May 4 1967
From The Space Library
NASA's Lunar Orbiter IV (Lunar Orbiter D) unmanned spacecraft was successfully launched by Atlas-Agena D booster from ETR on mission to photograph lunar surface [see May 8-June 1]. Agena 2nd stage fired to boost 850-lb spacecraft into 100-mi (161-km) -altitude parking orbit, reignited after 21-min coast period, injecting spacecraft on 89-hr translunar trajectory, and separated. On schedule Lunar Orbiter IV deployed its four solar panels and two antennas, locked its five sensors on the sun, and fixed its star tracker on Canopus. At 16:G GMT midcourse maneuver with 53.8-sec engine burn was successfully conducted to slow spacecraft's speed and alter its aim point slightly. Primary objectives of NASA's Lunar Orbiter IV mission, fourth in series of five, were (1) to place three-axis stabilized spacecraft into high-inclination lunar orbit; (2) to obtain broad systematic photographic survey of lunar surface; (3) to improve knowledge of the moon; and (4) to provide basis for selecting sites for more detailed scientific study by subsequent orbital and landing missions. Full photographic flight plan would require more than 200 camera-pointing maneuvers, compared to 50 for Lunar Orbiter III. Photos would cover more than 80% of the moon's front face and more than 90% of the hidden side. Spacecraft would also monitor micrometeoroids and radiation intensity in the lunar environment, refine definition of moon's gravitational field, and serve as a target for tracking operations by Manned Space Flight Network stations. Lunar Orbiter program was managed by LaRC under OSSA direction. Tracking and communications were the responsibility of JPL-operated Deep Space Network. (NASA Proj Off; 67-101)
NASA Release North American Aviation, Inc., President J. Leland Atwood assured the Senate Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences that NAA was making numerous technical, inspection, and management changes that would enable US. to "effectively accomplish the lunar mission in this decade." He accepted NAA's share of responsibility for Jan. 27 Apollo fire but urged the Committee to view the deficiencies cited by Apollo 204 Review Board [see April 9] in the perspective of the standards involved. . . . it must be recognized that in space work the standards are and must be extremely high. Literally perfection is the goal." Noting that many of the problems in NAA's management of the Apollo program had resulted from "a rapid build-up in manpower . . . encountered in almost all large, complex developmental programs," Atwood explained that the survey of NAA workmanship summarized in the Phillips Report [see April 18] had been conducted during time when these problems were reaching their peak. Thus the report did not truly represent overall NAA performance "but reflected the fact that the [Apollo] mission criteria had been evolving towards their final form." Atwood stressed, however, that General Phillips' recommendations had been accepted and corrected to NASA's "general satisfaction" by April 1966. To further improve Apollo program progress, Atwood said, he and NASA Administrator James E. Webb had reviewed "the overall working relationship" between NAA and NASA. As a result of this review efforts would be made to (1) improve coordination of management effectiveness and program control; (2) establish clearer and more specific objectives and measurement techniques for program performance; (3) conduct more periodic surveys and audits of program progress and performance; and (4) include sharper incentives and penalties in contract relationships. Only major changes in Apollo spacecraft would be incorporation of a quick-opening hatch and installation of additional insulation for interior wiring and tubing. (Hines, W Star, 5/4/67,2; Wilford, NYT, 5/5/67,19; SBD, 5/5/67,33-4)
Rep. William F. Ryan (D.N.Y.) recommended to the House that President Johnson appoint a high-level commission to fully investigate NASA and to determine whether NASA "has the competence to carry out the space program and to recommend changes in the agency to insure that our space program is efficiently and safely administered." Asserting that Americans "must have complete confidence in the administration of the space program" in order to give it unqualified support, he insisted that only a commission of non-NASA officials could thoroughly evaluate NASA. "From the [Apollo accident] testimony and subsequent developments it is clear that the entire management capability and supervisory competence of NASA is in question. . . . NASA is not competently administering one of the largest Federal programs . . . [and] has been extremely reluctant to be candid about its operations. There is every reason to believe that NASA will not examine itself sufficiently to form the basis for the changes that are needed to insure that there are no further catastrophes." (CR, 5/4/67, H5109-13)
Former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev made at least two offers in the early 1960's to show to the US. photos of US. military bases taken by orbiting Soviet satellites "in return for certain favors," Dr. Charles S. Sheldon, formerly an NASC staff member and currently at the Library of Congress, told an AIAA meeting in Atlanta. He declined to specify what favors Khrushchev wanted. Dr. Sheldon said frequent launchings of satellites into low circular orbits indicated strongly that U.S.S.R. was observing US. from space: "I think there's little doubt they are in the observation business." It was difficult to ascertain the status of the Soviet manned space program, he said, but U.S.S.R. might feel ready to attempt a manned orbit of the moon within the next year. Concerning reports that several cosmonauts had died during space flights, Dr. Sheldon said U.S.S.R. had definitely not lost any men in orbit and probably had not lost any men in the space program before the April 24 death of Cosmonaut Vladimir M. Komarov. He acknowledged the death of a man in a parachute accident and the death of a Soviet test pilot, but said he was not certain these deaths were involved in the space program. (AP, B Sun, 5/5/67)
NASA Nike-Cajun sounding rocket launched from Wallops Station carried GSFC-instrumented grenade payload to 72-mi (115-km) altitude to obtain data on temperature, pressure, density, and wind between 22-59 mi (35-95 km) at transition from winter-time westerly to summer-time easterly circulation. Rocket and instrumentation performed satisfactorily. (NASA Rpt SRL)
NASA Aerobee 150 sounding rocket launched from WSMR carried GSFC-instrumented payload to 109-mi (176-km) altitude to study special uv radiation of star Ieta Ophiuchi. Rocket and instrumentation performance was satisfactory; no spectra were obtained because a thin film of oil-like substance covered grating and mirrors. Source of substance was under investigation. (NASA Rpt SRL)
Total estimated cost for USAF's Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL) had risen to $2.2 billion, according to March testimony by Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara released by House Armed Services' Appropriations Subcommittee. Estimate represented $700-million increase over total cost of $1.5 billion predicted by President Johnson in his Aug. 25, 1965, announcement approving DOD development of MOL. (Text, Getler, Tech Wk, 5/8/67,14)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
