-
DESTINATION MOON: A History of the
Lunar Orbiter Program
-
-
- CHAPTER IX: MISSIONS I, II, III:
APOLLO SITE SEARCH AND VERIFICATION
-
- Prelude to Mission
II
-
-
-
- [245] At the time of
launch of Lunar Orbiter
I the status of the other
spacecraft was as follows. Spacecraft 5, the second flight
spacecraft, was in storage at Cape Kennedy. Its photo subsystem
was due to be delivered at KSC on September 4, 1966. Spacecraft C,
a ground-test spacecraft, was at JPL for display purposes, and no
further work was planned for it. Spacecraft 1, also a ground-test
spacecraft, [246] was at Boeing in Seattle. It had completed formal
testing and was being used as a flight-test unit. During Mission I
Boeing used it to duplicate problems encountered on
Lunar Orbiter I as an aid to their resolution. Spacecraft 2 was
also at Boeing, awaiting its photography subsystem so that it
could begin mission simulation tests. Spacecraft 3, the fifth
flight spacecraft, was in the clean room at Boeing waiting for
various hardware components to be installed. Major testing of this
spacecraft was due to begin on November 7. Spacecraft 6, the third
flight spacecraft, was scheduled for preshipment review on August
19 followed by shipment to Cape Kennedy on August 20. Spacecraft 6
would then serve as a back-up for the second flight spacecraft.
Finally, Spacecraft 7, the fourth flight spacecraft, was in
storage at Boeing awaiting preenvironmental flight checkout,
scheduled to begin on August 29.35
-
- The second Lunar Orbiter mission had run
into difficulties during May 1966, six months before the tentative
November launch date for Lunar
Orbiter II. On May 20 NASA and
Boeing program officials conducted a preshipment review of
Spacecraft 5 at the Boeing Company. This spacecraft was to serve
as back-up for the first mission and was to be launched on the
second mission in the event that all went as planned
[247]
on the first. After reviewing the history of Spacecraft 5, NASA's
review team refused permission to ship it to Cape Kennedy
facilities without further testing.36 The Boeing Lunar Orbiter Program officials objected
to this, but the history of Spacecraft 5 revealed a need to
overcome inadequate operations of important equipment.
-
- Having been subjected to the same tests as
Spacecraft 4, Spacecraft 5 was considered ready for shipment with
one major exception. The camera thermal door had failed to open
during thermal vacuum testing. The other thermal vacuum tests were
completed, save for this one. Again it was attempted. The thermal
vacuum chamber was pressurized and the command for the door to
open was sent. Again it remained closed. Next the operation of the
thermal door was visually observed, and after some of the thermal
insulation had been pulled loose the door operated correctly
through several cycles. The door and its motor mechanisms were
then removed from the spacecraft for special thermal vacuum
tests.37
-
- Boeing officials wanted to ship the
spacecraft to Cape Kennedy without the door while it underwent
further tests. [248] Once the cause of failure was isolated, it could
be corrected, and the door could be reinstalled at the Cape. NASA
officials declined this suggestion because of the long history of
development troubles with the door mechanism. Nevertheless, Boeing
officials still wanted to ship the spacecraft, saying that they
would be merely effecting a transfer from Boeing-Seattle to
Boeing-Florida. Boeing's major reason was the delivery deadline
for the second flight spacecraft: June 22. A contract incentive
depended upon meeting this date. However, NASA officials still
disagreed with Boeing's line of reasoning and insisted that the
facts were clear. The spacecraft had failed a specified test. It
was necessary to retest the whole spacecraft. Reluctantly Boeing
management accepted this verdict and issued instructions to return
the spacecraft to the test chamber on May 21.38
-
-
-
-