      Dive into underwater robotics testing with NASA’s futuristic SWIM (Sensing With Independent Micro-swimmers) concept for a swarm of miniature robots to explore subsurface oceans on icy worlds, and see a JPL team testing a prototype at a pool at Caltech in Pasadena, California, in September 2024. NASA/JPL-Caltech “People might ask, why is NASA developing an underwater robot for space exploration? It’s because there are places we want to go in the solar system to look for life, and we think life needs water. So we need robots that can explore those environments — autonomously, hundreds of millions of miles from home,” said Ethan Schaler, principal investigator for SWIM at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California.
      Under development at JPL, a series of prototypes for the SWIM concept recently braved the waters of a 25-yard (23-meter) competition swimming pool at Caltech in Pasadena for testing. The results were encouraging.
      SWIM Practice
      The SWIM team’s latest iteration is a 3D-printed plastic prototype that relies on low-cost, commercially made motors and electronics. Pushed along by two propellers, with four flaps for steering, the prototype demonstrated controlled maneuvering, the ability to stay on and correct its course, and a back-and-forth “lawnmower” exploration pattern. It managed all of this autonomously, without the team’s direct intervention. The robot even spelled out “J-P-L.”
      Just in case the robot needed rescuing, it was attached to a fishing line, and an engineer toting a fishing rod trotted alongside the pool during each test. Nearby, a colleague reviewed the robot’s actions and sensor data on a laptop. The team completed more than 20 rounds of testing various prototypes at the pool and in a pair of tanks at JPL.
      “It’s awesome to build a robot from scratch and see it successfully operate in a relevant environment,” Schaler said. “Underwater robots in general are very hard, and this is just the first in a series of designs we’d have to work through to prepare for a trip to an ocean world. But it’s proof that we can build these robots with the necessary capabilities and begin to understand what challenges they would face on a subsurface mission.”
      Swarm Science
      A model of the final envisioned SWIM robot, right, sits beside a capsule holding an ocean-composition sensor. The sensor was tested on an Alaskan glacier in July 2023 through a JPL-led project called ORCAA (Ocean Worlds Reconnaissance and Characterization of Astrobiological Analogs). The wedge-shaped prototype used in most of the pool tests was about 16.5 inches (42 centimeters) long, weighing 5 pounds (2.3 kilograms). As conceived for spaceflight, the robots would have dimensions about three times smaller — tiny compared to existing remotely operated and autonomous underwater scientific vehicles. The palm-size swimmers would feature miniaturized, purpose-built parts and employ a novel wireless underwater acoustic communication system for transmitting data and triangulating their positions.
      Digital versions of these little robots got their own test, not in a pool but in a computer simulation. In an environment with the same pressure and gravity they would likely encounter on Europa, a virtual swarm of 5-inch-long (12-centimeter-long) robots repeatedly went looking for potential signs of life. The computer simulations helped determine the limits of the robots’ abilities to collect science data in an unknown environment, and they led to the development of algorithms that would enable the swarm to explore more efficiently.
      The simulations also helped the team better understand how to maximize science return while accounting for tradeoffs between battery life (up to two hours), the volume of water the swimmers could explore (about 3 million cubic feet, or 86,000 cubic meters), and the number of robots in a single swarm (a dozen, sent in four to five waves).
      In addition, a team of collaborators at Georgia Tech in Atlanta fabricated and tested an ocean composition sensor that would enable each robot to simultaneously measure temperature, pressure, acidity or alkalinity, conductivity, and chemical makeup. Just a few millimeters square, the chip is the first to combine all those sensors in one tiny package.
      Of course, such an advanced concept would require several more years of work, among other things, to be ready for a possible future flight mission to an icy moon. In the meantime, Schaler imagines SWIM robots potentially being further developed to do science work right here at home: supporting oceanographic research or taking critical measurements underneath polar ice.
      More About SWIM
      Caltech manages JPL for NASA. JPL’s SWIM project was supported by Phase I and II funding from NASA’s Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) program under the agency’s Space Technology Mission Directorate. The program nurtures visionary ideas for space exploration and aerospace by funding early-stage studies to evaluate technologies that could transform future NASA missions. Researchers across U.S. government, industry, and academia can submit proposals.
      How the SWIM concept was developed Learn about underwater robots for Antarctic climate science See NASA’s network of ready-to-roll mini-Moon rovers News Media Contact
      Melissa Pamer
      Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
      626-314-4928
      melissa.pamer@jpl.nasa.gov
      2024-162
      Share
      Details
      Last Updated Nov 20, 2024 Related Terms
      Europa Jet Propulsion Laboratory NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Program Ocean Worlds Robotics Space Technology Mission Directorate Technology Explore More
      5 min read Making Mars’ Moons: Supercomputers Offer ‘Disruptive’ New Explanation
      Article 1 hour ago 4 min read From Houston to the Moon: Johnson’s Thermal Vacuum Chamber Tests Lunar Solar Technology 
      Article 19 hours ago 3 min read Northwestern University Takes Top Honors in BIG Idea Lunar Inflatables Challenge 
      Article 23 hours ago Keep Exploring Discover Related Topics
      Missions
      Humans in Space
      Climate Change
      Solar System
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      Imagine designing technology that can survive on the Moon for up to a decade, providing a continuous energy supply. NASA selected three companies to develop such systems, aimed at providing a power source at the Moon’s South Pole for Artemis missions. 

      Three companies were awarded contracts in 2022 with plans to test their self-sustaining solar arrays at the Johnson Space Center’s Space Environment Simulation Laboratory (SESL) in Houston, specifically in Chamber A in building 32. The prototypes tested to date have undergone rigorous evaluations to ensure the technology can withstand the harsh lunar environment and deploy the solar array effectively on the lunar surface. 
      The Honeybee Robotics prototype during lunar VSAT (Vertical Solar Array Technology) testing inside Chamber A at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.NASA/David DeHoyos The Astrobotic Technology prototype during lunar VSAT testing inside Chamber A at Johnson Space Center. NASA/James Blair In the summer of 2024, both Honeybee Robotics, a Blue Origin company from Altadena, California and Astrobotic Technology from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania put their solar array concepts to the test in Chamber A. 

      Each company has engineered a unique solution to design the arrays to withstand the harsh lunar environment and extreme temperature swings. The data collected in the SESL will support refinement of requirements and the designs for future technological advancements with the goal to deploy at least one of the systems near the Moon’s South Pole. 

      The contracts for this initiative are part of NASA’s VSAT (Vertical Solar Array Technology) project, aiming to support the agency’s long-term lunar surface operations. VSAT is under the Space Technology Mission Directorate Game Changing Development program and led by the Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, in collaboration with Glenn Research Center in Cleveland.  

      “We foresee the Moon as a hub for manufacturing satellites and hardware, leveraging the energy required to launch from the lunar surface,” said Jim Burgess, VSAT lead systems engineer. “This vision could revolutionize space exploration and industry.” 

      Built in 1965, the SESL initially supported the Gemini and Apollo programs but was adapted to conduct testing for other missions like the Space Shuttle Program and Mars rovers, as well as validate the design of the James Webb Space Telescope. Today, it continues to evolve to support future Artemis exploration. 

      Johnson’s Front Door initiative aims to solve the challenges of space exploration by opening opportunities to the public and bringing together bold and innovative ideas to explore new destinations. 

      “The SESL is just one of the hundreds of unique capabilities that we have here at Johnson,” said Molly Bannon, Johnson’s Innovation and Strategy specialist. “The Front Door provides a clear understanding of all our capabilities and services, the ways in which our partners can access them, and how to contact us. We know that we can go further together with all our partners across the entire space ecosystem if we bring everyone together as the hub of human spaceflight.” 

      Chamber A remains as one of the largest thermal vacuum chambers of its kind, with the unique capability to provide extreme deep space temperature conditions down to as low as 20 Kelvin. This allows engineers to gather essential data on how technologies react to the Moon’s severe conditions, particularly during the frigid lunar night where the systems may need to survive for 96 hours in darkness. 

      “Testing these prototypes will help ensure more safe and reliable space mission technologies,” said Chuck Taylor, VSAT project manager. “The goal is to create a self-sustaining system that can support lunar exploration and beyond, making our presence on the Moon not just feasible but sustainable.” 

      The power generation systems must be self-aware to manage outages and ensure survival on the lunar surface. These systems will need to communicate with habitats and rovers and provide continuous power and recharging as needed. They must also deploy on a curved surface, extend 32 feet high to reach sunlight, and retract for possible relocation.  

      “Generating power on the Moon involves numerous lessons and constant learning,” said Taylor. “While this might seem like a technical challenge, it’s an exciting frontier that combines known technologies with innovative solutions to navigate lunar conditions and build a dynamic and robust energy network on the Moon.”

      Watch the video below to explore the capabilities and scientific work enabled by the thermal testing conducted in Johnson’s Chamber A facility.
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      Curiosity Navigation Curiosity Home Mission Overview Where is Curiosity? Mission Updates Science Overview Instruments Highlights Exploration Goals News and Features Multimedia Curiosity Raw Images Images Videos Audio Mosaics More Resources Mars Missions Mars Sample Return Mars Perseverance Rover Mars Curiosity Rover MAVEN Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Mars Odyssey More Mars Missions The Solar System The Sun Mercury Venus Earth The Moon Mars Jupiter Saturn Uranus Neptune Pluto & Dwarf Planets Asteroids, Comets & Meteors The Kuiper Belt The Oort Cloud 3 min read
      Sols 4366–4367: One of Those Days on Mars (Sulfate-Bearing Unit to the West of Upper Gediz Vallis)
      NASA’s Mars rover Curiosity acquired this image using its Right Navigation Camera on Nov. 14, 2024 — sol 4363, or Martian day 4,363 of the Mars Science Laboratory mission – at 02:55:34 UTC. NASA/JPL-Caltech Earth planning date: Friday, Nov. 15, 2024
      The Monday plan and drive had executed successfully, so the team had high hopes for APXS and MAHLI data on several enticing targets in the rover’s workspace. Alas, it was not to be: The challenging terrain had resulted in an awkwardly perched wheel at the end of the drive, so we couldn’t risk deploying the arm from this position. Maybe next drive!
      We did plan a busy weekend of non-arm science activities regardless. Due to a “soliday” the weekend has two sols instead of three, but we had enough power available to fit in more than three hours of observations. The two LIBS observations in the plan will measure the composition of the flat, reddish material in the workspace that is fractured in a polygonal pattern (“Bloody Canyon”) and a nearby rock coating in which the composition is suspected to change with depth (“Burnt Camp Creek”). One idea is that the reddish material could be the early stage version of the thicker dark coatings we’ve been seeing.
      A large Mastcam mosaic (“Yosemite”) was planned to capture the very interesting view to the rover’s north. Nearby and below the rover is the layer of rocks in which the “Mineral King” site was drilled on the opposite side of the channel back in March. This is a stratum of sulfate-bearing rock that appears dark-toned from orbit and we’re interested to know how consistent its features are from one side of the channel to the other. Higher up, the Yosemite mosaic also captures some deformation features that may reveal past water activity, and some terrain associated with the Gediz Vallis ridge. So there’s a lot of science packed into one mosaic!
      Two long-distance RMI mosaics were planned; one is to image back into the channel, where there may be evidence of a late-stage debris flow at the base of the ridge. The second looks “forward” from the rover’s perspective instead, into the wind-shaped yardang unit above us that will hopefully be explored close-up in the rover’s future. This yardang mosaic is intended to form one part of a stereo observation.
      The modern environment on Mars will also be observed with dust devil surveys on both sols, line-of-sight and tau observations to measure atmospheric opacity (often increased by dust in the atmosphere), and zenith and suprahorizon movies with Navcam to look for clouds. There will also be standard passive observations of the rover’s environment by REMS and DAN.
      We’ll continue driving westward and upward, rounding the Texoli butte to keep climbing through the sulfate-bearing unit. It’s not always easy driving but there’s a lot more science to do!
      Written by Lucy Lim, Participating Scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
      Share








      Details
      Last Updated Nov 18, 2024 Related Terms
      Blogs Explore More
      2 min read Sols 4362-4363: Plates and Polygons


      Article


      6 days ago
      3 min read Peculiar Pale Pebbles
      During its recent exploration of the crater rim, Perseverance diverted to explore a strange, scattered…


      Article


      6 days ago
      2 min read Sols 4359-4361: The Perfect Road Trip Destination For Any Rover!


      Article


      1 week ago
      Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
      Mars


      Mars is the fourth planet from the Sun, and the seventh largest. It’s the only planet we know of inhabited…


      All Mars Resources


      Explore this collection of Mars images, videos, resources, PDFs, and toolkits. Discover valuable content designed to inform, educate, and inspire,…


      Rover Basics


      Each robotic explorer sent to the Red Planet has its own unique capabilities driven by science. Many attributes of a…


      Mars Exploration: Science Goals


      The key to understanding the past, present or future potential for life on Mars can be found in NASA’s four…

      View the full article
  • Check out these Videos

×
×
  • Create New...