NOTES
1. President John F. Kennedy, quoted in John M. Logsdon, The Decision to Go to
the Moon: Project Apollo and the National Interest (Cambridge: MIT Press,
1970), p. 128.
2. Robert R.
Gilruth, "Experts Were Stunned by Scope of Mission," New York Times,
Moon Special Supplement, 17 July 1969. The description of Gilruth's reaction
is taken from an interview, in Kilmarnock, VA, 10 July 1986, and from Charles
Murray and Catherine Bly Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1989), p. 16-17.
3. Robert R. Gilruth, Director of Key Personnel Development, NASA
Manned Spacecraft Center, to Francis W. Kemmett, Director of the Staff,
Inventions and Contributions Board, NASA headquarters, 28 August 1973. The main
purposes of Gilruth's letter, which was solicited by a NASA awards board, were to
evaluate Dr. John C. Houbolt's role in NASA's July 1962 decision in favor of the
lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) concept for Project Apollo and to determine whether
Houbolt's contribution was worthy of the maximum prize that NASA had been
authorized to give ($100,000) for an outstanding national contribution. To do
that, however, Gilruth had to review the Space Task Group's position on LOR and
the entire Apollo mission mode controversy. It is believed that no historian
besides the author has seen this letter, which is in the author's personal LOR
file. After a long investigation, the NASA Inventions and Contributions Board,
chaired first by Francis Kemmett and then by Frederick J. Lees, decided not to
give Houbolt the award.
4. Clinton
E. Brown interview, Hampton, VA, 17 July 1989. Brown's remarks are from a panel
discussion involving Brown, William H. Michael, Jr., and Arthur W. Vogeley that
the author organized and led as part of Langley's celebration of the twentieth
anniversary of Apollo 11, the first manned lunar landing. A videotape of the
evening program featuring this panel discussion is preserved in the Langley
Historical Archives (LHA), Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA.
5. William H. Michael, Jr. interview, Hampton, VA, 17 July 1989. F.R. Moulton's book
on celestial mechanics was available by 1958 in a second edition (London: The
MacMillan Co., 1956), but the NASA Langley library seems not to have had it. The
library did get one later.
6. On the history of pioneering thoughts about and proposals for space stations, see
Frederick I. Ordway III, "The History, Evolution, and Benefits of the Space
Station Concept," presented to the XIII International Congress of History of
Science, August 1971; Barton C. Hacker, "And Rest as on a Natural Station:
From Space Station to Orbital Operations in Space-Travel Thought,
1885-1951." Both of the preceding unpublished papers are available in the
archives of the NASA History Office in Washington, DC. For published information,
see Wernher von Braun and Frederick I. Ordway III, Space Travel: A History: An
Update of History of Rocketry & Space Travel (New York: Harper & Row,
1985), p. 18-20; Howard E. McCurdy, The Space Station Decision:
Incremental Politics and Technological Choice (Baltimore and London: The
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991), p. 5-8, 237 (n.7). On NASA's belief
that a space station was the logical follow-on to Project Mercury, see Barton C.
Hacker and James M. Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans: A History of Project
Gemini (Washington, DC: NASA SP-4203 1977), p. 5-6; McCurdy, The
Space Station Decision, p. 7-9. 71.
7. Brown interview, 17 July 1989.
8. Clinton E. Brown to Eugene C. Draley, Associate Director,
"Formation of a Working Group to Study the Problems of Lunar
Exploration," 24 March 1959, A200-1B, Langley Central Files (LCF), Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA.
9. William H. Michael, Jr., to Eugene
C. Draley, Associate Director, "Attendance at Meeting of Working Group on
Lunar and Planetary Surfaces Exploration at NASA Headquarters on 14 February
1959," A200-1B, LCF; William H. Michael, Jr., "Attendance at
Meeting for Discussion of Advanced Phases of Lunar Exploration at NASA Offices,
Silver Spring, Md., Saturday, May 2, 1959," A200-1B, LCF. On the
Jastrow Committee, see R. Cargill Hall, Lunar Impact: A History of Project
Ranger (Washington, DC: NASA SP-4210 1977), p. 15-16; William David
Compton, Where No Man Has Gone Before: A History of Apollo Lunar Exploration
Missions (Washington, DC: NASA SP-4214 1989), p. 13-14.
10. Harry J. Goett to Ira S. Abbott,
"Interim Report on Operation of Research Steering Committee on Manned
Space Flight,'" 17 July 1959, A200-1B, LCF. On the Goett Committee,
see Hacker and Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p. 9-10;
Logsdon, The Decision to Go to the Moon, p. 56-57; and Murray and
Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 43-45.
11. Laurence K. Loftin, Jr., interview,
Newport News, VA, 5 August 1989, copy of transcript in LHA, p. 100; Murray and
Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 43-45.
12. Michael, Jr., interview, 17 July
1989.
13. W.H. Michael, Jr.,
"Weight Advantages of Use of Parking Orbit for Lunar Soft Landing
Mission," in Lunar Trajectory Group's [Theoretical Mechanics Division]
unpublished "Studies Related to Lunar and Planetary Missions," 26 May
1960, A200-1B, LCF.
14. On 13 November 1948, H.E. Ross presented the essential elements of the LOR scheme in a
paper he presented before a meeting of the British Interplanetary Society in
London. His conclusion was that LORin comparison with a direct flight to
the lunar surface from the Earthwould reduce the Earth-launch weight by a
factor of 2.6. In his paper Ross credited Hermann Oberth, Guido von Pirquet,
Hermann Noordung, Walter Hohmann (of "Hohmann transfer" fame),
Tsiolkovskiy, and F.A. Tsander for having earlier discussed ideas pertinent to
the LOR concept. See H.E. Ross, "Orbital Bases," Journal of the
British Interplanetary Society 26 (January 1949): 1-18. For a
history of the first pioneering inklings about the value of rendezvous in orbit,
lunar and otherwise, see Barton C. Hacker, "The Idea of Rendezvous: From
Space Station to Orbital Operations in Space-Travel Thought,
1895-1951," Technology and Culture 15 (July 1974), as
well as 1963 (supplemented 5 February 1965 and 17 February 1966), copy in the
Milton Ames Collection, Box 6. The quote from Clint Brown about Michael's
reaction to the Vought briefing is from Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to
the Moon, p. 114-115.
15. For the Vought concept that came out of the MALLAR study,
see Vought Astronautics brochure, "Manned, Modular, Multi-Purpose Space
Vehicle," January 1960.
16. Michael, Jr., "Weight Advantages of Use of Parking Orbit for Lunar Soft
Landing Mission," p. 2.
17. The "Jaybird" story is taken from Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race
to the Moon, p. 115. For the technical reports that resulted from the early
lunar studies in the Theoretical Mechanics Division, see, among others, J.P.
Gapcynski, "A Consideration of Some of the Factors Involved in the Departure
of a Vehicle from a Circular Orbit About the Earth"; W.L. Mayo, "Energy
and Mass Requirements for Lunar and Martian Missions." Both articles are in
the Lunar Trajectory Group's "Studies Related to Lunar and Planetary
Missions." On Bird's lunar bug ideas, see Michael, Jr., interview, 7 April
1989, copy of transcript in LHA, p. 14-15. See also William H. Michael,
Jr., and Robert H. Tolson, "Effect of Eccentricity of the Lunar Orbit,
Oblateness of the Earth, and Solar Gravitational Field on Lunar
Trajectories," June 1960, copy in the Langley Research Center's Technical
Library.
18. John C. Houbolt,
"A Study of Several Aerothermoelastic Problems of Aircraft Structures in
High-Speed Flight," Eidgenoessiache Technische Hochshule Mitteilung
5 (1956): 108 p. Throughout his career at NACA and NASA Langley, Houbolt
was not a terribly prolific author of technical papers. A complete bibliography
of his papers is available among the author's papers in the LHA.
19. John C. Houbolt interview,
Williamsburg, VA, 24 August 1989, transcript in LHA, p. 3.
20. Ibid., p. 7-8.
21. Ibid., p. 9. On Rand and the
early space program, see Walter A. McDougall, Heavens and the Earth: A Political History of the Space Age
(New York: Basic Books, 1985), especially p.
89, 102, 106-110, 121-123.
22. Hacker and Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p.
13; Loftin, Jr., interview, 5 August 1989, p. 100-101.
23. NASA Langley, "Minutes of
Meeting of LRC Manned Space Laboratory Group," 18 September 1959,
A200-4, LCF. See paragraph five for Houbolt's statement on the rendezvous
problem.
24. Houbolt interview, 24
August 1989, p. 9-10.
25. Bernard Maggin to Milton B. Ames, Jr., "Inter-center Discussions of Space
Rendezvous," 23 May 1960; John C. Houbolt, "Considerations of the
Rendezvous Problems for Space Vehicles," presented at the National
Aeronautical Meeting of the Society of Automotive Engineers, New York City,
58 April 1960. Both documents are in A200-La, LCF. The point about
Marshalls limited interest in the rendezvous problem is from Hacker and
Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p. 14-15.
26. Lowell E. Hasel, "Minutes of
Meeting of LRC Lunar Mission Steering Group," 24 May 1960, A200-1B,
LCF.
27. Space Task Group,
"Guidelines for Advanced Manned Space Vehicle Program," June 1960. For
the summary details of these guidelines, see Ivan D. Ertel and Mary Louise Morse,
The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology, Vol. I: 38-41. In brief, the STG
identified a manned circumlunar mission as the "logical intermediate
step" toward future goals of lunar and planetary landing. Essential to the
guidelines were plans for advanced Earth-orbital missions and an Earth-orbiting
space station.
28. NASA Space Task Group, "Apollo Technical Liaison Plan," 16 November 1960,
A200-Lb, LCF; Langley to Space Task Group, "Langley Appointments to
Apollo Technical Liaison Groups," 7 December 1960, in Project Apollo files,
LCF. The following Langley researchers were appointed to the Apollo liaison
groups: William H. Michael, Jr. (Theoretical Mechanics Div.), to Trajectory
Analysis; Eugene S. Love (Aero-Physics Div.), to Configurations and Aerodynamics;
John M. Eggleston (AeroSpace Mechanics Div.), to Guidance and Control; Robert L.
Trimpi (Aero-Physics Div.), to Heating; Roger A. Anderson (Structures Research
Div.), to Structures and Materials; Wilford E. Sivertson (Instrument Research
Div.), to Instrumentation and Communication; David Adamson (Aero-Physics Div.),
to Human Factors; and Joseph G. Thibodaux, Jr. (Applied Materials and Physics
Div.), to Onboard Propulsion. Interestingly, John Houbolt was not appointed to
any of the liaison groups.
On
the first Industry-NASA Apollo Technical Conference, see the Wall Street
Journal, 18 July 1961. Among the many valuable papers given by Langley's
John Becker to the Archives of Aerospace Exploration at Virginia Tech, there is
his file on the Lunar Mission Steering Group. On the file's cover, Becker
provides a brief written introduction to the file's contents. Inside the file
there is a copy of the Apollo Technical Liaison Plan, with handwritten notes by
Becker. For information about this file and others in the Archives of Aerospace
Exploration, contact the special collections archivist at the university library
in Blacksburg, VA.
29. Houbolt,
"Considerations of the Rendezvous Problems for Space Vehicles," p.
1.
30. NASA Langley, "Minutes
of Meeting of LRC Manned Space Laboratory Group," 5 February 1965,
A200-4, LCF. See paragraphs three and ten.
31. William A. Mrazek, Marshall
Space Flight Center, to John C. Houbolt, 16 May 1960, B10-6, LCF; Houbolt
interview, 24 August 1989, p. 11.
32. John C. Houbolt, "Lunar Rendezvous,"
International Science and Technology 14 (February 1963): 63. There
have been several attempts to clarify the detailed history of the genesis of LOR
at Langley and Houbolt's role in it. The best efforts to date are Hacker and
Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p. 14-16, 60-68; John M.
Logsdon, "The Choice of the Lunar Orbital Rendezvous Mode,"
Aerospace Historian (June 1971): 63-70; and Murray and Cox,
Apollo: The Race to the Moon, chaps. 8 and 9. None of them are complete,
nor fully satisfy the Langley participants in the history, such as Houbolt,
Michael, Brown, et al. In a footnote to their excellent book on Project Apollo,
Murray and Cox remark on the holes in the overall LOR story, suggesting that
"there is a fascinating doctoral dissertation yet to be written on this
episode." This essay may not close off the possibility of this doctoral
dissertation, but its goal is to fill in many of the gaps and stress the Langley
role in LOR.
33. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 15;
Hacker and Grimwood, On the Shoulders of
Titans, p. 15-16.
34. Serving on the Low Committee were Eldon Hall (Office of Launch Vehicle Programs,
NASA HQ), Oran Nicks and John H. Disher (both of the Office of Space Flight
Programs, NASA HQ), Alfred Mayo (Office of Life Sciences Programs, NASA HQ),
Earnest O. Pearson, Jr. (Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics Research Div., NASA
HQ), Heinz H. Koelle (Marshall), Max Faget (Space Task Group), and John Houbolt
(Langley). See Hacker and Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p.
28-29. For Langley's copy of the first draft of the Low Committee report,
"A Plan for a Manned Lunar Landing," 24 January 1961, see A200-1B,
LCF. On the cover sheet of this report, Low identifies the members of his Lunar
Landing Working Group; Houbolt's name is not included. He had been named to the
committee, but he did not participate in its discussions. Nor did anyone else
from Langley.
35. "RCA Will Do Saint Payload," Aviation Week and Space Technology 5
(December 1960): 27. For other sources on Project Saint, see Hacker and Grimwood,
On the Shoulders of Titans, p. 416 n. 64.
36. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 16, 21-25. On
Houbolt's final chart, there were three conclusions: (1) "Rendezvous opens
possibility for earlier accomplishment of certain space measurement with existing
vehicles"; (2) "There is a need for rapid development of manned
rendezvous techniquesshould make use of Mercury and 'Saint'
technology"; and (3) "NASA should have manned rendezvous program in
long-range plans with objectives of expediting soft lunar landings and flexible
orbital operations."
37. Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 116.
38. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p.
17-18.
39. See the reference
to Brown's presentation in Charles J. Donlan to NASA Headquarters, Code KB,
Director of the Staff, Inventions and Contributions, 1 March 1974. A copy of
this letter is in the author's personal LOR file. John D. Bird also refers to it
in, "A Short History of the Development of the Lunar-Orbit-Rendezvous Plan
at the Langley Research Center," p. 2.
40. The preceding two paragraphs are derived from the author's
unsigned feature story, "The Rendezvous That Was Almost Missed: Lunar-Orbit
Rendezvous and the Apollo Program," NASA News Release No. 89-98, 7 July
1989, p. 5-6.
41. Hacker and
Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p. 28-29.
42. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p.
21-26.
43. John I. Cumberland, Executive Secretary, Space Exploration Program Council (SEPC), to
SEPC members and speakers, "Agenda for SEPC Meeting, 56 January
1961," A200-IB, LCF. During the first day, other technical
presentations were made by Oran Nicks (Lunar and Planetary Programs, NASA HQ) on
"Support by Unmanned Lunar Program"; Milton B. Ames (Office of Advanced
Research Programs, NASA HQ) and E.O. Pearson (Aerodynamics and Flight Mechanics
Research Div., NASA HQ) on "Research and Development Support"; and
Clark T. Randt (Office of Life Sciences Programs, NASA HQ), on "Life Science
Aspects."
44. Hacker and
Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p. 29.
45. Robert L. O'Neal to Charles
J. Donlan, Associate Director, "Discussion with Dr. Houbolt, LRC, Concerning
the Possible Incorporation of a Lunar Orbital Rendezvous Phase as a Prelude to
Manned Lunar Landing," 30 January 1961, A200-1B, LCF.
46. Ibid. p. 60; Owen Maynard to
Frederick J. Lees, Chairman, NASA Inventions and Contributions Board, 13 November
1982. A copy of this letter is in the author's personal LOR file. In truth,
Houbolt's numbers were overly optimistic in estimating the required weights for
the lunar excursion module, because in some critical areas detailed information
about the necessary subsystems was not available. Subsequent analysis by NASA
and its industrial contractors provided much more realistic weight numbers. The
later values for these weights did not turn out so radically out of line with
Houbolt's projections; they were still within the single-launch capability of the
Saturn V vehicle and therefore validated the advertised feasibility of the LOR
mode for the manned lunar landing mission.
47. Dr. Harvey Hall to KB/Director of the Staff, NASA Inventions
and Contributions Board, 28 March 1973. A copy of this letter is in the author's
personal LOR file.
48. Von Braun
quoted in Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p.
116-117.
49. Ibid., p.
117.
50. Houbolt interview, 24
August 1989, p. 22.
51. Gilruth to
Kemmett, 28 August 1973, p. 1; see note 2 of this monograph.
52. Donlan to Code KB, Director of the
Staff, Inventions and Contributions, 1 March 1974, p. 2; see note 39 of this
monograph.
53. Gilruth to Kemmett, p.
1.
54. Gilruth to Nicholas L.
Golovin, 12 September 1961, quoted in Hacker and Grimwood, On the Shoulders of
Titans, p. 61.
55. The quoted phrases are from Houbolt's letters to Francis W. Kemmett, NASA Inventions and
Contributions Board, 23 May 1978 and 2 September 1981. Copies of these letters
are in the author's personal LOR file.
56. The phrase "like an extremely far-out thing to do"
is from George Low, quoted in Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the
Moon, p. 117.
57. George M. Low, "A Plan for Manned Lunar
Landing," 24 January 1961, A220-Lb,
LCF; George M. Low, President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, to
Frederick J. Lees, NASA Inventions and Contributions Board, 21 October 1982. A
copy of this letter is in the author's personal LOR file. See also E.O. Pearson,
"Notes on Key Problems of Manned Lunar Missions," 13 January 1961,
A200-1B, LCF.
58. See M.J. Queijo to Associate Director,
"Techniques and
Problems Associated with Manned Lunar Orbits and Landings," 21 February
1961, A200-1B, LCF.
59. Bernard Maggin to John Houbolt,
1 March 1961, A200-1B, LCF.
60. Brown interview, 19 July 1989. The
politics also involved at least one major industrial firm, North American
Aviation in Los Angeles, which already had a big contract for a
command-and-service module based on the direct-ascent mode. If NASA selected
LOR, North American most likely would have to "share the pie" with some
other contractor that would be responsible for the separate lunar lander. That
contractor turned out to be Grumman. For more on the politics of the mission-mode
decision, see Henry S.F. Cooper, "We Don't Have to Prove Ourselves,"
The New Yorker (2 September 1991): 64.
61. NASA Langley, "Work at LRC in Support of Project
Apollo," 3 May 1961, Project Apollo file, LCF. This 15-page report divided
Langley's Apollo support work into seven categories: (1) trajectory analysis, (2)
configurations and aerodynamics, (3) guidance and control, (4) heating, (5)
structures and materials, (6) instrumentation and communications, and (7) human
factors. See also Rufus O. House to the Langley Director, "Number of
Professionals in Support of Project Apollo," 19 May 1961, Project Apollo
file, LCF. This memo advised center management that there were 326.5
professionals currently involved in research projects supporting Apollo, with 91
of these involved in the study of reentry heating problems.
62. Loftin interview, 5 August 1989, p.
93.
63. NASA Langley, "Manned
Lunar Landing Via Rendezvous," 19 April 1961, copy in A200-1B, LCF.
64. Hacker and Grimwood, On the
Shoulders of Titans, p. 61.
65. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 30.
66. Ibid., p. 28.
67. Hacker and Grimwood, On the
Shoulders of Titans, p. 61.
68. Ibid.
69. See McDougall, Heavens and the Earth, p. 8, 318, 328;
Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 79-80.
70. For an analysis of Lyndon Johnson's
enthusiasm for the lunar mission, see McDougall, Heavens and the Earth, p.
319-320; Logsdon, Decision to Go to the Moon, p. 119-121.
71. For a more complete analysis of the
political thinking behind Kennedy's lunar commitment, see chapter 15,
"Destination Moon" (p. 307-324) of McDougall's Heavens and the
Earth.
72. John C. Houbolt, Associate Chief, Dynamic Loads Division, to Dr. Robert C. Seamans, Jr., NASA
Associate Administrator, 9 May 1961, copy in Box 6, Milton Ames Collection,
LHA.
73. Hacker and Grimwood, On the Shoulders of Titans, p.
36; Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 81-82, 110. The
Fleming Committee had 23 members, 18 of whom were from NASA Headquarters; Langley
had no representative. The members from headquarters were: Fleming, Addison M.
Rothrock, Albert J. Kelley, Berg Paraghamian, Walter W. Haase, John Disher, Merle
G. Waugh, Eldon Hall, Melvyn Savage, William L. Lovejoy, Norman Rafel, Alfred
Nelson, Samuel Snyder, Robert D. Briskman, Secreat L. Barry, James P. Nolan, Jr.,
Earnest O. Pearson, and Robert Fellows. The other members were Heinz H. Koelle
(Marshall), Kenneth S. Kleinknecht and Alan Kehlet (STG), A.H. Schichtenberg (The
Lovelace Foundation), and William S. Shipley (Jet Propulsion Laboratory). Not
surprisingly, most of these men were big-rocket specialists.
74. Robert C. Seamans, Jr., Associate
Administrator, to John C. Houbolt, Associate Chief, Dynamic Loads Div., NASA
Langley, 2 June 1961, copy in Box 6, Milton Ames Collection, LHA; Seamans to
Director, Launch Vehicle Program (Don R. Ostrander), and Director, Advanced
Research Programs (Ira H. A. Abbott), "Broad Study of Feasible Ways for
Accomplishing Manned Lunar Landing Mission," 25 May 1961, A200-1B,
LCF.
75. For example, Murray and
Cox state that Houbolt was a member of the Lundin Committee (Apollo: The Race
to the Moon, p. 118).
76. Loftin interview, 5 August 1989, p. 91-97; Houbolt interview, 24 August
1989, p. 32-34. Other members of the Lundin Committee, besides Lundin and
Loftin, were Walter J. Downhower (Jet Propulsion Laboratory), Alfred E. Eggers
(NASA Ames), Harry O. Ruppe (NASA Marshall), and Lt. Col. George W. S. Johnson
(U.S. Air Force). Unlike the Fleming Committee, this task forceby
designhad no members from NASA headquarters and was conceived to represent
the technical judgments of the NASA centers.
77. Laurence K. Loftin, Jr., told this story from the audience
during the 17 July 1989 videotaped celebration program for the twentieth
anniversary of the Apollo 11 lunar landing. See also Loftin interview, 5 August
1989, p. 93.
78. NASA (Lundin Committee), "A Survey of Various Vehicle Systems for the Manned Lunar
Landing Mission," 10 June 1961, A200-1B, LCF.
79. Ibid., p. 16; Houbolt
interview, 24 August 1989, p. 34.
80. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 33; see also Murray
and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 118.
81. Loftin interview, 8 August 1989, p.
93-94.
82. Seamans to Directors for Launch Vehicle Programs and Advanced Research Programs and to
Acting Director for Life Sciences Program, "Establishment of Ad Hoc Task
Group or Manned Lunar Landing by Rendezvous Techniques," 20 June 1961,
A200-1B, LCF. See also Hacker and Grimwood, On the Shoulders of
Titans, p. 37-38. Serving on the Heaton Committee were ten officials
from NASA headquarters, five from NASA Marshall, one from the NASA Flight
Research Center, and two from Langley. The two from Langley were Houbolt and W.
Hewitt Phillips. There was also one representative from the U.S. Air Force.
83. Houbolt's paper, "Problems
and Potentialities of Space Rendezvous," first presented at the
International Academy of Astronautics' International Symposium on Space Flight
and Reentry Trajectories, was published under the same title in Astronautica
Acta 7 (1961): 406-429.
84. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 39.
85. For the conclusions of the Heaton
Committee, see Ad Hoc Task Group for Study of Manned Lunar Landing by Rendezvous
Techniques, "Earth Orbital Rendezvous for an Early Manned Lunar
Landing," Part I, "Summary Report of Ad Hoc Task Group Study,"
August 1961.
86. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 39.
87. Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 119.
See also Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 46.
88. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 47-48.
89. "Report of DOD-NASA Large Launch Vehicle Planning
Group, Vol. 1, 1961," copy in A200-1B, LCF. See Hacker and Grimwood,
On the Shoulders of Titans, p. 67-68. The members of this committee,
besides those mentioned in the text, were: Kurt R. Stehling and William A. Wolman
(NASA HQ); Warren H. Amster and Edward J. Barlow (Aerospace Corp.); Seymour C.
Himmel (NASA Lewis); Wilson Schramm and Francis L. Williams (NASA Marshall); Col.
Matthew R. Collins (Army); Rear Adm. Levering Smith and Capt. Lewis J. Stecher,
Jr. (Navy); and Col. Otto J. Glaser, Lt. Col. David L. Carter, and Heinrich J.
Weigand (Air Force). There were no Langley representatives on the committee.
90. John D. Bird, "A Short
History of the Development of the Lunar-Orbit-Rendezvous Plan at the Langley
Research Center," final supplement, 17 February 1966, p. 3.
91. Harvey Hall, NASA Coordinator,
NASA-DOD Large Launch Vehicle Planning Group, to Langley Research Center, 23
August 1961, A200-Lb, LCF.
92. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 49.
93. Hacker and Grimwood, On the
Shoulders of Titans, p. 60.
94. Ibid., p. 55-60.
95. On the Shoulders of Titans is an outstanding, detailed
history of the Gemini Program. For a briefer and somewhat more colorful insight
into this important preparatory program for the Apollo mission, see Michael
Collins Liftoff: The Story of America's Adventure in Space (New York:
NASA/Grove Press, 1988), p. 63-113. Better yet, see Collins' memoir,
Carrying the Fire: An Astronaut's Journeys (New York: Macmillan, 1977).
Collins, the command module pilot for the Apollo 11 mission to the Moon, was also
an astronaut in the Gemini Program (Gemini-Titan X, 18-21 July 1966). His
memoir is one of the best books about the manned space program of the 1960s.
96. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989,
p. 49-50.
97. NASA Langley, "Manned Lunar-Landing through Use of Lunar-Orbit Rendezvous," two
vols., 31 October 1961, copy in Box 6, Milton Ames Collection, LHA. Other
Langley researchers who made contributions to this two-volume report were Jack
Dodgen, William Mace, Ralph W. Stone, Jack Queijo, Bill Michael, Max Kurbjun, and
Ralph Briasenden. In essence, Houbolt and his associates prepared this
two-volume report as a working paper that could provide, as NASA Deputy
Administrator Hugh L. Dryden would later explain, "a quick summary of the
information then available on LOR as a mode of accomplishing manned lunar landing
and return." See Dryden to the Honorable Clinton P. Anderson, Chairman,
Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences, U.S. Senate, 11 April 1963, copy in
A200-1B, LCF.
98. John C. Houbolt, NASA Langley, to Dr. Robert C. Seamans, Associate Administrator, NASA,
15 November 1961, p. 1, copy in the Milton Ames Collection, LHA.
99. Ibid., p. 3.
100. Ibid., p. 1.
101. Robert C. Seamons, Jr., to Dr. John C. Houbolt, NASA Langley, 4 December, 1961, copy in
Box 6, Milton Ames Collection, LHA.
102. George M. Low, President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Troy, NY, to Mr. Frederick J. Less, Chairman, Inventions and Contributions Board,
NASA, 21 October 1982. A copy of this letter is in the author's personal LOR
file. See also Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 120.
103. For an excellent capsule portrait
of Dr. Joseph F. Shea, see Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon,
p. 120-125.
104. Ibid., p. 124.
105.
Ibid.
106. Ibid., p.
125.
107. Ertel and Morse,
Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology, Vol. I: 141. On Glenn's historic flight,
see Lloyd S. Swenson, James M. Grimwood, and Charles C. Alexander, This New Ocean: A History of
Project Mercury (Washington, DC: NASA SP-4201 1966), p.
420-436.
108. Bird, "A
Short History of the Development of the Lunar-Orbit-Rendezvous Plan," 17
February 1966, p. 4.
109. NASA,
"Minutes of Lunar Orbit Rendezvous Meeting, April 2-3, 1962," copy
in A200-1B, LCF. See also Ertel and Morse, Apollo Spacecraft: A
Chronology, Vol. I: 147-152.
110. Arthur W. Vogeley interview, Hampton, VA, 17 July 1989.
111. Faget quoted in Cooper,
"We Don't Have to Prove Ourselves," 64. For details of the Manned
Spacecraft Center's final evaluation in favor of LOR, see Charles W. Matthews,
Chief, Spacecraft Research Div., MSFC, to Robert R. Gilruth, MSFC Director,
"Summary of MSC Evaluation of Methods for Accomplishing the Manned Lunar
Landing Mission," 2 July 1962; Robert R. Gilruth to NASA Headquarters
("Attn: Mr. D. Brainerd Holmes"), "Summary of Manned Spacecraft
Center Evaluation Methods for Accomplishing the Manned Lunar Landing
Mission," 5 July 1962. Both memoranda are included in appendix A of the
NASA Office of Manned Space Flight's confidential 169-page report, "Manned
Lunar Landing Program Mode Comparison," 30 July 1962.
112. Gilruth to Kemmett, 28 August
1973.
113. See Murray and Cox, Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 125.
114. Ibid.
115.. George M. Low to Frederick J. Lees, Chairman, Inventions and
Contributions Board, NASA, 21 October 1982; George M. Low to John C. Houbolt,
Senior Vice President and Senior Consultant, Aeronautical Research Associates of
Princeton (NJ), Inc., 7 August 1969. Copies of both letters are in the author's
personal LOR file.
116. For analysis of Mattson's liaison role for
Langley at the Manned Spacecraft Center,
see my book, Spaceflight Revolution: NASA Langley Research Center from
Sputnik to Apollo (Washington: NASA SP-4308, 1995), pp. 357-369. Axel T.
Mattson, Research Assistant for Manned Spacecraft Projects, to Charles J. Donlan,
"Report on Activities (16-19 April 1962) Regarding Manned Spacecraft
Projects," A189-5, LCF. According to Mattson's memorandum, he took
Houbolt to see the following personnel of the Manned Spacecraft Center: Charles
W. Matthews and John M. Eggleston (Spacecraft Research Div.), Owen Maynard and
Eilsworth Phelps (Spacecraft Integration Branch), Floyd V. Bennett (Flight
Dynamics Branch), and Leo T. Chauvin and William F. Rector (Apollo Spacecraft
Project Office). Along with Houbolt, Langley's John D. Bird was also visiting
the Houston center to discuss LOR. One of the Houston engineers with whom Houbolt
and Bird met, Chuck Matthews, had just returned from a meeting at NASA Marshall.
There, Matthews had reviewed Houston's thinking on the LOR concept. According to
Mattson's memo, that presentation was "apparently well received by von
Braun, since he made favorable comments." See also Axel T. Mattson
interview, Hampton, VA, 14 August 1989, transcript in LHA.
117. Statement by Axel T. Mattson at the
17 July 1989 evening program on the twentieth anniversary of Apollo 11.
118. "Minutes of the MSF Management
Council," 6 February 1962, p. 1; Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p.
64.
119. Brown interview, 17 July 1989; Houbolt
interview, 24 August 1989, p. 68-72.
120. "Concluding Remarks by Dr.
Wernher von Braun about Mode Selection for the Lunar Landing Program Given to Dr.
Joseph F. Shea, Deputy Director (Systems) Office of Manned Space Flight," 7
June 1962. A copy of this 11-page document is preserved in Box 6, Milton Ames
Collection, LHA. For more on von Braun's surprise announcement in favor of LOR
and the reaction of the Marshall audience, see Murray and Cox, Apollo: The
Race to the Moon, p. 139.
121. For an introduction to the concept of "closure" in science and
technology, see Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, eds., The
Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and
History of Technology (Cambridge and London: MIT Press, 1990), p. 12-13.
122. John C. Houbolt, Chief,
Theoretical Mechanics Div., NASA Langley, to Dr. Wernher von Braun, Director,
NASA Marshall, 9 April 1962, A189-7, LCF; von Braun to Houbolt, 20 June
1962. A copy of the latter is in the author's personal LOR file. Von Braun
argued later that he really had not changed his mind from Earth-orbit rendezvous
to LOR; he had not been a strong supporter of Earth-orbit rendezvous in the first
place. His people at Marshall had investigated Earth orbit while Gilruth's people
in Houston had investigated lunar orbit, but that was part of a NASA management
strategy to cover all the options thoroughly. He personally did not take sides
until he had all the facts; when he did, he supported LOR. See Murray and Cox,
Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 139.
123. NASA, "Lunar Orbit Rendezvous: News Conference on
Apollo Plans at NASA Headquarters on July 11, 1962," copy in Box 6, Milton
Ames Collection, LHA. In the press conference, Robert Seamans credited John
Houbolt specifically for his contribution to the LOR concept: "I would first
like to say that when I joined NASA almost two years ago one of the first places
that I went to was Langley Field, and there reviewed work going on at a research
base under Dr. John Houbolt. This work related both to rendezvous and what a man
could do at the controls, of course under simulated conditions, as well as the
possibility of lunar orbit rendezvous" (p. 8). On Wiesner's opposition to
LOR, see McDougall, Heavens and the Earth, p. 378; Murray and Cox,
Apollo: The Race to the Moon, p. 140-143.
Even after its July 1962 announcement in favor of LOR, NASA
continued to evaluate the other major options for the Apollo mission mode. See,
for example, the Office of Manned Space Flight's confidential "Manned Lunar
Landing Program Mode Comparison," 30 July 1962, and the office's follow up
and also confidential "Manned Lunar Landing Mode Comparison," 24
October 1962. Copies of both documents are in A200-1B, LCF. Both reports
concluded thatalthough some forms of Earth-orbit rendezvous were also
feasible and would have adequate weight marginson the basis of
"technical simplicity, scheduling, and cost considerations," LOR was
the "most suitable" and the "preferred mode."
124. John C. Houbolt, Roy Steiner, and
Kermit G. Pratt, "Flight Data and Considerations of the Dynamic Response of
Airplanes to Atmospheric Turbulence," July 1962.
125. Houbolt interview, 24 August 1989, p. 73.
126. I.E. Garrick, Distinguished Research
Associate, NASA Langley, to Francis W. Kemmett, Code KB, NASA Inventions and
Contributions Board, NASA Headquarters, 18 November 1974. Garrick wrote two
other letters to Kemmett, dated 14 November 1975 and 12 September 1978. Copies
of all three of these letters are in the author's personal LOR file.
127. Low to Lees, 21 October 1982, p.
2-3. On 7 August 1969, two weeks after the successful completion of the
Apollo 11 mission, von Braun wrote Houbolt a personal letter in which he referred
to Houbolt's "singular contribution to the Apollo program." Von Braun
stated, "We know that it must be highly gratifying to you because of the
rousing and complete success of your Eagle. The LM concept that you developed
and defended so effectivelyeven, on occasion, before unsympathetic
tribunalswas indeed a prime factor in the success of man's first lunar
landing mission." Wernher von Braun, Director, NASA Marshall, to John C.
Houbolt, Senior Vice President and Senior Consultant, Aeronautical Research
Associates of Princeton (NJ) Inc., 7 August 1969, copy in the author's personal
LOR file.
128. Quoted in Bill Ruehlmann, "If It Hadn't Been for Three Langley Engineers, the Eagle
Wouldn't Have Landed," The Virginian-Pilot and The Ledger-Star, 15
July 1989. Throughout this paper, I often use the metaphor of Houbolt as "a
crusader," knowing that this association has plagued Houbolt for nearly
thirty years. It is one of the major factors that killed his chances for getting
a $100,000 cash award from the NASA Inventions and Contributions Board in the
late 1970s and early 1980s (see note 3 of this paper). This board decided, after
a lengthy inquiry, that it did not give awards to individuals who simply
advocated or "crusaded" for causes, however righteous they were.
One might wonder whether the NASA board did not significantly
underestimate the sometimes vital role of a crusader in the ultimate success of a
major technological endeavor. Most certainly in this case, the awards board used
a much too literal definition of "crusader," for Houbolt was not just
arguing for something for which other people were more responsible. Rather, he
made LOR into a personal cause when, after extensive work on the relevant
problems and his mounting frustration with NASA's failure even to consider LOR as
a feasible option, he became convinced that he should crusade. "Not until I
showed them all my analysis and so forth did the awards committee even realize
that I had gone into so much depth in terms of working through all the various
parts of the problem," says Houbolt. Or, to quote again from George Low's
letter to the NASA awards committee, "it is my strongly held opinion that
without the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous Mode, Apollo would not have succeeded; and
that without Houbolt's letter to Seamans (and the work that backed up that
letter) [author's emphasis], we might not have chosen the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous
Mode" (Low to Lees, 21 October 1982, p. 3.) Despite this emphatic
testimonial from one of NASA's most esteemed former officials, Houbolt received
no award.
to the next page --->