Up: Body Cylinder

Left: Upper Pole

Right: Northern Pole

A space station is an artificial structure designed for humans to live in outer space. So far only low earth orbit (LEO) stations are implemented, also known as orbital stations.

A space station is distinguished from other manned spacecraft by its lack of major propulsion or landing facilities — instead, other vehicles are used as transport to and from the station.

Space stations are designed for medium-term living in orbit, for periods of weeks, months, or even years.

Space stations are used to study the effects of long-term space flight on the human body as well as to provide platforms for greater number and length of scientific studies than available on other space vehicles. Since the ill-fated flight of Soyuz 11 to Salyut 1, all manned spaceflight duration records have been set aboard space stations. The duration record of 437.7 days was set by Valeri Polyakov aboard Mir from 1994 to 1995. As of 2005, 3 astronauts have completed single missions of over a year, all aboard Mir.

Past and present space stations

Salyut stations: Salyut 1, Salyut 2 (failed on-orbit, never occupied), Salyut 3, Salyut 4, Salyut 5, Salyut 6, Salyut 7.

Skylab.

Mir.

International Space Station (ISS).

Following the controlled deorbiting of Mir in 2001, the International Space Station is the only one of these currently in orbit; it has been continuously manned since October 30, 2000. As of mid 2006, it was 350 ft in length along the core, & 202.1 tons (US).

A second Skylab unit (Skylab B) was manufactured, as a backup article; due to the high costs of providing launch vehicles, and a desire by NASA to cease Saturn & Apollo operations in time to prepare for the Space Shuttle coming into service, it was never flown. The hull can now be seen in the National Air and Space Museum, in Washington DC, where it is a popular tourist attraction. A number of additional Salyuts were also produced, as backups or as flight articles which were later cancelled.

The International Space Station evolved from the American Space Station Freedom program, which - despite being under development for ten years - was never launched; it incorporated elements of a Mir replacement station ("Mir 2") which was also never constructed. Other cancelled space station programs included the United States Air Force Manned Orbiting Laboratory project, cancelled in 1969 about a year before the first planned test flight; this was unusual in being an explicitly military project, as opposed to the Soviet Almaz program, which was heavily intertwined with - and concealed by - the contemporaneous Salyut program.

Currently, Bigelow Aerospace is commercially developing inflatable habitat modules, derived from the earlier Transhab concept, intended to be used for space station construction and for a space prize they are funding and operating, America's Space Prize.

Types of space stations

Broadly speaking, the space stations so far launched have been of two types; the earlier stations, Salyut and Skylab, have been "monolithic", intended to be constructed and launched in one piece, and then manned by a crew later. As such, they generally contained all their supplies and experimental equipment when launched, and were considered "expended", and then abandoned, when these were used up.

Starting with Salyut 6 and 7, a change was seen; these were built with two docking ports, which allowed a second crew to visit, bringing a new spacecraft (for technical reasons, a Soyuz capsule cannot spend more than a few months on orbit, even powered down, safely) with them. This allowed for a crew to man the station continually. The presence of a second port also allowed Progress supply vehicles to be docked to the station, meaning that fresh supplies could be brought to aid long-duration missions. This concept was expanded on Salyut 7, which "hard docked" with a TKS tug shortly before it was abandoned; this served as a proof-of-concept for the use of modular space stations. The later Salyuts may reasonably be seen as a transition between the two groups.

The second group, Mir and the ISS, have been modular; a core unit was launched, and additional modules, generally with a specific role, were later added to that. (On Mir they were usually launched independently, whereas on the ISS most are brought by the Shuttle). This method allows for greater flexibility in operation, as well as removing the need for a single immensely powerful launch vehicle. These stations are also designed from the outset to have their supplies provided by logistical support, which allows for a longer lifetime at the cost of requiring regular support launches.

These stations have various issues that limit their long-term habitability, such as very low recycling rates, high radiation levels and a lack of gravity. Some of these problems cause discomfort and long-term health effects. In the case of solar flares, most current habitats even have an acute danger of radiation poisoning. Some space habitats address these issues, and are intended for long-term occupation. Some designs might even accommodate large numbers of people, essentially "cities in space" where people would make their homes. No such design has yet been constructed, because even for a small station, the extra equipment is too expensive to place in orbit at current (2006) launch costs.

Part of space elevator

A space station can be the counterweight part of a space elevator, as well as being placed at some point of the cable, like 35786 km to have microgravity conditions. In this case, another station (or an asteroid, or anything with enough mass) would be needed as a counterweight.

In fiction

A large amount of science fiction is set on space stations. A notable example is Babylon 5, a series set on a space station by that name in the future years of 2258-2262. The Star Trek series has several types of stations. Federation Deep Space Station K-7 was featured in a planetary dispute. And Earth Station McKinley acted as a shipbuilding/repair facility. Similarly, Deep Space 9 is a prominent space station in the Star Trek story line. It was built by the Cardassians around Bajor and later staffed by Federation personnel.

The Chesley Bonestell station design of the '50s was a 250 ft diameter, 3-deck wheel that revolved at 3 RPM to provide artificial one-third gravity.

The film (and novel) 2001: A Space Odyssey has Space Station 5, built as an 1836 ft double ring, revolving to produce one-sixth gravity; this has proven to be one of the iconic images of a space station in popular culture.

The James Bond film Moonraker featured a space station which serves as Hugo Drax's lair and a base to nerve-gas Earth

International Space Station

International Space Station photographed following separation from the Space Shuttle Discovery, August 7, 2005

ISS Diagram

The International Space Station (ISS) is a joint project of five space agencies: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (United States), the Russian Federal Space Agency (Russian Federation), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (Japan), the Canadian Space Agency (Canada) and the European Space Agency (Europe)[2].

The Brazilian Space Agency (Brazil) participates through a separate contract with NASA. The Italian Space Agency similarly has separate contracts for various activities not done in the framework of ESA's ISS works (where Italy also fully participates).

The space station is located in orbit around the Earth at an altitude of approximately 360 km (220 miles), a type of orbit usually termed low Earth orbit (The actual height varies over time by several kilometres due to atmospheric drag and reboosts [3]). It orbits Earth in a period of about 92 minutes; by June 2005 it had completed more than 37,500 orbits since launch of the Zarya module on November 20, 1998.

In many ways the ISS represents a merger of previously planned independent space stations: Russia's Mir 2, the U.S. Space Station Freedom and the planned European Columbus and Japanese Experiment Module.

Due to the ISS, there is a permanent human presence in space, as there have always been at least two people on board ISS since the first permanent crew entered the ISS on November 2, 2000. It is serviced primarily by the Soyuz, Progress spacecraft units and Space Shuttle. The ISS is currently still under construction with a projected completion date of 2010. At present, the station has a capacity for a crew of three. So far, all permanent crewmembers have come from the Russian or United States space programs. The ISS has however been visited by astronauts from a large number of other countries and was also the destination of the first three space tourists.

History

Zarya and Node 1 in 1999In the early 1980s NASA planned Space Station Freedom as a counterpart to the Soviet Salyut and Mir space stations. It never left the drawing board, and with the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War it was cancelled. The end of the Space race prompted the U.S. administration to start negotiations with international partners, Europe, Russia, Japan and Canada in the early 1990s, in order to build a truly international space station. This project was first announced in 1993 and was called Space Station Alpha. It was planned to combine the planned space stations of all participating space agencies: NASA's Space Station Freedom, Russia's successor project to Mir, the Mir-2 and ESA's Columbus Laboratory Module that was planned to be a stand-alone spacelab.

Throughout the 1990s, construction delays hit the project, budget projections were heavily revised and the ISS structure was modified frequently. The ISS has been, as of today, far more expensive than originally anticipated. The ESA estimates the overall cost from the start of the project in the late 1980s to the prospective end in 2016 to be in the region of €100 billion [3].

Zarya module as seen from STS-88 (NASA). STS-88 delivered the Unity module, the second module of the ISS.The first section, the Zarya Functional Cargo Block, was put in orbit in November 1998 on a Russian Proton rocket. Two further pieces (the Unity Module and Zvezda service module) were added before the first crew, Expedition 1, was sent. Expedition 1 docked to the ISS on November 2, 2000 and consisted of U.S. astronaut William Shepherd and two Russian cosmonauts, Yuri Gidzenko and Sergei Krikalev.

ISS construction began on November 20, 1998 and is now far behind the original planned schedule for completion in 2004 or 2005. This is mainly due to the halting of all NASA Shuttle flights following the Columbia disaster in early 2003 (although there had been prior delays due partly to Shuttle problems, and partly to delays stemming from the Russian space agency's budget constraints). For the two and a half years that the NASA Space Shuttle fleet was grounded, crew rotation continued on the station through the use of the Russian Soyuz spacecraft, but construction of the ISS was halted and the science conducted aboard was limited due to the crew size of two.

Columbia lifting off on its final mission.The reappearance of the foam debris problem on the STS-114 mission in July 2005 (the same problem that doomed Columbia) has again delayed the launch sequence in 2005. As of 2006, the station is only able to accommodate three permanent crew members, compared to the expected six that the completed station will be home to.

In March 2006, a meeting of the heads of the five participating space agencies [4] accepted the new ISS construction schedule that plans to complete the ISS by 2010. A crew of six is expected to be established in 2009, after the Shuttle's next 12 construction flights following the second Return to Flight mission STS-121. Requirements for stepping up the crew size include enhanced environmental support on the ISS, a second Soyuz permanently docked on the station to function as a second 'lifeboat', more frequent Progress flights to provide double the amount of consumables, more fuel for orbit raising maneouvers, and a sufficient supply line of experimental equipment.

Building the ISS

Space Shuttle structural overviewAs of the beginning of 2006 many changes have been made to the originally planned ISS, modules and other structures have been cancelled or replaced and the number of Shuttle flights to the ISS has been reduced from previously planned numbers. Still, the newest ISS Shuttle launch manifest and the current ISS design scheme reveal that more than 80% of the hardware planned to be part of the ISS in the late 90s, is still planned to be orbited to the ISS by its scheduled completion date in 2010.

The Pirs is one of the modules launched by a SoyuzBuilding the ISS requires more than 40 assembly and utilization flights. Of these flights, currently 33 are planned to be Space Shuttle flights, with 17 ISS-shuttle flights currently flown and 16 more planned between 2006 and 2010. Other assembly flights consist of modules lifted by the Russian Proton rocket or in the case of the Pirs Airlock by a Soyuz rocket.

In addition to the assembly and utilization flights, approximately 30 Progress spacecraft flights are required to provide logistics until 2010. Experimental equipment, fuel and consumables are and will be delivered by all vehicles visiting the ISS, the Shuttle, the Russian Progress, the European ATV (prospectively from May 2007 onwards) and the Japanese HTV.

When assembly is complete, the ISS will have a pressurized volume of approximately 1,000 cubic meters, a mass of approximately 400,000 kilograms, approximately 100 kilowatts of power output, a truss 108.4 meters long, modules 74 meters long, and a crew of six.

As of early 2006 the station consists of several modules and elements:

Element Flight Launch Vehicle Launch date Length

(m) Diameter

(m) Mass

(kg)

Zarya FGB 1A/R Proton rocket 20 Nov 1998 12.6 4.1 19,323

Unity Node 1 2A - STS-88 Endeavour 4 Dec 1998 5.49 4.57 11,612

Zvezda Service Module 1R Proton rocket 12 Jul 2000 13.1 4.15 19,050

Z1 Truss 3A - STS-92 Discovery 11 Oct 2000 4.9 4.2 8,755

P6 Truss - Solar Array 4A - STS-97 Endeavour 30 Nov 2000 73.2 10.7 15,900

Destiny 5A - STS-98 Atlantis 7 Feb 2001 8.53 4.27 14,515

Canadarm2 6A - STS-100 Endeavour 19 Apr 2001 17.6 0.35 4,899

Joint Airlock - Quest Airlock 7A - STS-104 Atlantis 12 Jul 2001 5.5 4.0 6,064

Docking Compartment - Pirs Airlock 4R Progress M 14 Aug 2001 4.1 2.6 3,900

S0 Truss 8A - STS-110 Atlantis 8 Apr 2002 13.4 4.6 13,970

Mobile Base System for Canadarm2 UF-2 - STS-111 Endeavour 5 Jun 2002 5.7 2.9 1,450

S1 Truss 9A - STS-112 Atlantis 7 Oct 2002 13.7 3.9 12,598

P1 Truss 11A - STS-113 Endeavour 24 Nov 2002 13.7 3.9 12,598

External Stowage Platform (ESP-2) LF1 - STS-114 Discovery 26 Jul 2005 ? ? ?

ISS structures and design

Cosmonaut Sergei Krikalev inside the Zvezda Service Module, November 2000

Flight Engineer Helms in Node 1

Node 2

March 10, 2001 - The Leonardo Multi Purpose Logistics Module rests in Discovery's payload bay during STS-102.

Astronaut Reilly in Quest Airlock

Columbus Laboratory Module

JEM Kibo module

CupolaThe ISS, when completed, will be essentially made of a set of communicating pressurized modules connected to a truss, on which are attached four large pairs of photovoltaic modules. The pressurized modules and the truss will be perpendicoular: the truss spanning from starboard to port and the habitable zone extending on the aft-forward axis.

Power supply

The ISS source for electrical power is the sun: light is converted into electricity through the use of solar panels. Before assembly flight 4A (shuttle mission STS-97, November 30, 2000) the only power source were the Russian solar panels attached to the Zarya and Zvezda modules: the Russian segment of the station uses 28 volts dc (just like the Shuttle does). In the rest of the station electricity is provided by the solar panels attached to the truss at a voltage ranging from 130 to 180 volts dc, is then stabilized and distributed at 160 volts dc and transformers convert it to the user-required 124 volts dc. Power can be shared between the two segments of the station using converters, and this feature is essential since the cancellation of the russian Science Power Platform: the Russian segment will depend on the U.S. built solar arrays for power supply.

Using a high-voltage distribution line in the so-called U.S. part of the station led to smaller power lines and thus weight savings.

Life support

This section is a stub. You can help by adding to it.

ISS Assembly

ISS assembly sequence

Official NASA assembly sequence

A total of 10 main pressurized modules (Zarya, Zvezda, US Lab, Node 1, Node 2, Node 3, Columbus, Kibo, MLM and the RM) are currently scheduled to be part of the ISS by its completion date in 2010. A number of smaller pressurized sections will be adjunct to them (Soyuz spacecrafts (permanently 2 as lifeboats - 6 months rotations), Progress transporters (2 or more), the Quest and Pirs Airlocks, as well as periodically the MPLM, the ATV and the HT-V).

Pressurized modules already launched

Currently the ISS consists of only four main pressurized modules; two Russian modules Zarya and Zvezda and two US modules Destiny and Node 1. Zarya was the first module launched by a Proton rocket in November 1998, followed by a shuttle mission that connected Zarya with Node 1, the first of three node modules, 2 weeks after Zarya had been launched. This bare 2-module core of the ISS remained unmanned for the next one and a half years, until in July 2000 the Russian module Zvezda was added, allowing a minimum crew of two astronauts or cosmonauts to be on the ISS permanently.

Since 2000 the only main pressurized module delivered to the ISS was the Destiny Laboratory Module by STS-98 in 2001. The US Lab was also the first science module delivered to the ISS, whereas Zarya provides electrical power, storage, propulsion, and guidance functions and Zvezda provides living quarters, a life support system, a communication system, electrical power distribution, a data processing system, a flight control system, and a propulsion system. Node 1's primary function is to link different modules together, however fluids, environmental control and life support systems, electrical and data systems are also routed through Node 1 to supply work and living areas of the station.

Other pressurized sections of the current configuration of the ISS are the Quest Airlock and the Pirs Airlock. Soyuz spacecrafts and Progress spacecrafts docked to the ISS also extend the pressurized volume. At least one Soyuz spacecraft has to stay docked permanently as a 'lifeboat' and is replaced every six months by a new Soyuz as part of crew rotation.

Although not permanently docked with the ISS, the Multi-Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) forms part of the ISS during Shuttle missions that include the MPLM. The MPLM is attached to Node 1 and is used for resupply and logistics flights. Speculation that the last Space Shuttle flight involving an MPLM could leave one MPLM permanently docked with the Station are fueled by the MPLM's potential capacity for a long-term stay in orbit. Modifications would need to be made, including power support and checks on whether the MPLM would influence the ISS overall structure. As of 2006, it is not planned to integrate the MPLM permanently into the ISS structure.

Pressurized modules to be launched

Node 2 - 2007

As of March, 2006, nearly all already built pressurized modules are planned to be launched by the Space Shuttle after return to flight with STS-121 in July 2006. If the current Shuttle launch sequence is not disrupted materially, Node 2 will be launched in the second quarter of 2007. Node 2 was built by the Italian Space Agency, however its ownership has been already transferred to NASA as part of a bartering agreement between NASA and ESA [4]. Node 2 will contain eight racks that provide air, electrical power, water and other systems essential to support life on the spacecraft and is scheduled to be the hub for the Columbus module and Kibo.

Columbus Laboratory Module - 2007

The next Shuttle flight after Node 2 is scheduled to bring the European module Columbus to the ISS. Columbus will be the second module mainly dedicated to science on the ISS, including the Fluid Science Laboratory (FSL), the European Physiology Modules (EPM), the Biolab, the European Drawer Rack (EDR) and various storage racks.

Multipurpose Laboratory Module - 2007

The Russian space agency has announced that the Multipurpose Laboratory Module (MLM) is scheduled to be launched by a Proton rocket in November 2007. The MLM is the main Russian science module, the third science module to be launched to the ISS. It will be equipped with an altitude control system that can be used as a backup by the ISS and will be docked onto the Zarya control module side docking port. The European Robotic Arm will be launched together with MLM, mated on its surface for a later deployment in space, according to a €20 million agreement signed in October 2005 between ESA and Roskosmos.

Russian Research Module - 2009

NASA's ISS schedule still includes one Russian Research Module (RM) as part of the ISS that may be docked to Zvezda and is rumoured to fly to the ISS in 2009 on a Russian Proton rocket. Construction on this module has not yet begun, which casts doubt on its actual delivery to the ISS.

Japanese Experiment Module - 2008/2009

The Japanese Experiment Module (JEM), aka KIBO is the next pressurized module on the schedule. It consists of two pressurized sections and one exposed facility. Three Shuttle flights are needed to bring KIBO into orbit; the pressurized sections are scheduled to fly in the second half of 2008 and in the first half of 2009. KIBO will be mounted on the Node 2, on the opposite side to the Columbus module.

Node 3 and Cupola - 2009/2010

Although it has been speculated that Node 3 has been cancelled, it is still in the new launch manifest, currently scheduled for the end of 2009. Like Node 2, Node 3 was built in Italy by the Italian Space Agency, but is owned by NASA. It will be used as a storage compartment; however its original purpose, to be a hub for the Habitation Module as well as the Crew Return Vehicle, is no longer relevant, as both items were cancelled in 2001. One of the curiosities of the ISS, the 'space window' Cupola is currently scheduled to be flown together with Node 3 on the last shuttle flight to the ISS. ESA has already finished construction and is storing the Cupola until its flight together with Node 3.

Unpressurized elements

There is also a large unpressurized truss system partially in place that will eventually support the prominent solar arrays.

Cancelled elements

Centrifuge Accommodations Module - cancelled, would have been attached to Node 2

Universal Docking Module - cancelled, replaced by (MLM - FGB2)

Docking and Stowage Module - cancelled

Habitation Module - cancelled

Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) - cancelled

Interim Control Module - cancelled, no need to replace Zvezda

ISS Propulsion Module - cancelled, no need to replace Zvezda

Science Power Platform - cancelled, power will be provided to the Russian segments partly by the US solar cell platforms

Visiting spacecraft

Space Shuttle - resupply vehicle, assembly and logistics flights and crew rotation

Soyuz spacecraft - crew rotation and emergency evacuation, replaced every 6 months

Progress spacecraft - resupply vehicle

Proposed: European (ESA) Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) ISS resupply spacecraft (scheduled for May 2007)

Proposed: Japanese (JAXA) H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV) resupply vehicle for KIBO module (scheduled for 2008)

Proposed: Commercial cargo resupply spacecraft, under the NASA COTS (Commercial Orbital Transportation Services) program (Program ends 2010)

Proposed: Russian Space Shuttle Kliper for possible crew rotation and as resupply transporter (scheduled for 2012)

Proposed: Crew Exploration Vehicle possible crew rotation and as resupply transporter (scheduled for 2011 or 2012)

Legal aspects

Agreement

Cover page of the Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement signed on January 28, 1998The legal structure that regulates the space station is multi-layered. The primary layer establishing obligations and rights between the ISS partners is the Space Station Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA), an international treaty signed on January 28, 1998 by fifteen governments involved in the Space Station project: the United States, Canada, Japan, the Russian Federation, and eleven Member States of the European Space Agency (Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom). Article 1 outlines its purpose:

This Agreement is a long term international co-operative framework on the basis of genuine partnership, for the detailed design, development, operation, and utilisation of a permanently inhabited civil Space Station for peaceful purposes, in accordance with international law. [5]

The IGA sets the stage for a second layer of agreements between the partners referred to as 'Memoranda of Understanding' (MOUs), of which four exist between NASA and each of the four other partners. There are no MOUs between ESA, Roskosmos, CSA and JAXA due to the fact that NASA is the designated manager of the ISS. The MOUs are used to describe the roles and responsibilities of the partners in more detail.

A third layer consists of bartered contractual agreements or the trading of the partners' rights and duties, including the 2005 commercial framework agreement between NASA and Roskosmos that sets forth the terms and conditions under which NASA purchases seats on Soyuz crew transporters and cargo capacity on unmanned Progress transporters.

A fourth legal layer of agreements implements and supplements the four MOUs further. Notably among them is the ISS code of conduct, setting out criminal jurisdiction, anti-harassment and certain other behavior rules for ISS crewmembers [6].

Utilization of the ISS

The nadir window in the Destiny lab - the Destiny lab is 100% owned by NASA

The Zarya module was built in Russia but is 100% owned by NASAThere is no fixed percentage of ownership for the whole space station. Rather Article 5 of the IGA sets forth that each partner shall retain jurisdiction and control over the elements it registers and over personnel in or on the Space Station who are its nationals [7]. Therefore, for each ISS module only one partner retains sole ownership. Still, the agreements to use the space station facilities are more complex.

The three planned Russian segments Zvezda, the Multipurpose Laboratory Module and the Russian Research Modules are made and owned by Russia which, as of today, also retains its current and prospective usage (Zarya, although constructed and launched by Russia, has been paid for and is officially owned by NASA). In order to use the Russian parts of the station, the partners use bilateral agreements (third and fourth layer of the above outlined legal structure). The rest of the station, (the U.S., the European and Japanese pressurized modules as well as the truss and solar panel structure and the two robotic arms) has been agreed to be utilized as follows (% refers to time that each structure may be used by each partner):

(1) Columbus: 51% for ESA, 49% for NASA and CSA (CSA has agreed with NASA to use 2.3% of all non-Russian ISS structure)

(2) Kibo: 51% for JAXA, 49% for NASA and CSA (2.3%)

(3) Destiny Lab: 100% for NASA and CSA (2.3%) as well as 100% of the truss payload accommodation

(4) Crew time and power from the solar panel structure, as well as rights to purchase supporting services (upload/download and communication services) 76.6% for NASA, 12.8% for JAXA, 8.3% for ESA and 2.3% for CSA

Costs

The most cited figure of an estimate of overall costs of the ISS is 100 billion (very often cited as USD, ESA, the only agency actually stating potential overall costs on its website estimates 100 billion EUR [8]). Giving a precise cost estimate for the ISS is however not straight forward, it is for instance hard to determine which costs should actually be contributed to the ISS program or how the Russian contribution should be measured, as the Russian space agency runs at considerably lower USD costs than the other partners.

Criticism of the ISS

The ISS Centrifuge Accommodations Module built by JAXA for NASA, one of the most ambitious science modules, will not be part of the completed ISSThere are many critics of the ISS, especially with regard to the biggest partner NASA. These critics view the project as a waste of both time and American tax money, inhibiting progress on more useful projects: for instance, claiming that the very often quoted estimated $100 billion USD lifetime cost could pay for dozens of unmanned scientific missions or could be used for space exploration in general or be better spent on problems on Earth.

Critics point to the fact that very little high-quality scientific research has been done on the ISS, although it has been in orbit for eight years already and has been manned for more than five. They point out that the scientific fruits of experiments conducted on the shuttle and other space stations have been negligible in comparison to much cheaper unmanned missions. Others criticise that cuts to the ISS structure have included ambitious science modules, such as the Centrifuge Accommodations Module, a pressurized module that would include a centrifuge for experiments in lower gravity. They say that the planned ISS structure meets few of the scientific objectives of the station proposed in the 1990s, and indeed will do little science whatsoever.

In Russia, some argue that the ISS does not principally differ from the Mir space station, uses the same general technology and cannot serve purposes that the Mir was not able to serve, so it is not a step forward.

Advocates of manned space exploration say that criticism of the ISS project is short-sighted, and that manned space research and exploration have produced billions of dollars' worth of tangible benefits to people on Earth. By some estimates, the indirect economic benefits made from commercialization of technologies developed during manned space exploration have returned many times the initial investment to the economy. However, there is no consensus among economists on how to make such an estimate, since it requires speculation as to what the tax money would have accomplished had it remained in the economy. Whether the ISS, as distinct from the wider space program, will be a major contributor in this sense is thus a subject of debate. More cynical advocates have pointed out that even if its scientific value is nil, it would have still served to force international cooperation at a time of tough international politics.

Two technical aspects of the ISS's design have been heavily criticized: (1) it requires too much maintenance, and in particular too much maintenance by risky, expensive EVAs; (2) its orbit is too highly inclined, making it difficult to reach from the Earth's surface in an economical way. The latter decision arose from the political realities of the US's desire to keep Russia involved in the program.

Present status of the ISS

Present configuration of the ISSAfter the breakup of Columbia on February 1, 2003, and the subsequent two and a half year suspension of the U.S. space program, followed by problems with resuming flight operations in 2005, there was some uncertainty over the future of the ISS until 2006. In 2006 the international partners announced their commitment to complete the ISS by 2010.

Still the future of the ISS depends on the Space Shuttle. Due to weight restrictions and design constraints, payloads intended for the Shuttle - even if ready to fly - cannot be launched (in an economically sensible way) to the station on any other available launcher. In addition, assembly work is manpower-intensive, making it difficult to do without the assistance of EVA teams brought up by the Shuttle. Thus, if the Shuttle program suffered another disaster or a severe cut, the ISS project could probably not be continued.

Since 2003 crew exchange has been carried out using the Russian Soyuz spacecraft. Starting with Expedition 7, two-astronaut caretaker crews have been launched, instead of the previous crews of three. Because the ISS had not been visited by a shuttle for an extended period, a larger than planned amount of waste accumulated, temporarily hindering station operations in 2004. However Progress transports and the STS-114 shuttle flight took care of this problem.

The Space Shuttle Program resumed flight on July 26, 2005 with the STS-114 mission of Discovery. This mission to the ISS was intended both to test new safety measures implemented since the Columbia disaster, and to deliver supplies to the station. Although the mission succeeded safely, it was not without risk; foam was shed by the external tank, leading NASA to announce future missions would be grounded until this issue was resolved.

The second Return to Flight mission, STS-121 was planned for September 2005, but Discovery's flight preparation has been delayed until at least July 2006. ISS construction will continue in 2006, if all goes well with STS-121 with a launch in August by Atlantis and probably another launch by Discovery in December.

The International Space Station is the most-visited spacecraft in the history of space flight. As of August 28, 2005, it has had 141 (non-distinct) visitors. Mir had 137 (non-distinct) visitors (See Space station).

Miscellaneous

Yuri Malenchenko was the first person who married in space

Space tourism, weddings and the ISS

The ISS has seen the first space tourist, Dennis Tito, who spent USD 20 million to fly aboard a Russian supply mission and the first space wedding when Yuri Malenchenko on the station married Ekaterina Dmitriev who was in Texas. Another planned curiosity was to be an EVA by Russian cosmonaut Pavel Vinogradov in the summer of 2006 in order to hit a golf ball from the station, an event sponsored by a Canadian golf equipment manufacturer. The event has been postponed in order to complete some additional maintenance to the exterior video systems.

Microgravity

The state of weightlessness on the ISS is popularly explained as a result of the cancelling out of the gravitational force of the Earth (that at the ISS altitude is still 88% of 1G) by the centrifugal force produced by the ISS orbiting the planet. In a more formal physics description, the state of weightlessness is a result of the fact that the ISS is in constant free fall, which, according to the Equivalence principle, is indiscernable to being in a state where all forces (including therefore the gravitational force) are absent. However, due to the drag resulting from the residual atmosphere, vibratory acceleration due to mechanical systems and the crew on board the ISS, orbital corrections by the on-board gyroscopes or thrusters, and the spatial separation from the real centre of mass of the ISS, the environment on the station is often described as microgravity, with a level of gravity on the order of 2-1000 millionth of G (the value varies with the frequency of the disturbance; the low value occurs at frequencies below 0.1 Hz, the higher value at frequencies of 100 Hz or more)

Skylab is also the name of a research station at Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station in Antarctica. Skylab was the first space station the United States launched into orbit. The 75 metric ton station was in Earth orbit from 1973 to 1979, and visited by crews three times in 1973 and 1974.

Mission Statistics

Mission Name: Skylab

Call Sign: Skylab

Launch: May 14, 1973

17:30:00 UTC

Cape Canaveral

Complex 39A

Reentry: July 11, 1979

16:37:00 UTC

near Perth, Australia

Crews: 3

Occupied: 171 days

In Orbit: 2,249 days

Number of

Orbits: 34,981

Apogee: 274.6 mi (442 km)

Perigee: 269.7 mi (434 km)

Period: 93.4 min

Inclination 50 deg

Distance

Traveled: ~890,000,000 mi

(~1,400,000,000 km)

Orbital Mass: 77,088 kg

Skylab

The original genesis of the Skylab project is difficult to pinpoint due to the number of different proposals floated from various NASA centers.

Early studies

A key event took place in 1959, when Wernher von Braun submitted his final Project Horizon plans to the US Army. The overall goal of Horizon was to place man on the moon, a mission that would soon be taken over by the rapidly-forming NASA. Although concentrating on the moon missions, von Braun also detailed an orbiting laboratory built out of a Horizon upper stage. This basic concept of re-using existing boosters would lead directly to a number of follow-on designs, and eventually the Skylab that actually flew.

In 1963 the US Air Force started development of the Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL), a small space station primarily intended for photo reconnaissance using large telescopes directed by a two-man crew. The station consisted of an Agena upper stage with equipment installed in its former fuel tanks. The stations were launched unmanned, the crew following in a Gemini modified with a hatch cut into the heat shield on the bottom of the capsule.

A number of NASA centers saw the MOL as something of a threat, and started back-room studies on various space station designs of their own. Most of these were simply "back of the napkin" type designs with no official backing. Studies generally looked at platforms launched by the Saturn V, followed up by crews launched on Saturn IB using an Apollo Command and Service Module (CSM), or alternately Gemini capsule on a Titan II-C, the latter being much less expensive in the case where cargo was not needed.

But at the same time NASA was also looking for proposals for a major post-Apollo follow-on mission, including studies of a very large 24-man station with an operating lifetime of about five years. Lockheed was involved in this project, and proposed a station that they felt would be a natural follow-on to the moon missions. One requirement for a permanent station would be periodic resupply, and for this role Lockheed suggested both Apollo-derived cargo vehicles or a new lifting body craft. After a lengthy and circuitous history, the new supply vehicle would emerge as the Space Shuttle, and their space station proposal as Space Station Freedom.

The AAP

Although initially unrelated, in June 1964 NASA headquarters in Washington set up the Apollo Logistic Support System Office, originally intended to study various ways to modify the Apollo hardware for scientific missions. The office originally proposed a number of projects for direct scientific study, including an extended-stay lunar mission which required two Saturn V launchers, a "lunar truck" based on the Lunar Module (LM), a large manned solar telescope using an LM as its crew quarters, and small space stations using a variety of LM or CSM-based hardware. Although not looking at the space station specifically, over the next two years the office would become increasingly dedicated to this role. In 1965 the office was renamed, becoming the Apollo Applications Program.

As part of their general work, in August 1964 MSC presented studies on an expendable lab known as Apollo "X", short for Apollo Extension System. Apollo X replaced the LM carried on the top of the S-IVB stage with a small space station just larger than the CSM's service area, containing supplies and experiments for missions between 15 and 45 days duration. Using this study as a baseline, a number of different mission profiles were looked at over the next six months.

Wernher von Braun proposed a more ambitious plan to build a much larger station. His design replaced the S-IVB stage of a complete Saturn V with an aeroshell, primarily as an adaptor for the CSM on top. Inside the shell was a cylindrical equipment section slightly smaller in diameter than the CSM. On reaching orbit, the S-II booster would be vented to remove any remaining hydrogen fuel, then the equipment section would be slid into it via a large inspection hatch. The station filled the entire interior of the S-II stage's hydrogen tank, with the equipment section forming a "spine" and living quarters between it and the walls of the booster. This would have resulted in a very large 33 x 45 foot living area. Power was to be provided by solar cells lining the outside of the S-II stage.

One problem with this proposal was that it required a dedicated Saturn V launch to fly the station. You could not "piggyback" the station's launch on a lunar mission; those required a working S-IVB stage. At the time the design was being proposed, all of the then-contracted Saturn V's were already earmarked for moon launches. Further work led to the idea of launching a smaller station based on the S-IVB instead, launching it on a surplus Saturn IB. Several planned Earth-orbit test missions for the LM and CSM had been cancelled, leaving several Saturn IB's free for use.

Since the Saturn I had a much lower throw weight capability, the S-IV stage could not be left empty, its thrust would be needed for the mission. This limitation led to the development of the Wet Workshop concept, which led naturally out of von Braun's idea of using an existing stage after its fuel had burned off. However, in this case the station was to be built out of the S-IVB stage itself, as opposed to the S-II below it. A number of S-IVB-based stations were studied at MSC, but even the earliest, from mid-1965, had much in common with the Skylab design that actually flew. An airlock was placed in the equipment area immediately below where the LM sat on a moon mission, and a minimum amount of equipment was installed in the tank itself in order to avoid taking up too much fuel volume. After launch, a follow-up mission launched by a Saturn IB would carry up additional equipment in place of its LM, including solar panels, an equipment section and docking adaptor, and various experiments. Douglas Aircraft, builders of the S-IVB stage, were asked to prepare proposals along these lines.

On April 1, 1966, MSC send out contracts to Douglas, Grumman, and McDonnell for conversion of a S-IVB spent stage under the name Saturn S-IVB spent-stage experiment support module (SSESM). In May the Apollo astronauts voiced concern over purging the stage's hydrogen tank in space. Nevertheless, in late July it was announced that the Orbital Workshop would be launched as a part of Apollo mission AS-209, originally one of the Earth-orbit CSM test launches, followed by two Saturn I/CSM crew launches, AAP-1 and AAP-2.

Design work continued over the next two years, in an era of shrinking budgets. In August 1967 NASA announced that the lunar mapping and base construction missions examined by the AAP were being cancelled. Only the Earth-orbiting missions remained, namely the Orbital Workshop and Apollo Telescope Mount solar observatory. Later several moon missions were cancelled as well, originally to be Apollo missions 18 through 20. The cancellation of these missions freed up three Saturn V boosters for the AAP program. Although this would have allowed them to develop von Braun's original S-II based mission, by this time so much work had been done on the S-IV based design that worked continued on this baseline. With the extra power available, the wet workshop was no longer needed, the S-IC and S-II lower stages could launch a "dry workshop" directly into orbit.

Skylab vehicle

On August 8, 1969, McDonnell Douglas received a contract for the conversion of two existing S-IVB stages to the Orbital Workshop configuration. One of the S-IV test stages was shipped to McDonnell for the construction of a mockup in January 1970. They named the manned workshop Skylab after a contest was held by NASA for someone to create a name.

Skylab was actually the refitted S-IVB second stage of a Saturn IB booster (from the AS-212 vehicle), a leftover from the Apollo program originally intended for one of the canceled Apollo earth orbital missions. A product of the Apollo Applications Program (a program tasked with finding long-term uses for Apollo program hardware), Skylab was originally planned as a minimally-altered S-IVB to be launched on a Saturn IB. The small size of the IB would have required Skylab to double as a rocket stage during launch, only being retrofitted as a space station once on-orbit. With the cancellation of Apollo missions 18-20 a Saturn V was made available and thus the "Wet Workshop" concept, as it was called, was put aside and Skylab was launched dry and fully outfitted. Skylab's grid flooring system was a highly visible legacy of the wet workshop concept.

The mission computer used aboard Skylab was the IBM System/4Pi TC-1, a relative of the AP-101 Space Shuttle computers.

Skylab mission

Launch of the last Saturn V rocket (Actually a Saturn INT-21) carrying the Skylab space stationSkylab was launched May 14, 1973 by a Saturn INT-21 (a two-stage version of the Saturn V launch vehicle). The launch is sometimes refered to as Skylab 1, or SL-1. Severe damage was sustained during launch, including the loss of the station's micrometeoroid shield/sun shade and one of its main solar panels. Debris from the lost micrometeoroid shield further complicated matters by pinning the remaining solar panel to the side of the station, preventing its deployment and thus leaving the station with a huge power deficit. The station underwent extensive repair during a spacewalk by the first crew, which launched on May 25, 1973 (the SL-2 mission) atop a Saturn IB. Two additional missions followed on July 28, 1973 (SL-3) and November 16, 1973 (SL-4) with stay times of 28, 59, and 84 days, respectively. The last Skylab crew returned to Earth on February 8, 1974.

Operations on orbit

Skylab orbited Earth 2,476 times during the 171 days and 13 hours of its occupation during the three manned Skylab missions. Astronauts performed ten spacewalks totalling 42 hours 16 minutes. Skylab logged about 2,000 hours of scientific and medical experiments, including eight solar experiments. The Sun's coronal holes were discovered thanks to these efforts. Many of the experiments conducted investigated the astronauts' adaptation to extended periods of microgravity. Each Skylab mission set a record for the amount of time astronauts spent in space.

End of Skylab

Following the last mission, Skylab was left in a parking orbit expected to last at least 8 years. The Space Shuttle was planned to dock with and elevate Skylab to a higher safe altitude in 1979; however, the shuttles were not able to launch until 1981. A planned unmanned satellite called the Teleoperator was to be launched to save Skylab, but funding never materialised. Skylab was considered junk by many. It was falling apart, according to the visiting astronauts, and had suffered great damage during launch when the solar panel tore off with the solar shield. The station needed new gyroscopes, fuels, equipment, life support systems, plumbing, and much more.

Skylab's demise was an international media event, with merchandising, wagering on time and place of re-entry and nightly news reports. The San Francisco Examiner offered a $10,000 prize for the first piece of Skylab to be delivered to their offices. An Australian farmer claimed the bounty. In a coincidence for the organisers, the annual Miss Universe pageant was scheduled to be held a few days later, on July 20, 1979 in nearby Perth, Western Australia. A large piece of Skylab debris was displayed on the stage. [1]

Two flight-quality Skylabs were built. The first one was that which crashed in Western Australia; the second, a backup, is on display at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, DC. A full scale training mockup is kept at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas.

The Salyut (Russian: Salute or Firework) program was a series of space stations launched by the Soviet Union in the 1970s. The Salyuts were all relatively simple structures consisting of a single main module placed into orbit in a single launch. The program was originally designated the DOS 7-K program, with each Salyut station receiving a designation.

Salyut 1 (DOS 1) was launched April 19, 1971. It was the first space station ever orbited. Its first crew launched in Soyuz 10 butwas unable to board it due to a failure in the docking mechanism; its second crew launched in Soyuz 11 and remained on board for 23 productive days. Unfortunately, a pressure-equalization valve in the Soyuz 11 reentry capsule opened prematurely when the crew returned to Earth, killing all three. Salyut 1 reentered Earth's atmosphere October 11, 1971.

Salyut 2 was launched April 3, 1973. It was not really a part of the same program as the other Salyut stations, instead being the highly classified prototype military space station Almaz. It was given the designation Salyut 2 to conceal its true nature. Despite its successful

launch, within two days the as-yet-unmanned Salyut 2 began losing pressure and its flight control failed; the cause of the failure was likely due to shrapnel piercing the station when the discarded Proton rocket upper stage that had placed it in orbit later exploded nearby.

The Salyut space station that Almaz had substituted for, designated DOS 3, was launched on May 11, 1973, three days before the launch of Skylab. Due to errors in the flight control system while out of the range of ground control, the station fired its orbit-correction engines until it consumed all of its fuel. Since the spacecraft was already in orbit and had been registered by Western radar, the Soviets disguised the launch as "Cosmos 557" and quietly allowed it to reenter Earth's atmosphere and burn up a week later. It was revealed to have been a Salyut station only much later.

Salyut 3 was launched on June 25, 1974. It was another Almaz military space station, this one launched successfully. It tested a wide variety of reconnaissance sensors, returning a canister of film for analysis. On January 24, 1975 trials of the on-board 23 mm Nudelmann aircraft cannon (other sources say it was a Nudelmann NR-30 30 mm gun) were conducted with positive results at ranges from 3000 m to 500 m. Cosmonauts have confirmed that a target satellite was destroyed in the test. The next day, the station was ordered to deorbit. Only one of the three intended crews successfully boarded and manned the station, brought by Soyuz 14; Soyuz 15 attempted to bring a second crew but failed to dock. Nevertheless, Salyut 3 was an overall success.

Salyut 4 (DOS 4) was launched on December 26, 1974. It was essentially a copy of the DOS 3, and unlike its ill-fated sibling it was a complete success. Three crews made stays aboard Salyut 4 (Soyuz 17, Soyuz 18 and Soyuz 21), including one of 63 days duration, and an unmanned Soyuz capsule remained docked to the station for three months, proving the systems' long-term durability. Salyut 4 was deorbited February 3, 1977.

Salyut 5 was launched on June 22, 1976. It was the third and last Almaz military space station. Its launch and subsequent mission were both completed successfully, with three crews launching and two (Soyuz 21 and Soyuz 24) successfully boarding the craft for lengthy stays (the second crew on Soyuz 23 was unable to dock and had to abort). Salyut 5 reentered on August 8, 1977. Following Salyut 5 the Soviet Military decided that the tactical advantages were not worth the expense of the programme and withdrew. The focus for the later missions was propaganda.

Salyut 6 was launched on September 29, 1977. Although it resembled the previous Salyut stations in overall design, it featured several revolutionary advances including a second docking port where an unmanned Progress cargo spacecraft could dock and refuel the station. From 1977 until 1982 Salyut 6 was visited by five long-duration crews and 11 short-term crews, including cosmonauts from Warsaw Pact countries. The very first long-duration crew on Salyut 6 broke a record set onboard Skylab, staying 96 days in orbit. The longest flight onboard Salyut 6 lasted 185 days. The fourth Salyut 6 expedition deployed a 10-meter radio-telescope antenna delivered by a cargo ship. After Salyut 6 manned operations were discontinued in 1981, a heavy unmanned spacecraft called TKS and developed using hardware left from the canceled Almaz program was docked to the station as a hardware test. Salyut 6 was deorbited July 29, 1982.

Salyut 7 was launched on April 19, 1982. It was the back-up vehicle for Salyut 6 and very similar in equipment and capabilities, though several more advanced features were included. It was aloft for four years and two months, during which time it was visited by 10 crews constituting 6 main expeditions and 4 secondary flights (including French and Indian cosmonauts). Aside from the many experiments and observations made on Salyut 7, the station also tested the docking and use of large modules with an orbiting space station. The modules were called "Heavy Cosmos modules." They helped engineers develop technology necessary to build Mir. Salyut 7 deorbited on February 7, 1991.

Mir (can mean both world and peace in Russian) was a highly successful Soviet (and later Russian) orbital station. It was humanity's first consistently inhabited long-term research station in space.

Through a number of collaborations, it was made internationally accessible to cosmonauts and astronauts of many different countries. Mir was assembled in orbit by successively connecting several modules, each launched separately from February 19, 1986 to 1996.

The station existed until March 23, 2001, at which point it was deliberately de-orbited and broke apart during atmospheric re-entry.

History

Fully constructed space station Mir in 1996Mir was based upon the Salyut series of space stations previously launched by the Soviet Union (seven Salyut space stations had been launched since 1971). It was mainly serviced by Russian-manned Soyuz spacecraft and Progress cargo ships, but it was anticipated that it would also be the destination for flights by the later abandoned Buran space shuttle. The orbiting Mir's purpose was to provide a large and livable scientific laboratory in outer space.

The United States had planned to build Space Station Freedom as its counterpart to Mir, but this project was cancelled after the fall of the Soviet Union made an international cooperation possible (see International Space Station). Also, the space shuttle Challenger exploded less than a month before Mir was launched into orbit (see Space Shuttle Challenger disaster). In later years, after the end of the Cold War, the Shuttle-Mir program combined Russia's Mir capabilities with United States space shuttles and allowed a couple of American and other western astronauts to visit or stay long-term on the station. The visiting US shuttles used a modified docking collar originally designed for the Soviet Buran shuttle, mounted on a bracket originally designed for use with Space Station Freedom. With the space shuttle docked to Mir the temporary enlargements of living and working areas amounted to a complex that was the world's largest spacecraft at that time in space history, with a combined mass of 250 tons.

Mir space station breaking up in Earth's atmosphere over the South Pacific on March 23, 2001.Inside, the 100-ton Mir looked like a cramped labyrinth, crowded with hoses, cables and scientific instruments – as well as articles of everyday life, such as photos, children's drawings, books and a guitar. It commonly housed three crewmembers, but it sometimes supported as many as six for up to a month. Except for two short periods, Mir was continuously occupied until August 1999.

The journey of the 15-year-old Russian space station ended March 23, 2001, as Mir re-entered the Earth's atmosphere near Nadi, Fiji, and fell into the South Pacific Ocean. Near the end of its life, there were plans for private interests to purchase Mir, possibly for use as the first orbital television/movie studio, but the station was deemed too unstable to be safely used any further. Many in the space community still felt that at least some of Mir was salvageable and that considering the extremely high costs of getting material into orbit, simply disposing of Mir was a seriously wasted opportunity.

In addition to Soviet/Russian cosmonauts, Mir hosted international scientists and U.S. astronauts.

Mir modules

The Mir space station was constructed by connecting several Mir modules, each launched into orbit separately by the Proton rocket, except for the Docking Module, which was brought to Mir by the Space Shuttle.

Module Launch Date Launch vehicle Docking Date Mass Soyuz Purpose

Core February 19, 1986 Proton 8K82K N/A 20,100 kg N/A Living Quarters

Kvant-1 March 31, 1987 Proton 8K82K ~April 9, 1987 10,000 kg TM-2 Astronomy

Kvant-2 November 26, 1989 Proton 8K82K December 6, 1989 19,640 kg TM-8 Newer, more sophisticated life support systems.

Kristall May 31, 1990 Proton 8K82K June 10, 1990 19,640 kg TM-9 Technology, material processing, geophysics and astrophysics laboratory

Spektr May 20, 1995 Proton 8K82K June 1, 1995 19,640 kg TM-21 House experiments for the US-Soviet Cooperation program.

Docking Module November 12, 1995 STS-74 Atlantis November 15, 1995 6,134 kg TM-22 Used as a docking port for the Space Shuttle.

Priroda April 23, 1996 Proton 8K82K April 26, 1996 19,000 kg TM-23 Remote sensing module

Core Module

The Core Module provided living quarters and station control. It was equipped with six docking ports, and it served as a core of the multi-modular space station. It was launched on February 19, 1986 at 21:28 UTC from Baikonur LC200 with a Proton 8K82K. Its initial orbit had a Perigee of 387 km and Apogee of 395 km. The inclination was 51.6 deg for the duration of the station (and is the same for the International Space Station). The initial period was 92.4 min.

Although the Core Module resembled Salyut 6 and Salyut 7, there was also major differences between them. Because most of the additional instruments can be placed onboard "add-on" modules, much of the scientific equipment found on Salyut space stations were absent. It is equipped with six docking ports, and it served as a core of the later multi-modular space station.

Kvant-1

Kvant-1 (means "quantum") was originally planned to dock with Salyut 7 , Mir's predecessor. The module experienced technical problems during its development, however, and it was reassigned for Mir. The module carried the first set of six gyroscopes for altitude control. The module also carried instruments for X-ray and ultraviolet astrophysical observation.

The initial rendezvous of the Kvant-1 module with Mir on April 5, 1987 was troubled by the failure of the onboard control system. After the failure of the second attempt to dock, the onboard cosmonauts conducted a spacewalk to fix the problem. They found a trash bag between the module and the station, which prevented the docking. The bag was left in orbit after the departure of one of the cargo ships. They removed the bag and completed docking on April 12.

Kvant-2

The Kvant-2 module was based on a TKS transport spacecraft. It contained scientific instruments and the crew's shower. It also contained a second set of gyroscopes that was mounted on the exterior of the spacecraft, and a new life support system for recycling water and generating oxygen.

It was divided into three sections. One of them was a large airlock featuring a one-metre hatch. It was used for conducting spacewalks and thus contained a special backpack. Its size and functions are similar to the US Manned Maneuvering Unit.

Kristall

Kristall (meaning "crystal" in Russian) was a technology, material processing, geophysics and astrophysics laboratory.

The main purpose of the Kristall module was to serve as a docking port for the Soviet's Buran-class space shuttle. This never happened as the Soviet's space shuttle program was terminated in the 1990s, and the module was used later to serve as the docking port of the American Space Shuttle instead.

Other equipments included the Crater-V electrical furnace, the Svetlana experiment, and the experiments Buket, Marina and Glazar. The Crater-V electrical furnace was designed for the purpose of creating high quality gallium arsenide and zinc oxide crystals. The Svetlana experiment included a small greenhouse for the cultivation of plants, equipped with a source of light and a feeding system. Finally, the experiments Buket, Marina and Glazar were designed for ultraviolet astronomy observations.

Spektr

Spektr served as the living and working space for American astronauts. The module moved positions on the station on July 17, 1995 to its final position by the robotic arm aboard the station.

Docking Module

During the STS-71 mission, Atlantis docked directly with the Kristall module, using the docking port intended for the Soviet-era Buran shuttle. In order to provide sufficient clearance between the shuttle and Mir's solar arrays, the Kristall module had to be shifted from its usual position to Mir's axial docking port. This left only one docking port for use by Soyuz or Progress vehicles, preventing Mir from receiving supplies, exchanging crews, or replacing a docked Soyuz.

The problem was solved by attaching the Docking Module to Krystall's docking port, thereby providing enough clearance for a shuttle to dock with Mir without moving Kristall or coming too close to the station's solar arrays.

Priroda

Priroda conducted Earth remote sensing.

Before, during and after the Shuttle-Mir Program, Mir was tended and resupplied by manned Soyuz capsules and unmanned Progress cargo vehicles.

Before the Russian Revolution a "mir" was a piece of land worked by a community of peasants. There was very strong social pressure against peasants leaving the land, because taxes were levied on the mir as a whole. If some peasants left, the remaining peasants would have to pay more per person.

International cooperation

Starting from March 1995 seven U.S. astronauts consecutively spent 28 months on Mir. During their stay the space station went through rough times and several acute emergencies occurred, notably a large fire on February 23, 1997, and a collision with a Progress (unmanned) cargo ship on June 25, 1997. In both occasions complete evacuation (there was a Soyuz escape craft for return to earth) was avoided by a narrow margin. The second disaster left a hole in the Spektr module, which then was sealed off from the rest of the station. Several space walks were needed to restore full power to Mir (ironically, one of the "space walks" was inside the Spektr module from which all the air had escaped).

The cooperation between the U.S. and Russia proved far from easy. Distrust, lack of coordination, language problems, different views of each others' responsibilities and divergent interests caused many problems. After the emergencies, the U.S. Congress and NASA considered whether the U.S. should abandon the program out of concern for astronauts' safety. NASA administrator Daniel S. Goldin decided to continue the program. In June 1998, the final U.S. Mir astronaut Andy Thomas, who was actually an Australian, left the station aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery.

The story of Phase One is described in great detail by Bryan Burrough in his book Dragonfly: NASA and the Crisis Aboard Mir (1998).

The Mir space station was originally planned to be followed by a Mir 2, and elements of that project, including the core module (now called Zvezda) which was labeled as "Mir-2" for quite some time in the factory, are now an integral part of the International Space Station.

The Vostok programme (translated as "East") was a Soviet human spaceflight project that succeeded in putting a person into Earth orbit for the first time. The programme developed the Vostok spacecraft from the Zenit spy satellite project and adapted the Vostok rocket from an existing ICBM design. Just before the first release of the name Vostok to the press, it was a classified word.

A series of prototype Vostoks, including at least five with animals and some with a test dummy aboard, were used to qualify the spacecraft for human flight. Dates given are dates of spacecraft launch.

Sputnik 4 (Korabl-Sputnik 1) - May 15, 1960.

Sputnik 5 (Korabl-Sputnik 2) - August 19, 1960.

Sputnik 6 (Korabl-Sputnik 3) - December 1, 1960.

Sputnik 9 (Korabl-Sputnik 4) - March 9, 1961.

Sputnik 10 (Korabl-Sputnik 5) - March 25, 1961.

Vostok 1 - April 12, 1961. First human spaceflight.

Vostok 2 - August 6, 1961. First full day in space.

Vostok 3 - August 11, 1962, and Vostok 4 - August 12, 1962. First dual flight.

Vostok 5 - June 14, 1963. Longest solo spaceflight of the twentieth century.

Vostok 6 - June 16, 1963. First woman in space.

Another seven Vostok flights were originally planned, going through to April of 1966, but these were cancelled and the components recycled into the Voskhod programme, which was intended more towards performing stunt flights and achieving Soviet "firsts" in space.

The Vostok (translated as East) was a type of spacecraft built by the Soviet Union's space programme for human spaceflight.

The craft consisted of a spherical descent module (mass 2.46 tonnes, diameter 2.3 meters), which housed the cosmonaut, instruments and escape system, and a conical instrument module (mass 2.27 tonnes,

2.25 m long, 2.43 m wide), which contained propellant and the engine system. On reentry, the cosmonaut would eject from the craft at about 7,000 m (23,000 ft) and descend via parachute, while the capsule would land separately.

The Vostok capsule did not have any thrusters. As such, the reentry path and orientation could not be controlled after the capsule had separated from the engine system. This meant that the capsule had to be protected from friction heat on all sides, thus explaining the spherical design (as opposite to Project Mercury's conical design), which allows for maximum volume, while minimizing the external surface. The only way for some control of the capsule was in the positioning of the heavy equipment, which was placed in such a manner that maximized the chance of the cosmonaut enduring g-forces while in a horizontal position. Even then, the cosmonaut experienced 8 to 9 g-forces.

The Vostok spacecraft was originally designed for use both as a camera platform (for the Soviet Union's first spy satellite program, Zenit) and as a manned spacecraft. This dual-use design was crucial in gaining Communist Party support for the program. The basic Vostok design has remained in use for some forty years, gradually adapted for a range of other unmanned satellites. The descent module design was reused, in heavily-modified form, by the Voskhod programme.

There were several models of the Vostok leading up to the manned version:

Vostok 1K - prototype spacecraft. Used to test basic systems and prove the concept. Vostok 2K - photo-reconnaissance and signals intelligence spacecraft . Later named Zenit-2. Vostok 3K - Manned spacecraft.

Vostok spacecraft

Vostok 3KA spacecraft specifications

Reentry Module: Vostok SA. Also known as: Spuskaemiy apparat - 'Sharik' (sphere).

Crew Size: 1

Length: 2.3 m

Diameter: 2.3 m

Mass: 2,460 kg

Heat Shield Mass: 837 kg

Recovery equipment: 151 kg

Parachute deploys at 2.5 km altitude

Crew seat and provisions: 336 kg

Crew ejects at 7 km altitude

Ballistic reentry acceleration: 8 g (78 m/s²)

Equipment Module: Vostok PA. Also known as: Priborniy otsek.

Length: 2.25 m

Diameter: 2.43 m

Mass: 2,270 kg

Equipment in pressurized compartment

RCS Propellants: Cold gas (nitrogen)

RCS Propellants: 20 kg

Main Engine (TDU): 397 kg

Main Engine Thrust: 15.83 kN

Main Engine Propellants: Nitrous oxide/amine

Main Engine Propellants: 275 kg

Main Engine Isp: 266 s (2.61 kN·s/kg)

Main Engine Burn Time: 1 minute (typical retro burn = 42 seconds)

Spacecraft delta v: 155 m/s

Electrical System: Batteries

Electric System: 0.20 average kW

Electric System: 24.0 kW·h

Total Mass:4,730 kg

Endurance: Supplies for 10 days in orbit

Launch Vehicle: Vostok 8K72K

Typical orbit: 177 km x 471 km, 64.9 inclinaton

Vostok rocket

Vostok 8K72K

Stages 3

0 - Strap-on Boosters Engines 4 x RD-107-8D74-1959

Thrust 4 x 970.86 kN = 3,883.4 kN

Burn time 118 seconds

Fuels Lox/Kerosene

1 - Core Stage Engines 1 x RD-108-8D75-1959

Thrust 912 kN

Burn time 301 seconds

Fuels Lox/Kerosene

2 - Final Stage Engine 1 x RD-0109

Thrust 54.5 kN

Burn time 365 seconds

Fuels Lox/Kerosene

Launch Vehicle 1st Launch December 22, 1960

Payload LEO 65-deg 4,725 kg

Payload Lunar probe 500 kg

The Vostok rocket was a derivative of the Soviet R-7 ICBM designed for the human spaceflight programme but later used for other satellite launches.

The major versions of the rocket were:

8K72 - used to launch the early Luna spacecraft and the prototype Vostok spacecraft

8K72K - a refined version of the above. This was the version actually used for human spaceflight

8A92 - used for launching Zenit reconnaissance satellites throughout the 1960s

8A92M - modified version for launching Meteor weather satellites into high orbits.

On March 18, 1980 a Vostok-2M rocket exploded on its launch pad at Plesetsk during a fueling operation, killing 48. An investigation into a similar -- but avoided -- accident revealed that the substitution of lead-based for tin-based solder in hydrogen peroxide filters had resulted in the breakdown of the H2O2 and the resulting explosion.

Vostok 8K72K specifications

Stage Number: 0 - Strap-on Boosters; 4 x Vostok 8K72K-0

Gross Mass: 43,300 kg

Empty Mass: 3,710 kg

Thrust (vac): 4 x 99,000 kgf (971 kN) = 3.88 MN

Isp: 313 s (3.07 kN·s/kg)

Burn time: 118 s

Isp(sl): 256 s (2.51 kN·s/kg)

Diameter: 2.68 m

Span: 8.35 m

Length: 19.00 m

Propellants: Lox/Kerosene

Engines: 1 x RD-107-8D74-1959 per booster = 4

Stage Number: 1 - Core stage; 1 x Vostok 8K72K-1

Gross Mass: 100,400 kg

Empty Mass: 6,800 kg

Thrust (vac): 912 kN

Isp: 315 s (3.09 kN·s/kg)

Burn time: 301 s

Isp(sl): 248 s (2.43 kN·s/kg)

Diameter: 2.99 m

Length: 28.00 m

Propellants: Lox/Kerosene

Engine: 1 x RD-108-8D75-1959

Vostok Rocket Family (NASA)

Stage Number: 2 - Final stage; 1 x Vostok 8K72K-2

Gross Mass: 7,775 kg

Empty Mass: 1,440 kg

Thrust (vac): 54.5 kN

Isp: 326 s (3.20 kN·s/kg)

Burn time: 365 s

Diameter: 2.56 m

Span: 2.56 m

Length: 2.84 m

Propellants: Lox/Kerosene

Engine: 1 x RD-0109

The Voskhod was a spacecraft built by the Soviet Union's space program for human spaceflight (see Voskhod programme). It was a development of and a follow-on to the Vostok spacecraft.

The craft consisted of a spherical descent module (diameter 2.3 meters), which housed the cosmonauts, and instruments, and a conical instrument module (mass 2.27 tonnes, 2.25 m long, 2.43 m wide), which contained propellant and the engine system.

The Voskhod spacecraft is basically a Vostok spacecraft that has had a backup, solid fuel retro rocket, added to the top of the descent module. The ejection seat was removed and two or three crew couches were added to the interior at a 90 degree angle to that of the Vostok crew position. In the case of Voskhod 2, an inflatable exterior airlock was also added to the descent module opposite the entry hatch. After use, the airlock was jettisoned. There was no provision for crew escape in the event of a launch or landing emergency. A solid fuel braking rocket was also added to the parachute lines to provide for a softer landing at touchdown. This was necessary because, unlike the Vostok, the crew lands with the Voskhod descent module.

In order to create more space inside the descent module, the cosmonaut's ejection seat was removed, meaning that the Voskhod crews would return to Earth inside their spacecraft, unlike the Vostok cosmonauts who ejected and parachuted down separately. The lack of space also meant that the Voskhod 1 crew did not wear space suits. Both crew members wore spacesuits on the Voshkod 2 mission, as it involved an EVA and using an airlock. The second crew member wore a spacesuit as a precaution against the possibility of accidental descent module depressurization. Because the crew was required to land with the descent module, a new landing system to slow the craft was developed. This added a small solid-fuel rocket to the parachutes lines.

Soyuz (union) is a series of spacecraft designed by Sergey Korolyov for the Soviet Union's space program. The Soyuz succeeded the Voskhod spacecraft design and were originally built as part of the Luna program. The spacecraft are launched by the Soyuz launch vehicle, as part of the Soyuz program and the later missions of the Zond program. They were later used to carry cosmonauts to and from the Salyut and Mir space stations and are now used for transport to and from the International Space Station. The first unmanned launch of the Soyuz was on November 28, 1966. The first manned launch of the Soyuz was on April 23, 1967.

Design

Soyuz spacecraft consists of three parts: from front to back, a roughly spherical orbital module, a small smooth reentry module, and a cylindrical service module with solar panels attached. The first two

portions are habitable living space. By moving as much as possible into the orbital module, which does not have to be shielded or decelerated during atmospheric re-entry, the Soyuz is both larger and lighter than the Apollo spacecraft's command module. The Apollo command module had six cubic meters of living space and a mass of 5000 kg; the three-part Soyuz provided the same crew with nine cubic meters of living space, an airlock, and a service module for the mass of the Apollo capsule alone.

Soyuz can carry up to three cosmonauts and provide life support for them for up to 3.2 days. The life support system provides a nitrogen/oxygen atmosphere at sea level partial pressures. The atmosphere is regenerated through KO2 cylinders, which absorb most of the CO2 and water produced by the crew and regenerates the oxygen, and LiOH cylinders which absorb leftover CO2.

The vehicle is protected during launch by a nose fairing, which is jettisoned after passing through the atmosphere. It has an automatic docking system. The ship can be operated automatically, or by a pilot independently of ground control.

The forepart of the spacecraft is the orbital module. It houses all the equipment that will not be needed for reentry, such as experiments, cameras or cargo. It also contains the docking port and can be isolated from the descent module to act as an airlock if needed. This separation also lets the orbital module be customized to the mission with less risk to the life-critical descent module.

The descent module is used for launch and the journey back to Earth. It is covered by a heat-resistant covering to protect it during re-entry. It is slowed initially by the atmosphere, then by a braking parachute, followed by the main parachute which slows the craft for landing. At one metre above the ground, solid-fuel braking engines mounted behind the heat shield are fired to give a soft landing. One of the design requirements for the reentry module was for it to have the highest possible volumetric efficiency (internal volume divided by hull area). The best shape for this is a sphere, but such a shape can provide no lift, which results in a purely ballistic reentry. Ballistic reentries are hard on the occupants due to high deceleration and can't be steered beyond their initial deorbit burn. That is why it was decided to go with the 'headlight' shape that the Soyuz uses - a hemispherical forward area joined by a barely angled cone (seven degrees) to a classic spherical section heat shield. This shape allows a small amount of lift to be generated due to the unequal weight distribution. The nickname was thought up at a time when nearly every headlight was circular.

At the back of the vehicle is the service module. It has a pressurized container shaped like a bulging can that contains systems for temperature control, electric power supply, long-range radio communications, radio telemetry, instruments for orientation and control. A non-pressurized part of the service module contains the main engine and a spare: liquid-fuel propulsion systems for maneuvering in orbit and initiating the descent back to Earth. The ship also has a system of low-thrust engines for orientation. Outside the service module are the sensors for the orientation system and the solar array, which is oriented towards the sun by rotating the ship.

Variants

The first manned version of the Soyuz was called 7K-OK. It could support up to three crewmembers in a shirt-sleeve environment. Although it could feature a docking fixture, this was passive and only allowed the two spacecraft to be joined, with no facility for internal transfer. Cosmonauts had to spacewalk to the other spacecraft, as done on Soyuz 4 and 5. This spacecraft was also designed to fly to the moon.

The 7K-L1 was designed to launch men from the Earth to circle the moon. It was based on the 7K-OK with several components stripped out to reduce the vehicle weight. The most notable modifications included the removal of the orbital module (extra space for living quarters or equipment) and reserve parachute. It was the primary hope for Soviet circumlunar flight. Tests in the Zond program from 1968-1970 produced multiple failures in the 7K-L1's re-entry systems. The goal was scrapped, along with the two remaining 7K-L1s.

The next manned version of the Soyuz was the 7K-OKS. This was designed for space station flights and now had a docking port that allowed internal transfer between spacecraft.

It flew only twice manned. During the reentry of the second flight, Soyuz 11, the crew were killed when the capsule depressurised during the re-entry phase.

The complete redesign that resulted led to the 7K-T. It deleted one crew space so that all cosmonauts could wear spacesuits during launch and reentry. The replacement of solar panels with batteries limited it to about two days of undocked flight.

A modified version of this spacecraft flew on Soyuz 13 where instead of the docking system was a large Orion 2 astrophysical camera for imaging the sky and Earth.

Another modification was the 7K-T/A9 used for the flights to the military Almaz space station. This featured the ability for remote control of the space station and a new parachute system but other than that the changes are still classified and unknown.

The Soyuz ASTP spacecraft was designed for use during the Apollo Soyuz Test Project. It featured design changes mandated by the Americans to make the spacecraft safer. The Soyuz ASTP featured new solar panels for increased mission length, an androgynous universal docking mechanism instead of the standard male mechanism and modifications to the environmental control system to lower the cabin pressure to 0.68 atmospheres (69 kPa) prior to docking with Apollo. The last flight of this version, Soyuz 22 again replaced the docking port with a camera.

The next major redesign was the Soyuz T version (Transportnyi meaning transport). It featured solar panels allowing longer missions, a revised Igla rendezvous system and new translation/attitude thruster system on the Service module.

The Soyuz TM crew transports (M - Modifitsirovannyi meaning modified) were introduced in 1986 to service the Mir space station. It added to the Soyuz T new docking and rendezvous, radio communications, emergency and integrated parachute/landing engine systems. The new Kurs rendezvous and docking system permitted the Soyuz TM to maneuver independently of the station, without the station making "mirror image" maneuvers to match unwanted translations introduced by earlier models' aft-mounted attitude control.

A slightly modified Soyuz TMA is now also being used (A - Antropometricheskii meaning anthropometric). This features several changes to accommodate requirements requested by the American space agency NASA, including more latitude in the height and weight of the crew and improved parachute systems. It is also the first expendable vehicle to feature "glass cockpit" technology.

The unmanned Progress spacecraft were derived from Soyuz and are used for servicing space stations. The Chinese Shenzhou spacecraft is also heavily influenced by the design of the Soyuz. In 2004, Russian space officials announced that the Soyuz will be replaced by early 2011 with the new Kliper and Parom spacecrafts.

ISS Progress cargo spacecraftThe Progress is a Russian expendable unmanned freighter spacecraft; it was derived from the Soyuz spacecraft, and is launched with the Soyuz launch vehicle. It is currently used to supply the International Space Station, but was originally used to supply Russian space stations for many years. There are three to four flights of the Progress spacecraft to the ISS per year. Each spacecraft remains docked until shortly before the new one arrives. Then it is filled with waste, disconnected, deorbited, and destroyed in the atmosphere.

It has carried fuel and other supplies to all the space stations since Salyut 6. The idea for the Progress came from the realisation that in order for long duration space missions to be possible, there would have to be constant source of supplies. It had been determined that a cosmonaut needed 30 kg of consumables a day; this equates to 5.4 tonnes over a 6 month stay. It was impractical to launch this along with cargo of the Space Shuttle missions, or

in the small space available in the Soyuz.

Design

Progress is of much the same size and shape as Soyuz. It consists of three modules:

A pressurised forward module. This carries the supplies for the crew such as scientific equipment, clothes, prepackaged and fresh food, and letters from home. The docking drogue is similar to that of the Soyuz but features ducting for the UDMH fuel and N2O4 oxidiser.

A fuel compartment. The reentry module of the Soyuz was replaced with an unpressurized propellant and refueling compartment with ducting along the outside of the spacecraft. This meant that if a leak occurred, the poisonous gas would not enter the station's atmosphere. The fuel is carried in two tanks.

A propulsion module. The propulsion module, at the rear of the spacecraft, remained unchanged and contains the orientation engines used for the automatic docking. It may be used to boost the orbit of the station once docked.

Reduction in weight was possible because the Progress was designed to be unmanned and disposable. This means that there is no need for bulky life support systems and heat shields. The spacecraft also has no ability to split into separate modules. After undocking, the spacecraft performs a retrofiring and burns up in the atmosphere.

Versions

There were many small variations between the different flights, but the major upgrades are reflected in the change of name.

Progress

There were 42 spacecraft under the name Progress, the last one being launched in May 1990.

The bureau in charge of designing the freighter was TsKBEM (now RKK Energia). They began work on the design in mid-1973, assigning Progress the rather cryptic designation 11F615A15. The design was complete by February, 1974, and the first production model was ready for launch in November 1977. Progress 1 launched on January 20, 1978 aboard the same rocket used to launch the Soyuz. It still featured the same launch shroud as the Soyuz, though this was purely for aerodynamic purposes as the launch escape system had been deactivated.

This first version of Progress had a mass of 7,020 kg and carried 2,300 kg of cargo, or 30% of its launch weight. It had the same diameter as the Soyuz at 2.2 metres, but was 8 metres in length—slightly longer. The autonomous flight time was 3 days, the same time as that of the Soyuz ferry. It could spend one month docked. Progress always docked to the aft port of the station it was resupplying.

Launch weight 7,020-7,249 kg

Weight of cargo (Progress 1-24) ~2,300 kg

Weight of cargo (Progress 24-42) ~2,500 kg

Length 7.94 m

Diameter of cargo modules 2.2 m

Maximum diameter 2.72 m

Volume of cargo compartment 6.6 m³

Progress M

The upgrade Progress M was first launched in August 1989. The first 43 flights all went to Mir; following Mir's re-entry, there have been about 10 flights to the International Space Station, and more are scheduled.

It is essentially the same spacecraft as the Progress, but it features improvements from the Soyuz T and Soyuz TM. It can spend up to 30 days in autonomous flight and is able to carry 100 kg more to Mir. Also, contrary to the old Progress crafts, it can return items to Earth. This is accomplished by using the Raduga capsule, which can carry up to 150 kg of cargo. It is 1.5 m long and 60 cm in diameter and has a "dry weight" of 350 kg. Progress M can dock to the forward port of the station and still transfer fuel. It uses the same rendezvous system as the Soyuz, and it features solar panels for the first time.

Launch weight 7,130 kg

Cargo weight 2,600 kg

Dry cargo weight 1,500 kg

Liquid cargo weight 1,540 kg

Length 7.23 m

Solar array span 10.6 m

Dry cargo compartment volume 7.6 m³

Diameter of cargo modules 2.2 m

Maximum diameter 2.72 m

Progress M1

Progress M1 was another variant, capable of carrying more propellant (but less total cargo) to the stations. There have been 11 of these flights.

Mass: 7,150 kg

Capacity cargo: 2,230 kg

Capacity propellant: 1,950 kg

Capacity dry cargo: 1,800 kg

Current status

This spacecraft is still in use today for the International Space Station. Between February 1, 2003 and July 26, 2005, it was the only spacecraft available to transport large quantities of supplies to the station, as the Space Shuttle fleet was grounded after the breakup of the Columbia at the end of STS-107. For ISS missions, the Progress M1 variant is used, which moves the water tanks from the propellant and refueling module to the pressurized section, and as a result is able to carry more propellant.

Like the Soyuz (and unlike most American space ships), the Progress has an autonomous navigation system that usually allows for automatic docking with the space station. It can be manually overridden if necessary.

The European Space Agency (ESA) is planning its own supply freighter called the Automated Transfer Vehicle. The first of these, the Jules Verne, is due for launch in mid 2007. It will be able to carry up to 7.5 tonnes of cargo into space, roughly three times as much as the Progress, and will be launched every 12 months by an Ariane 5 rocket.

The new Crew Exploration Vehicle, which will replace the Space Shuttle after 2010, will have, like Progress, two unmanned variations of the CEV. One version will retain the pressurized crew module, but will be outfitted with storage lockers that can allow astronauts to bring fresh equipment onboard, along with being able to return experiments to Earth. Another version, with the crew module replaced with a docking ring on an enlarged service module, will allow the ISS to be boosted into a higher (350+ mi.) orbit, allowing the ISS to avoid most of the atmosphere and reducing the need to reboost the station on a regular basis.

RKK Energia has proposed as a replacement for the Progress spacecraft a new spacecraft by the name of Parom which means ferry in Russian. This new spacecraft would retrieve either the proposed Kliper or any other cargo container with a Russian airlock up to 15 tons back to the ISS.

Shuttle Buran

For other uses of the term, see Buran.

Space Shuttles

US Space Shuttle program

Enterprise (atmospheric tests)

Pathfinder (ground facilities tests)

Columbia (destroyed 2003)

Challenger (destroyed 1986)

Discovery (active)

Atlantis (active)

Endeavour (grounded for maintenance)

Explorer (replica for museum display)

Soviet Shuttle Buran program

Buran (retired, damaged)

Ptichka (unfinished)

2.01 (unfinished)

2.02 (dismantled)

2.03 (dismantled)

The external similarities to the U.S. STS are apparent.

Buran piggybacked on an An-225 carrier

Buran shuttle before liftoff.

The Soviet reusable spacecraft program Buran ( meaning "snowstorm" or "blizzard" in Russian) began in 1976 at TsAGI as a response to the United States Space Shuttle program. Soviet politicians were convinced that the Space Shuttle would be an effective military weapon since the U.S. Department of Defense took part in the project, and could pose a potential threat to the balance of power during the Cold War. The project was the largest and the most expensive in the history of Soviet space exploration.

Buran is partially similar to the NASA Space Shuttle, while many features are more advanced.

Similarities to NASA Space Shuttle

Because Buran's debut followed that of Space Shuttle Columbia's, and because there were striking visual similarities between the two shuttle systems—a state of affairs which recalled the similarity between the Tupolev Tu-144 and Concorde supersonic airliners—many speculated that Cold War espionage played a role in the development of the Soviet shuttle. It is now known, however, that, while externally it was aerodynamically similar to the Space Shuttle, internally it was all engineered and developed domestically, many features being significantly more advanced.

Key differences from the NASA Space Shuttle

Buran was not an integral part of the system, but rather a payload for the Energia launcher. Other payloads than Buran, with mass as high as 80 metric tons, could be lifted to space by Energia, as was the case on its first launch.

Energia was designed from the start to be configured for a variety of uses, rather than just a shuttle launcher. The heaviest configuration (never built) would have been able to launch 200 tons into orbit.

As Buran was designed to be capable of both manned and unmanned flight, it had automated landing capability; the manned version was never operational.

The orbiter had no main rocket engines, freeing space and weight for additional payload; the largest cylindrical structure is the Energia carrier-rocket, not just a fuel tank.

The boosters used liquid propellant (kerosene/oxygen).

The Energia carrier, including the main engines, was designed to be reusable but funding cuts meant that a reusable version of Energia was never completed.

The U.S. Space Shuttle has reusable main engines in the orbiter and reusable Solid Rocket Boosters but requires a new External Tank for each flight, as the tank is not recovered and is allowed to burn up in the atmosphere Buran could lift 30 metric tons into orbit in its standard configuration, compared to the Space Shuttle's 25 metric tons.

The high lift-to-drag ratio of Buran is 6.5 against 5.5 for the Space Shuttle.

Buran was designed to return 20 metric tons of payload from orbit, as against 15 metric tons for the Space Shuttle orbiter.

The thermal protection tiles on the Buran and U.S. Space Shuttles are laid out differently. Soviet engineers believed their design to be thermodynamically superior. Buran's TPS does not have the grey Reinforced Carbon-Carbon (RCC) panels or nosecap of the STS, damage to the former being the primary cause of the destruction of the Space Shuttle Columbia in 2003.

Buran's equivalent of the shuttle's Orbital Maneuvering System used safer propellants with lower toxicity (GOX/Kerosene), and gave higher performance.

Buran was designed to be moved to the launch pad horizontally on special train-tracks, and then erected at the launch site. This enabled a much faster roll out than the US Space Shuttle, which is moved vertically and hence very slowly.

Technical data

Mass breakdown

Mass of Total Structure / Landing Systems: 42,000 kg

Mass of Functional Systems and Propulsion: 33,000 kg

SSME 14,200

Maximum Payload: 30,000 kg

Maximum liftoff weight: 105,000 kg

Dimensions

Length: 36.37 m

Wingspan: 23.92 m

Height on Gear: 16.35 m

Payload bay length: 18.55 m

Payload bay diameter: 4.65 m

Wing glove sweep: 78 degrees

Wing sweep: 45 degrees

Propulsion

Total orbital maneuvering engine thrust: 17,600 kgf

Orbital Maneuvering Engine Specific Impuse: 362 sec

Total Maneuvering Impulse: 5 kgf-sec

Total Reaction Control System Thrust: 14,866 kgf

Average RCS Specific Impulse: 275-295 sec

Normal Maximum Propellant Load: 14,500 kg

Development

The Soviet reusable space-craft program has its roots in the very beginning of the space age, the late 1950s. The idea of Soviet reusable space flight is very old, though it was neither continuous, nor consistently organized. Before Buran no project of the programme reached production.

The idea saw its first iteration in the Burya high-altitude jet aircraft, which reached the prototype stage. Several test flights are known, before it was cancelled by order of the Central Committee. The Burya had the goal of delivering a nuclear payload, presumably to the United States, and then returning to base. The cancellation was based on a final decision to develop ICBMs. The next iteration of the idea was Zvezda from the early 1960s, which also reached a prototype stage, and it has been finalized a service module for the International Space Station. After Zvezda, there was a hiatus in reusable projects until Buran.

The development of the Buran began in the early 1970s as a response to the U.S. Space Shuttle program. While the Soviet engineers favoured a smaller, lighter lifting body vehicle, the military leadership pushed for a direct, full scale copy of the delta wing Space Shuttle, in an effort to maintain the strategic parity between the superpowers.

The construction of the shuttles began in 1980, and by 1984 the first full-scale Buran was rolled out. The first suborbital test flight of a scale-model took place as early as July 1983. As the project progressed, five additional scale-model flights were performed. A test vehicle was constructed with four jet engines mounted at the rear; this vehicle is usually referred to as OK-GLI, or as the "Buran aerodynamic analogue". The jets were used to take off from a normal landing strip, and once it reached a designated point, the engines were cut and OK-GLI glided back to land. This provided invaluable information about the handling characteristics of the Buran design, and was much more convenient than the carrier plane/air drop method used by the USA and the Enterprise test craft. Twenty-four test flights of OK-GLI were performed after which the shuttle was "worn out".

First flight

The first and only orbital launch of the (unmanned) shuttle Buran 1.01 was at 3:00 UTC on 15 November 1988. It was lifted into orbit by the specially designed Energia booster rocket. The life support system was not installed and no software was installed on the CRT displays.

The shuttle orbited the Earth twice before returning, performing an automated landing on the shuttle runway at Baikonur Cosmodrome.

Part of the launch was televised, but the actual lift-off was not shown. This led to some speculation that the mission may have been fabricated, and that the subsequent landing may not have been from orbit but from a shuttle-carrying aircraft. (Note that in the United States, this procedure was used to test the flight characteristics of the Space Shuttle on approach and landing using the Approach and Landing Test vehicle Space Shuttle Enterprise, so that by the time mission STS-1 drew to a close, the handling characteristics of Space Shuttle Columbia would be known.) Since then, the launch video has been released to the public, confirming that the shuttle did indeed lift off, with the poor weather conditions described by the Russian media at the time easily seen.

Aftermath

After the first flight the project was suspended due to lack of funds and the political situation in the Soviet Union. The two subsequent orbiters, which were due in 1990 (informally Ptichka, meaning "little bird") and 1992 were never completed. The project was officially terminated on June 30, 1993 by President Boris Yeltsin. At the time of its cancellation, 20 billion roubles had been spent on the Buran program. [1]

While lack of money is generally accepted as the reason for the cancellation of the Buran program, there were rumours that the original Buran was so damaged upon return from its only space flight as to make another launch unfeasible. Photographs and videos of the Buran upon landing from orbit do not lend much credence to this hypothesis.

The program was designed to boost national pride, carry out research, and meet technological objectives similar to those of the U.S. shuttle program, including resupply of the Mir space station, which was launched in 1986 and remained in service until 2001. When Mir was finally visited by a space shuttle, the visitor was an American shuttle, not Buran.

The Buran SO, a docking module that was to be used for rendezvous with the Mir space station, was refitted for use with the U.S. Space Shuttles during the Shuttle-Mir missions.

The completed shuttles 1.01 (11F35 K1, "Buran") and 1.02 (11F35 K2, informal "Ptichka"), and the remains of the project are now the property of Kazakhstan. In 2002, the hangar housing the sole space-flown Buran 1.01 orbiter and a mockup of the Energiya booster rocket collapsed due to incomplete maintenance, destroying the vehicle. Eight workers were also killed in the collapse of the building's roof [2].

Burans 2.01 (11F35 K3) and 2.02 (11F35 K4) (a second series with a modified flight-deck design, equipped with Zvezda K-36RB ejection seats for the first manned flights) never left the Tushino factory and remain there in poor condition. Parts from these vehicles are being sold on the Internet.

The partially built Buran 2.03 (11F35 K5) was dismantled when the programme was closed, and no longer exists.

As well as the five "production" Burans, there were eight test vehicles. These were used for static testing or atmospheric trials, and some were merely mock-ups for testing of electrical fittings, crew procedures, etc.

Serial numbers and current status

OK-M (later OK-ML-1) Static test Now at Baikonur Cosmodrome

OK-GLI Aero test

OK-KS Static electrical/integration test Now at the Energia factory in Korolev

OK-MT (later OK-ML-2) Engineering mock-up Now at Baikonur Cosmodrome

OK-??? Static test Status unknown

OK-TVI Static heat/vacuum testbed Status unknown

OK-??? Static test Status unknown

OK-TVA Static test Now in Gorky Park, Moscow

The OK-GLI test vehicle was fitted with four jet engines mounted at the rear (the fuel tank for the engines occupied a quarter of the cargo bay). This Buran could take off under its own power for flight tests, in contrast to the American Enterprise test vehicle, which was entirely unpowered and relied on an air launch.

After the program was cancelled, OK-GLI was stored at Zhukovsky Air Base, near Moscow, and eventually bought by an Australian company, Buran Space Corporation. It was transported by ship to Sydney, Australia via Gothenburg, Sweden [3] — arriving on February 9, 2000 — and appeared as a static tourist attraction under a large temporary structure in Darling Harbour for a few years.[4][5]

Visitors could walk around and inside the vehicle (a walkway was built along the cargo bay), and plans were in place for a tour of various cities in Australia and Asia. The owners, however, went into bankruptcy, and the vehicle was moved into the open air, where it suffered some deterioration and vandalism.

In September 2004 a German reporter team found the Shuttle near Bahrain. It was bought by the Sinsheim Auto & Technik Museum, to be transported to Germany in 2005. Due to legal issues, it still remains (as of June 2006) in Bahrain.

The 2003 grounding of the U.S. Space Shuttles caused many to wonder whether the Russian Energia launcher or Buran shuttle could be brought back into service. By then, however, all of the equipment for both (including the vehicles themselves) had fallen into disrepair or been repurposed after falling into disuse with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Energia

You can help Wikipedia by introducing appropriate citations.

An artist's conception of a Soviet space shuttle lifting off atop the immense Energia booster.The Energia (or Energiya, in Russian, meaning Energy) rocket was a Soviet rocket that was designed by NPO Energia to serve as a heavy-lift expendable launch system as well as a booster for the Buran Space Shuttle. It had the capacity to place around 100 metric tons in Low Earth orbit (LEO), although it could have been (but never was) upgraded for heavier payloads comparable to (or even greater than) the LEO capacity of the Saturn V. It was first test-launched 21:30 15 May 1987 with the Polyus spacecraft (UKSS military payload), where the Energia itself functioned well, but the Polyus failed to reach orbit due to a malfunction of its own attitude control system after separation from Energia. The only other flight to orbit has been the successful mission in which the unmanned Buran orbiter (space shuttle) was brought to orbit, in 1988. Both the Energia and Buran programs were designed as part of the backbone itself of the maintenance of strategic parity between the two superpowers.

Work on the Energia/Buran system began in 1976 after the decision was made to cancel the unsuccessful N1 rocket. The cancelled N1 rocket-based Manned Lunar Launch Facilities and Infrastructure were used for Energia (notably the huge horizontal assembly building). Energia also replaced the "Vulkan" concept, which was a design based on the Proton rocket and using the same toxic hypergolic fuels, but much larger and more powerful.

Three major variants were planned after the original configuration, each with vastly different payloads. The Energia M was the smallest design configuration. The number of Zenit boosters was reduced from four to two, and instead of four RD-0120 engines in the core, it had only one. It was designed to replace the Proton rocket, but lost the 1993 competition to the Angara rocket. The Energia-2 was designed to be completely reusable. While the Zenit boosters were always designed to be reused, the core would be expended in each launch. With the Energia-2, the core would be capable of re-entering and gliding to a landing, presumably using technology developed for the Buran. The final unflown configuration was also the largest. With eight Zenit booster rockets and an Energia-M core as an upper stage, the "Vulkan" (which was interestingly the same name of another Soviet heavy lift rocket that was cancelled years earlier) or "Hercules" configuration could have launched a stunning 175 tonnes into orbit.

The Energia rocket only flew twice, the first on May 15, 1987, with the Polyus military payload, and the second on November 15, 1988, with the Buran Shuttle. Production of Energia rockets ended with the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Buran shuttle project. Ever since, there have been persistent rumors of the renewal of production, but given the current market realities, that is highly unlikely.

Comparisons between Energia and Saturn V

There is much debate in the space enthusiast community about which was the better or more powerful booster, the Energia or the Saturn V. In its most powerful configuration, the Energia was equipped with eight Zenit strap-on boosters and a high energy H2 upper stage; this configuration exceeded the LEO payload capability (175 metric tons vs. 120 metric tons) of the Saturn V, although it never flew. In the configuration it did fly in (four Zenit strap-ons, single core) the Energia LEO payload was only 80 metric tons, though this is still far and away the only vehicle comparable to the Saturn V to have also actually successfully launched. Both vehicles had a reliability of 100%, though the Energia only flew twice.

It is assumable that if the eight Zenit heavy lift booster Energia had flown, it would have worked perfectly. When considering “what ifs” of that nature, it would have also been interesting to see how good the Saturn V would have become over time with additions such as uprated F1A and J2S engines. Indeed, the Energia perhaps never would have happened at all had not the USA abandoned the Saturn to pursue the STS system, given the reactionary behavior of the Soviet regime in response which led to the Energia/Buran in the first place

One thing is quite beyond speculation however; the Energia and Saturn V vehicles are easily the most powerful and reliable large boosters that ever successfully flew. In all categories: takeoff thrust, launch mass, payload mass, etc. the Saturn V and the Energia are at the top of the list in some order, and every other launch system (with the possible exception of the STS) being a distant third. Had either launch system been maintained in production and had the space agencies enough money to pay for these launchers, the modern state of human affairs in space could be considerably different. It is interesting to note that both vehicles were developed using tremendous resources and effort to make them as good as they were, only to be abandoned shortly after the considerable capital investment made in them. This makes the Energia and Saturn V co-title holders in a more ignominious category: The most expensive and impressive vehicles to have been abandoned so rapidly after proving they worked so well.

Present status

The grounding of the US space shuttles has caused many to wonder aloud whether or not the Russian Energia launcher or Buran shuttle could have been brought back into service. However, the reality of the situation is that all the equipment for Energia and Buran, including the vehicles themselves, have either rotted away or been repurposed since falling into disuse with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Energia lives on, in a sense. The four strap-on liquid-fuel boosters, which burned kerosene and liquid oxygen, were the basis of the Zenit rocket which used the same engines. The engine is the RD-170: a powerful, modern, and efficient design. It is still used on the Baikonur-launched Zenit and on the Sea Launch floating launch platform system, which is built around the Zenit. A half sized derivative of the engine, the RD-180, powers Lockheed Martin's Atlas V, one of the two new U.S. EELV rockets (the other being the Boeing Delta IV). The proposed Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV), a heavy-lift launch vehicle based on the U.S. Space Shuttle, will somewhat resemble the heavy-lifting version of the Energia, but will use two five-segment Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters, with the upper stage using two Apollo-Saturn J-2X motors.

The company S.P. Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation Energia is still in business.

Space Shuttle program

The Space Shuttle Columbia seconds after engine ignition, April 12, 1981 (NASA). The external fuel tank spray-on foam insulation was painted white for the first two missions only. Subsequent missions have had an unpainted tank, thus exposing the orange colored foam insulation. This resulted in a weight saving of over 450 kg (1000 lb) allowing equivalently increased payload capacity to orbit.This article is about the NASA Space Shuttle. For information on the Soviet space shuttle, see the article Shuttle Buran.

NASA's Space Shuttle, officially called Space Transportation System (STS), is the United States government's current manned launch vehicle. The winged shuttle orbiter is launched vertically, carrying

usually five to seven astronauts (although eight have been carried) and up to about 22,700 kg (50,000 lb) of payload into low earth orbit. When its mission is complete, it re-enters the earth's atmosphere and makes an unpowered horizontal landing.

The Shuttle is the first orbital spacecraft designed for partial reusability. It is also the first winged manned spacecraft to achieve orbit and land. It carries large payloads to various orbits, provides crew rotation for the International Space Station (ISS), and performs servicing missions. The orbiter can recover satellites and other payloads from orbit and return them to Earth, but this capacity has not been used often. However, this capability is used to return large payloads from the International Space Station to earth, as the Russian Soyuz has limited capacity for return payloads. Each Shuttle was designed for a projected lifespan of 100 launches or 10 years operational life.

The program started in the late 1960s and has dominated NASA's manned operations since the mid-1970s. According to the Vision for Space Exploration, use of the Space Shuttle will be focused on completing assembly of the ISS in 2010, after which it will be replaced by the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). However, following the STS-114 return-to-flight mission in August 2005, the shuttle was grounded while outstanding safety issues were resolved. It is currently scheduled to launch on July 1, 2006, despite objections from its chief engineer and safety head. [1]

Space Shuttles

US Space Shuttle program

Enterprise (atmospheric tests)

Pathfinder (ground facilities tests)

Columbia (destroyed 2003)

Challenger (destroyed 1986)

Discovery (active)

Atlantis (active)

Endeavour (grounded for maintenance)

Explorer (replica for museum display)

Soviet Shuttle Buran program

Buran (retired, damaged)

Ptichka (unfinished)

2.01 (unfinished)

2.02 (dismantled)

2.03 (dismantled)

Development

The early studies were denoted "Phase A", and in June 1970, "Phase B", which were more detailed and specific.

In 1969 President Richard M. Nixon formed the Space Task Group, chaired by vice president Spiro T. Agnew. They evaluated the shuttle studies to date, and recommended a national space strategy including building a space shuttle.[1]

During early shuttle development there was great debate about the optimal shuttle design that best balanced capability, development cost and operating cost. Ultimately the current design was chosen, using a reusable winged orbiter, solid rocket boosters, and expendable external tank.[1]

The Shuttle program was formally launched on January 5, 1972, when President Nixon announced that NASA would proceed with the development of a reusable Space Shuttle system.[1] The final design was less costly to build and less technically ambitious than earlier fully reusable designs.

The prime contractor for the program was North American Aviation (later Rockwell International), the same company responsible for the Apollo Command/Service Module. The contractor for the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters was Morton Thiokol (now part of Alliant Techsystems), for the external tank, Martin Marietta (now Lockheed Martin), and for the Space shuttle main engines, Rocketdyne.[1]

The first complete Orbiter was originally named Constitution, but a massive write-in campaign from fans of the Star Trek television series convinced the White House to change the name to Enterprise. Amid great fanfare, the Enterprise was rolled out on September 17, 1976, and later conducted a successful series of glide-approach and landing tests that were the first real validation of the design.

The first fully functional Shuttle Orbiter was the Columbia, built in Palmdale, California. It was delivered to Kennedy Space Center on March 25, 1979, and was first launched on April 12, 1981—the 20th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's space flight—with a crew of two. Challenger was delivered to KSC in July 1982, Discovery in November 1983, and Atlantis in April 1985. Challenger was destroyed when it disintegrated during ascent on January 28, 1986, with the loss of all seven astronauts on board. Endeavour was built to replace her (using spare parts originally intended for the other Orbiters) and delivered in May 1991; she was first launched a year later. Seventeen years after Challenger, Columbia was lost, with all seven crew members, during reentry on February 1, 2003, and has not been replaced.

Description

Atlantis sits atop the Mobile Launcher Platform (MLP). It consists of Orbiter (on top), External Tank (at center), and Solid Rocket Boosters (to the right and left of External Tank). Two Tail Service Masts (TSMs) to the either side of the Orbiter's tail provide umbilical connections for propellent loading and electrical power.The Shuttle is a partially reusuable launch system composed of three main assemblies: the reusable Orbiter Vehicle (OV), the expendable External Tank (ET), and the two reusable Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs). The tank and boosters are jettisoned during ascent, so only the orbiter goes into orbit. The vehicle is launched vertically like a conventional rocket, and the orbiter glides to a horizontal landing, after which it is refurbished for reuse.

The Orbiter resembles an airplane with double-delta wings, swept 81° at the inner leading edge and 45° at the outer leading edge. Its vertical stabilizer's leading edge is swept back at a 45° angle. The four elevons, mounted at the trailing edge of the wings, and the rudder/speed brake, attached at the trailing edge of the stabilizer, with the body flap, control the Orbiter during descent and landing.

The Orbiter's crew cabin consists of three levels: the flight deck, the mid-deck, and the utility area. The highest flight deck seats the commander and pilot, two mission specialists in the back. The mid-deck has three more seats for the rest of the crew members. Galley, toilet, sleep locations, storage lockers, and the side hatch for entering/exiting the vehicle is also located there, as is the airlock hatch. The airlock has another hatch into the payload bay. It allows two astronauts, wearing their Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) space suits, to depressurize before a space walk.

The Orbiter has a large 60 by 15 ft (18 m by 4.6 m) payload bay, filling most of the fuselage. The payload bay doors have heat radiators mounted on their inner surfaces, and so are kept open for thermal control while the Shuttle is in orbit. Thermal control is also maintained by adjusting the orientation of the Shuttle relative to Earth and Sun. Inside the payload bay is the Remote Manipulator System, also known as the Canadarm, a robot arm used to retrieve and deploy payloads. Until the loss of Columbia, the Canadarm had been used only on those missions where it was needed. Since the arm is a crucial part of the Thermal Protection Inspection procedures now required for Shuttle flights, it will probably be included on all future flights.

Orbital VehicleThree Space Shuttle Main Engines (SSMEs) are mounted on the Orbiter's aft fuselage in a triangular pattern. The three engines can swivel 10.5 degrees up and down and 8.5 degrees from side to side during ascent to change the direction of their thrust and steer the Shuttle as well as push.

The Orbital Maneuvering System (OMS) provides orbital maneuvers, including insertion, circularization, transfer, rendezvous, abort to orbit, and abort once around.

The Reaction Control System (RCS) provides attitude control and translation along the pitch, roll, and yaw axes during the flight phases of orbit insertion, orbit, and re-entry.

The Thermal Protection System (TPS) covers the outside of the Orbiter, protecting it from the cold soak of -121 °C (-250 °F) in space to the 1649 °C (3000 °F) heat of reentry

The orbiter structure is made primarily from aluminum alloy, although the engine thrust structure is made from titanium.

The External Tank (ET) provides 2.025 million liters (535,000 gallons) of liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen propellant to the SSMEs. It is discarded 8.5 minutes after launch at an altitude of 60 nautical miles (111 km) then breaks up on reentry. The ET is constructed mostly of aluminum-lithium alloy about 1/8 inch thick.

Two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) provide about 83% of the vehicle's thrust at liftoff and during the first stage ascent. They are jettisoned two minutes after launch at a height of about 150,000 feet (45.7 km), then deploy parachutes and land in the ocean to be recovered. The SRB cases are made of steel about 1/2 inch (1.27 cm) thick.

Computerized fly-by-wire digital flight control

The shuttle was one of the earliest craft to use a computerized fly-by-wire digital flight control system. This means no mechanical or hydraulic linkages connect the pilot's control stick to the control surfaces or reaction control system thrusters.

A primary concern with digital fly-by-wire systems is reliability. Much research went into the shuttle computer system. The shuttle uses five identical redundant IBM 32-bit general purpose computers (GPCs), model AP-101, constituting a type of embedded system. Four computers run specialized software called the Primary Avionics Software System (PASS). A fifth backup computer runs separate software called the Backup Flight System (BFS). Collectively they are called the shuttle Data Processing System (DPS).

Atlantis deploys landing gear before landing on a selected runway just like a common aircraft.The design goal of the shuttle DPS is fail operational/fail safe reliability. After a single failure the shuttle can continue the mission. After two failures it can land safely.

The four general-purpose computers operate essentially in lockstep, checking each other. If one computer fails the three functioning computers "vote" it out of the system. This isolates it from vehicle control. If a second computer of the three remaining fails, the two functioning computers vote it out. In the rare case of two out of four computers simultaneously failing (a two-two split), one group is picked at random.

The Backup Flight System (BFS) is separately developed software running on the fifth computer, used only if the entire four-computer primary system fails. The BFS was created because although the four primary computers are hardware redundant, they all run the same software, so a generic software problem could crash all of them. This should never happen, as embedded system avionic software is developed under totally different conditions than commercial software. For example the number of code lines is tiny relative to a commercial operating system, changes are only made infrequently and with extensive testing, and many programming and test personnel work on the small amount of computer code. However in theory it can fail, so the BFS exists for that contingency.

The software for the shuttle computers are written in a high-level language called HAL/S, somewhat similar to PL/I. It is specifically designed for a real time embedded system environment.

The IBM AP-101 computers originally had about 424 kilobytes of magnetic core memory each. The CPU could process about 400,000 instructions per second. They have no hard disk drive, but load software from tape cartridges.

In 1990 the original computers were replaced with an upgraded model AP-101S, which has about 2.5 times the memory capacity (about 1 megabyte) and three times the processor speed (about 1.2 million instructions per second). The memory was changed from magnetic core to semiconductor with battery backup.

Other improvements

During STS-101, Atlantis was the first Shuttle to fly with glass cockpit.Internally the Shuttle remains largely similar to the original design, with the exception of the improved avionics computers. In addition to the computer upgrades, the original vector graphics monochrome cockpit displays were replaced with modern full-color, flat-panel display screens, similar to contemporary airliners like the Airbus A320. This is called a "glass cockpit". In the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project tradition, programmable calculators are carried as well (originally the HP-41C). With the coming of the ISS, the Orbiter's internal airlocks are being replaced with external docking systems to allow for a greater amount of cargo to be stored on the Shuttle's mid-deck during Station resupply missions.

Shuttle Orbiter, showing Shuttle main enginesThe Space Shuttle Main Engines have had several improvements to enhance reliability and power. This explains phrases such as "Main engines throttling up to 104%." This does not mean the engines are being run over a safe limit. The 100% figure is the original specified power level. During the lengthy development program, Rocketdyne determined the engine was capable of safe reliable operation at 104% of the originally specified thrust. They could have rescaled the output number, saying in essence 104% is now 100%. However this would have required revising much previous documentation and software, so the 104% number was retained. SSME upgrades are denoted as "block numbers", such as block I, block II, and block IIA. The upgrades have improved engine reliability, maintainability and performance. The 109% thrust level was finally reached in flight hardware with the Block II engines in 2001. The normal maximum throttle is 104%, with 106% and 109% available for abort emergencies.

For STS-1 and STS-2 the external tank was painted white to protect the insulation that covers much of the tank, but improvements and testing showed that it was not required. The 600 lb saved by not painting the tank results in an almost 600 lb increase in payload capability to orbit. Additional weight was saved by removing some of the internal "stringers" in the hydrogen tank that proved unnecessary. The resulting "light-weight external tank" has been used on the vast majority of Shuttle missions. STS-91 saw the first flight of the "super light-weight external tank". This version of the tank is made of the 2195 aluminium-lithium alloy. It weighs 7,500 lb (3.4 t) less than the last run of lightweight tanks. As the Shuttle cannot fly unmanned, each of these improvements has been "tested" on operational flights.

The SRBs (Solid Rocket Boosters) have undergone improvements as well. Notable is the adding of a third O-ring seal to the joints between the segments, which occurred after the Challenger accident.

Several other SRB improvements were planned in order to improve performance and safety, but never came to be. These culminated in the considerably simpler, lower cost, probably safer and better performing Advanced Solid Rocket Booster which was to have entered production in the early to mid-1990s to support the Space Station, but was later cancelled to save money after the expenditure of $2.2 billion. The loss of the ASRB program forced the development of the Super LightWeight external Tank (SLWT), which provides some of the increased payload capability, while not providing any of the safety improvements. In addition the Air Force developed their own much lighter single-piece SRB design using a filament-wound system, but this too was cancelled.

A cargo-only, unmanned variant of the Shuttle has been variously proposed and rejected since the 1980s. It is called the Shuttle-C and would trade re-usability for cargo capability with large potential savings from reusing technology developed for the Space Shuttle.

On the first four Shuttle missions, astronauts wore full-pressure Launch Entry Suit (LES) during ascent and descent. The pressured helmet was used from STS-5 until the loss of Challenger. The LES was reinstated when Shuttle flights resumed in 1988. The LES ended its service life in late 1995, replaced by the Advanced Crew Escape Suit (ACES).

Technical data

Orbiter Specifications (for Endeavour, OV-105)

Length: 122.17 ft (37.24 m)

Wingspan: 78.06 ft (23.79 m)

Height: 58.58 ft (17.25 m)

Empty Weight: 151,205 lb (68,586.6 kg)

Gross Liftoff Weight: 240,000 lb (109,000 kg)

Maximum Landing Weight: 230,000 lb (104,000 kg)

Main Engines: Three Rocketdyne Block 2 A SSMEs, each with a sea level thrust of 393,800 lbf (178,624 kgf / 1.75MN)

Maximum Payload: 55,250 lb (25,061.4 kg)

Payload Bay dimensions: 15 ft by 60 ft (4.6 m by 18.3 m)

Operational Altitude: 100 to 520 nmi (185 to 1,000 km)

Speed: 25,404 ft/s (7,743 m/s, 27,875 km/h, 17,321 mi/h)

Crossrange: 1,085 nautical miles (2,009.4 km)

Crew: Seven (Commander, Pilot, two Mission Specialists, and three Payload Specialists), two for minimum.

Space Shuttle Atlantis transported by a Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA), 1998 (NASA)External Tank Specifications (for SLWT)

Length: 153.8 ft (46.9 m)

Diameter: 27.6 ft (8.4 m)

Propellent Volume: 535,000 gallon

Empty Weight: 58,500 lb (26,559 kg)

Gross Liftoff Weight: 1.667 million lb (757,000 kg)

Solid Rocket Booster Specifications

Length: 149.6 ft (45.6 m)

Diameter: 12.17 ft (3.71 m)

Empty Weight: 139,490 lb (63,272.7 kg)

Gross Liftoff Weight: 1.3 million lb (590,000 kg)

Thrust (sea level, liftoff): 2.8 million lbf (1,270,058 kgf / 12.46MN)

System Stack Specifications

Height: 184.2 ft (56.14 m)

Gross Liftoff Weight: 4.5 million lb (2.04 million kg)

Total Liftoff Thrust: 6.781 million lbf (3.076 million kgf / 30.18MN)

Ascent

At T minus 16 seconds, the sound suppression system begins to release a torrent of water on the Mobile Launcher Platform (MLP) and SRB trenches as the three SSMEs are started at T minus 6.6 seconds, protecting the Orbiter from damage by acoustical energy and rocket exhaust reflected from the flame trench and MLP during liftoff. All SSMEs must reach the required 100% thrust within three seconds. If the onboard computers verify normal thrust buildup, at T minus 0 the SRBs are ignited. At that point the vehicle is committed to takeoff, as the SRBs cannot be turned off once ignited. There are extensive emergency procedures (abort modes) to handle various failure scenarios during ascent. Many of these concern SSME failures, since that is the most complex and highly stressed component. After the Challenger disaster, there were extensive upgrades to the abort modes.

Around a point called "Max Q", where the aerodynamic forces are at their maximum, the main engines are temporarily throttled back to avoid overspeeding and hence overstressing the Shuttle (particularly vulnerable parts such as the wings). At this point, a phenomenon known as the "Prandtl-Glauert Singularity" occurs, where condensation clouds form during the vehicle's transition to supersonic speed.

126 seconds after launch, explosive bolts release the SRBs and small separation rockets push them laterally away from the vehicle. The SRBs parachute back to the ocean to be reused. The Shuttle then begins accelerating to orbit on the Space Shuttle Main Engines. The vehicle at that point in the flight has a thrust to weight ratio of less than one — the main engines actually have insufficient thrust to exceed the force of gravity, and the vertical speed given to it by the SRBs temporarily decreases. However, as the burn continues, the weight of the propellant reduces, the ever-lighter vehicle produces more and more acceleration until the thrust to weight ratio exceeds 1 again and the vehicle can hold itself up.

The vehicle continues to climb and takes on a somewhat nose-up angle to the horizon — it uses the main engines to gain and then maintain altitude whilst it accelerates horizontally towards orbit.

Finally, in the last tens of seconds of the main engine burn, the mass of the vehicle is low enough that the engines must be throttled back to limit vehicle acceleration to 3 g, largely for astronaut health and comfort.

Before complete depletion of propellant (running dry would destroy the engines) the main engines are shut down and the external tank is released by firing explosive bolts. The tank then falls to largely burn up in the atmosphere, with some fragments falling into the Indian Ocean.

To keep the shuttle from following the external tank back into the atmosphere, the OMS engines are fired to raise the perigee out of the atmosphere. On some missions (e.g., STS-107 and missions to the ISS), the OMS engines are also used while the Main engines are still firing.

Descent and landing

The outside of the Shuttle heats to over 1,500 °C during reentry.The vehicle begins reentry by firing the OMS engines opposite to the orbital motion for about three minutes. The deceleration of the Shuttle lowers its orbit perigee down into the atmosphere. This OMS firing is done roughly halfway around the globe from the landing site. The entire reentry, except for the lowering the landing gear and deploying the air data probes, is then under complete computer control. However the reentry can be and has (once) been flown manually. The final landing can be done on autopilot, but is typically hand flown.

The vehicle then starts significantly entering the atmosphere at about 400,000 ft (120 km) doing around Mach 25 (8.2 km/s). The vehicle is controlled, achieved by a combination of RCS thrusters and control surfaces, to fly at a 40 degrees nose-up attitude producing high drag, not only to slow it down to landing speed, but also to reduce reentry heating. In addition, the vehicle needs to bleed off extra speed before reaching the landing site. This is achieved by performing s-curves at up to a 70 degree bank angle.

Endeavour deploys drag chute after touch-down.In the lower atmosphere the Orbiter flies much like a conventional glider, except for a much higher descent rate, over 10,000 feet (3 km) per minute (roughly 20 times that of an airliner). It glides to landing with a glide angle of 4:1. At approximately Mach 3, two air data probes, located on the left and right sides of the Orbiter's forward lower fuselage, are deployed to sense air pressures related to vehicle's movement in the atmosphere.

When the approach and landing phase begins, the Orbiter is at 10,000 ft (3048 m) altitude, 7.5 miles (12.1 km) to the runway. The pilots apply aerodynamic braking to help slow down the vehicle. The Orbiter's speed is reduced from 424 mph (682.3 km/h) to approximately 215 mph (346 km/h), (compared to 160 mph for a jet airliner), at touch-down. The landing gear is deployed while the Orbiter is flying at 267 mph (429.7 km/h). In additional to applying the speed brakes, a 40 ft (12.2 m) drag chute is deployed once the nose gear touches down at about 185 knots. It is jettisoned as the Orbiter slows through 60 knots.

After landing the vehicle stands on the runway to permit the fumes from poisonous hydrazine that was used as propellant for attitude control to dissipate.

Operations, applications and accidents

From left to right: Columbia, Challenger, Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour. Not illustrated: Enterprise, Explorer and Pathfinder.

Shuttles

Individual Orbiters are both named, in a manner similar to ships, and numbered, using the NASA Orbiter Vehicle Designation system. Whilst all Orbiters are externally very similar, they have minor internal differences; new equipment is fitted on a rotating basis as they are maintained, and the newer Orbiters tend to be structurally lighter.

Handling test article designed with no spaceflight capability:

Pathfinder (Orbiter Simulator, no series number)

Mockup for display at Kennedy Space Center visitor complex.

Explorer

Main propulsion test article, with no spaceflight capability:

MPTA-ET (External Tank) which is now attached to Pathfinder

MPTA-098 suffered major damage due to engine failure.

Structural test article, with no spaceflight capability:

STA-099 which became Challenger

Test vehicle suitable only for glide/landing tests, with no spaceflight capability without major refit:

Enterprise (OV-101)

Lost in accidents (see below):

Challenger (OV-099, ex-STA-099) - destroyed after liftoff - January 28, 1986

Columbia (OV-102) - destroyed during reentry February 1, 2003

In use:

Atlantis (OV-104)

Discovery (OV-103)

Endeavour (OV-105)

Applications

Crew rotation of the ISS

Manned servicing missions, such as to the Hubble Space Telescope (HST)

Manned experiments in LEO

Carry to LEO:

Large satellites — these have included the HST

Components for the construction of the ISS

Supplies

Carry satellites with a booster, the Payload Assist Module (PAM-D) or the Inertial Upper Stage (IUS), to the point where the booster sends the satellite to:

A higher Earth orbit; these have included:

Chandra X-ray Observatory

Many TDRS satellites

Two DSCS-III (Defense Satellite Communications System) communications satellites in one mission

A Defense Support Program satellite

An interplanetary orbit; these have included:

Magellan probe

Galileo spacecraft

Ulysses probe

Accidents

As of 2005 two Shuttles have been destroyed in 114 missions, both with the loss of the entire crew (14 astronauts total):

Challenger — lost 73 seconds after liftoff, January 28, 1986

Further information: Space Shuttle Challenger disaster

Columbia — lost during reentry, February 1, 2003

Further information: Space Shuttle Columbia disaster

This gives a 2% death rate per astronaut per flight.

While the technical details of the accidents are quite different, the organizational problems show remarkable similarities. In both cases events happened which were not planned for or anticipated. In both cases, engineers were greatly concerned about possible problems but these concerns were not properly communicated to or understood by senior NASA managers. In both cases the vehicle gave ample warning beforehand of abnormal problems. A heavily layered, procedure-oriented bureaucratic structure inhibited necessary communication and action. In both cases a mind set among senior managers developed that concerns had to be objectively proven rather than simply suspected.

With Challenger an O-ring which should not have eroded at all did erode on earlier shuttle launches. Yet managers felt because it had not previously eroded by more than 30%, that this was not a hazard as there was "a factor of three safety margin". Morton Thiokol designed and manufactured the SRBs, and during a pre-launch conference call with NASA, the Thiokol engineer most experienced with the O-rings pleaded with management repeatedly to cancel or reschedule the launch. He raised concerns that the unusually cold temperatures would stiffen the O-rings, preventing a complete seal, which was exactly what happened on the fatal flight. However, Thiokol's senior managers overruled him, dismissing his safety concerns and allowed the launch to proceed. Challenger's O-rings eroded completely through as predicted, resulting in the complete destruction of the spacecraft and the loss of all seven astronauts on board.

Columbia was destroyed because of damaged thermal protection from foam debris that broke off the external tank during ascent. The foam had not been designed or expected to break off, but had been observed in the past to do so without incident. The original shuttle operational specification said the orbiter thermal protection tiles were designed to withstand virtually no debris hits at all. Over time NASA managers gradually accepted more tile damage, similar to how O-ring damage was accepted. The Columbia Accident Investigation Board called this tendency the "normalization of deviance" — a gradual acceptance of events outside the design tolerances of the craft simply because they had not been catastrophic to date.

Retrospect

Although carefully engineered, all systems as complex as the space shuttle inevitably contain some mistakes:

placing the heat shield where it could be damaged by foam and ice falling off the external tank a design requiring the ceramic heat shield (the tiles are too fragile, and incredibly labour intensive to replace) there is allegedly a mistake with the shape of the vehicle- during reentry the center of pressure is offset from where originally expected due to a mistake in the calculations; the design works, but is somewhat unstable.

the O-ring/joint design on the SRB was originally poorly thought out and lead to the loss of Challenger the SSMEs originally didn't use hydrostatic bearings, and this added to the maintenance issues

originally it was thought that the SRBs could be safely switched off before burn out, this could not be achieved, greatly reducing safety.

Costs

While the Shuttle has been a reasonably successful launch vehicle, it has not met the goal of greatly reducing launch costs. There are various ways to measure per-launch costs. One way is dividing the total cost over the life of the program (including buildings, facilities, training, salaries, etc) by the number of launches. This method gives about $1.3 billion per launch[2]. Another method is calculating the incremental (or marginal) cost differential to add or subtract one flight — just the immediate resources expended/saved/involved in that one flight. This is about $55 million [3]. Neither figure is right or wrong; they are simply different ways to examine the picture. However, the original cost justifications used flight rates far higher than any operational rate that was ever achieved.

The total cost of the program has been $145 billion as of early 2005, and is estimated to be $174 billion when the Shuttle retires in 2010. NASA's budget for 2005 allocates 30%, or $5 billion, to Space Shuttle operations. [4]

Original goals of the Shuttle included operating at a fairly high flight rate (roughly 12 flights per year [5]), at low cost, and with high reliability. Improving in these areas over the previous generation of single-use and unmanned launchers was a motivation. Although it did operate as the world's first reusable crew-carrying spacecraft, it did not greatly improve on those parameters, and is considered by some to have failed in its original purpose.

Although the final design differs from the original concept, the project was still supposed to meet USAF goals and be much cheaper to fly in general. One reason behind this apparent failure is inflation. During the 1970s the U.S. suffered from severe inflation. Between when the program began in 1972, and first flight in April 1981, inflation increased prices over 200%. When evaluating shuttle development costs in later-year dollars, this superficially appeared to be a large cost overrun in the program. In fact when discounting inflation, the shuttle development program was within the initial cost estimate given to President Richard M. Nixon in 1971 [6].

The high shuttle operational costs have been much more than anticipated, if counting all associated support resources (total expenditures, including development costs, divided by number of flights). Some of this can be attributed to a lower flight rate, operating beyond the 10-year anticipated lifespan of each Shuttle, and higher than anticipated maintenance costs. The marginal or incremental per launch costs have been about 50% more than early projections.

Some reasons for higher than expected operational costs can be ascribed to:

Maintenance of thermal protection tiles turned out to be very labor intensive, averaging about a week's work for one person to replace a tile, with hundreds damaged with each launch.

The main engines were highly complex and maintenance intensive, necessitating removal and extensive inspection after each flight. Before the current "Block II" engines, the turbopumps (a primary engine component) had to be removed, dissembled, and totally overhauled after each flight.

Launch rate is significantly lower than initially expected. This does not reduce actual operating costs, but if dividing total program costs by number of launches, more launches per year produces a lower per-launch cost figure. Some early hypothetical studies examined 55 launches per year, but the maximum possible launch rate was limited to 24 per year, based on manufacturing capacity of the external tank. Early in the shuttle development, the expected launch rate was about 12 per year [7]. Launch rates reached 9 per year in 1985 but averaged less thereafter.

Early cost estimates of $118 per pound of payload were based on marginal or incremental launch costs, and based on 1972 dollars and assuming a 65,000 pound payload capacity. Correcting for inflation and other factors, this equates to roughly $36 million incremental costs per launch. Compared to this, today's actual incremental per launch costs are about 50% more, or $55 million per launch [8].

Shuttle operations

The Shuttle was originally conceived to operate somewhat like an airliner. After landing, the orbiter would be checked out and start "mating" to the rest of the system (the ET and SRBs), and be ready for launch in as little as two weeks. Instead, this turnaround process takes months; Columbia was once launched twice within 56 days. Because loss of crew is unacceptable, the primary focus of the Shuttle program is to return the crew to Earth safely, which can conflict with other goals, namely to launch payloads cheaply. Furthermore, because in many cases there are no survivable abort modes, many pieces of hardware simply must function perfectly and so must be carefully inspected before each flight. The result is high labor cost, with around 25,000 workers in Shuttle operations and labor costs of about $1 billon per year.

During development, shuttle features were primarily chosen based on capability required to service the future space station. Even though the initially planned Space Station Freedom was signficantly scaled back, the shuttle was still vital to service it. No other launch vehicle had the shuttle's payload capability or could return large items from the space station to earth.

NASA's plan for using the shuttle to launch all unmanned payloads declined, then was discontinued. Following the Challenger disaster, carrying in the shuttle payload bay the powerful liquid fueled Centaur upper stages planned for interplanetary probes was ruled out. The Shuttle's history of unexpected delays also makes it liable to miss narrow launch windows. Advances in technology over the last decade have made probes smaller and lighter, and as a result unmanned probes and communications satellites can use cheaper and more reliable expendable rockets, including Delta launcher, and Atlas V.

Looking back and ahead

Opinions differ on the lessons of the Shuttle. While it was developed within the original development cost and time estimates given to President Richard M. Nixon in 1971 [9], the operational costs, flight rate, payload capacity, and reliability have been worse than anticipated.

In general future designers look to less complex, more reliable launch systems with lower maintenance costs. One approach is Single Stage To Orbit (SSTO), which would be 100% reusable and use a single stage. NASA evaluated several concepts in the 1990s, and selected the X-33, which would eventually have been the VentureStar. During design that program increased in complexity and development cost, encountered problems and was finally cancelled.

Another variant of SSTO is a hypersonic, scramjet-powered, airbreathing vehicle. This would be launched and landed horizontally like an airliner. It would achieve much of orbital velocity while still within the upper atmosphere. It was originally investigated by the U.S. Department of Defense, but passenger-carrying civilian versions were planned, sometimes called the "New Orient Express". The official name was the Rockwell X-30. Like the X-33, the X-30 encountered major technical difficulties, primarily due to the system complexity and materials required for hypersonic flight, and was also cancelled.

Another approach is lower cost expendable launch vehicles. NASA currently uses these for unmanned launches, and plans to use them for future manned launches. NASA plans on using modified shuttle components to build an expendable Shuttle Derived Launch Vehicle. This technology would be used to develop two separate launchers, one for manned missions and the other for unmanned heavy cargo. This contrasts with the current shuttle where astronauts and heavy cargo are launched in a single vehicle. Unlike the shuttle, this future launcher and associated crew exploration vehicle will have a launch escape system to greatly improve the chances that the crew can be saved in the event of a disaster

The Mercury capsule

Description

Role: Suborbital and orbital spaceflight

Crew: one, pilot

Dimensions

Height: 11.5 ft 3.51 m

Diameter: 6.2 ft 1.89 m

Volume: 60 ft3 1.7 m3

Weights (MA-6)

Launch: 4,265 lb 1,935 kg

Orbit: 2,986 lb 1,354 kg

Post Retro: 2,815 lb 1,277 kg

Reentry: 2,698 lb 1,224 kg

Landing: 2,421 lb 1,098 kg

Rocket engines

Retros (solid fuel) x 3: 1,000 lbf ea 4.5 kN

Posigrade (solid fuel) x 3: 400 lbf ea 1.8 kN

RCS high (H2O2) x 6: 25 lbf ea 108 N

RCS low (H2O2) x 6: 12 lbf ea 49 N

Performance

Endurance: 34 hours 22 orbits

Apogee: 175 miles 282 km

Perigee: 100 miles 160 km

Retro delta v: 300 mph 483 km/h

Mercury capsule diagram

Mercury program. It ran from 1959 through 1963 with the goal of putting a man in orbit around the Earth. Early planning and research was carried out by NACA, while the program was officially carried out by the newly created NASA. The name comes from Mercury, a Roman mythological god who is often seen as a symbol of speed. Mercury is also the name of the innermost planet of the solar system, which revolves around the sun faster than any other, hence the image of speed, although Project Mercury had no other connection to that planet.

The Mercury program cost $1.5 billion dollars. See NASA Budget.

Spacecraft

It was said that the Mercury spacecraft were not ridden, they were worn, because of their extremely small size - at 1.7 cubic metres in volume, the capsule was just large enough for the single crew member. Inside were 120 controls: 55 electrical switches, 30 fuses and 35 mechanical levers. The spacecraft was designed by Max Faget and NASA's Space Task Group.

During the launch phase of the mission, the Mercury spacecraft and astronaut were protected from launch vehicle failures by the Launch Escape System. The LES consisted of a solid fuel, 52,000 lbf (231 kN) thrust rocket mounted on a tower above the spacecraft. In the event of a launch abort, the LES fired for 1 second, pulling the Mercury spacecraft away from a defective launch vehicle. The spacecraft would then descend on its parachute recovery system. After booster engine cutoff (BECO), the LES was no longer needed and was separated from the spacecraft by a solid fuel, 800 lbf (3.6 kN) thrust jettison rocket that fired for 1.5 seconds.

To separate the Mercury spacecraft from the launch vehicle, the spacecraft fired three small solid-fuel, 400 lbf (1.8 kN) thrust rockets for 1 second. These rockets are called the Posigrade rockets.

The spacecraft was only equipped with attitude control thrusters - after orbit insertion and before retrofire they could not change their orbit. There were three sets of high and low powered automatic control jets and separate manual jets - one for each axis (yaw, pitch and roll), supplied from two separate fuel tanks - one automatic and one manual. The pilot could use any one of the three thruster systems and fuel them from either of the two fuel tanks to provide spacecraft attitude control.

The Mercury spacecraft were designed to be totally controllable from the ground in the event that the space environment impaired the pilot's ability to function.

The spacecraft had three solid-fuel, 1000 lbf (4.5 kN) thrust retrorockets that fired for 10 seconds each. One was sufficient to return the spacecraft to earth if the other two failed. The firing sequence (known as ripple firing) required firing the first retro was fired, followed by the second retro five seconds later (while the first was still firing). Five seconds after that, the third retro fired (while the second retro was still firing).

There was a small metal flap at the nose of the spacecraft called the "spoiler". If the spacecraft started to reenter nose first (another stable reentry attitude for the capsule), airflow over the "spoiler" would flip the spacecraft around to the proper, heatshield-first reentry attitude. During reentry, the astronaut would experience about 4 g-forces.

Initial designs for the spacecraft suggested the use of either beryllium heat-sink heat shields or an ablative shield. Extensive testing settled the issue - ablative shields proved to be reliable (so much so that the initial shield thickness was safely reduced, allowing a lower total spacecraft weight), easier to produce (at that time, beryllium was only produced in sufficient quantities by a single company in the US) and cheaper.

NASA ordered 20 production spacecraft, numbered 1 through 20, from McDonnell Aircraft Company, St. Louis, Missouri. Five of the twenty spacecraft were not flown. They were Spacecraft #10, 12, 15, 17, and 19. Two unmanned spacecraft were destroyed during flights. They were Spacecraft #3 and #4. Spacecraft #11 sank and was recovered from the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean after 38 years. Some spacecraft were modified after initial production (refurbished after launch abort, modified for longer missions, etc) and received a letter designation after their number, examples 2B, 15B. Some spacecraft were modified twice; for example, spacecraft 15 became 15A and then 15B.

A number of boilerplate spacecraft (mockup/prototype/replica spacecraft, made from non-flight materials or lacking production spacecraft systems and/or hardware) were also made by NASA and McDonnell Aircraft and used in numerous tests, including launches.

Boosters

The Mercury program used three boosters: Little Joe - 8 suborbital robotic flights, 2 carrying primates. Launch escape system tests.

Redstone - 4 suborbital robotic flights, 1 carrying a primate; 2 piloted suborbital flights.

Atlas - 4 suborbital robotic flights; 2 orbital robotic flights, 1 carrying a primate; 4 piloted orbital flights.

Little Joe was used to test the escape tower and abort procedures. Redstone was used for suborbital flights, and Atlas for orbital ones. Starting in October, 1958, Jupiter missiles were also considered as suborbital launch vehicles for the Mercury program, but were cut from the program in July, 1959 due to budget constraints. The Atlas boosters required extra strengthening in order to handle the increased weight of the Mercury capsules beyond that of the nuclear warheads they were designed to carry. Little Joe was a solid-propellant booster designed specially for the Mercury program. The Titan missile was also considered for use for later Mercury missions, however the Mercury program was terminated before these missions were flown. The Titan was used for the Gemini program which followed Mercury

Unpiloted Flights

The program included 20 robotic launches. Not all of these were intended to reach space and not all were successful in completing their objectives. Four of these flights included non-human primates, starting with the fifth flight (1959) which launched a Rhesus macaque named Sam (after the Air Force's School of Aviation Medicine). The Mercury program's complete roster of non-human space-farers is given below:

Sam, a Rhesus macaque, launched December 4, 1959 on Little Joe 2 to 85 km altitude.

Miss Sam, a Rhesus macaque, launched January 21, 1960 on Little Joe 1B to 15 km altitude.

Ham, a chimpanzee, launched January 31, 1961 on Mercury-Redstone 2 for a suborbital flight.

Enos, a chimpanzee, launched November 29, 1961 on Mercury-Atlas 5 for a 2-orbit flight.

Mission Rocket Call Sign Launch Date Launch Time Duration Remarks

Mercury-Jupiter Jupiter (missile) N/A N/A N/A N/A Cancelled in July, 1959 - Proposed suborbital launch vehicle for Mercury. Not flown.

Little Joe 1 Little Joe LJ-1 August 21, 1959 N/A 00d 00h 00m 20s Test of launch escape system during flight.

Big Joe 1 Atlas 10-D Big Joe 1 September 9, 1959 N/A 00d 00h 13m Test of heat shield and Atlas / spacecraft interface.

Little Joe 6 Little Joe LJ-6 October 4, 1959 N/A 00d 00h 05m 10s Test of capsule aerodynamics and integrity.

Little Joe 1A Little Joe LJ-1A November 4, 1959 N/A 00d 00h 08m 11s Test of launch escape system during flight.

Little Joe 2 Little Joe LJ-2 December 4, 1959 N/A 00d 00h 11m 06s Carried Sam the monkey to 85 kilometres in altitude.

Little Joe 1B Little Joe LJ-1B January 21, 1960 N/A 00d 00h 08m 35s Carried Miss Sam the monkey to 9.3 statute miles (15 kilometres) in altitude.

Beach Abort Launch escape system Beach Abort May 9, 1960 N/A 00d 00h 01m 31s Test of the Off-The-Pad abort system.

Mercury-Atlas 1 Atlas MA-1 July 29, 1960 13:13 UTC 00d 00h 03m 18s First flight of Mercury spacecraft and Atlas Booster.

Little Joe 5 Little Joe LJ-5 November 8, 1960 N/A 00d 00h 02m 22s First flight of a production Mercury spacecraft.

Mercury-Redstone 1 Redstone MR-1 November 21, 1960 N/A 00d 00h 00m 02s Launched 4 inches (100 mm). Settled back on pad due to electrical malfunction.

Mercury-Redstone 1A Redstone MR-1A December 19, 1960 N/A 00d 00h 15m 45s First flight of Mercury spacecraft and Redstone booster.

Mercury-Redstone 2 Redstone MR-2 January 31, 1961 16:55 UTC 00d 00h 16m 39s Carried Ham the Chimpanzee on suborbital flight.

Mercury-Atlas 2 Atlas MA-2 February 21, 1961 14:10 UTC 00d 00h 17m 56s Test of Mercury spacecraft and Atlas Booster.

Little Joe 5A Little Joe LJ-5A March 18, 1961 N/A 00d 00h 23m 48s Test of the launch escape system during the most severe conditions of a launch.

Mercury-Redstone BD Redstone MR-BD March 24, 1961 17:30 UTC 00d 00h 8m 23s Redstone Booster Development - test flight.

Mercury-Atlas 3 Atlas MA-3 April 25, 1961 16:15 UTC 00d 00h 07m 19s Test of Mercury spacecraft and Atlas Booster.

Little Joe 5B Little Joe AB-1 April 28, 1961 N/A 00d 00h 05m 25s Test of the launch escape system during the most severe conditions of a launch.

Mercury-Atlas 4 Atlas MA-4 September 13, 1961 14:09 UTC 00d 01h 49m 20s Test of Mercury spacecraft and Atlas Booster. Completed 1 orbit.

Mercury-Scout 1 Scout MS-1 November 1, 1961 15:32 UTC 00d 00h 00m 44s Test of Mercury tracking network.

Mercury-Atlas 5 Atlas MA-5 November 29, 1961 15:08 UTC 00d 03h 20m 59s Carried Enos the Chimpanzee on a two orbit flight.

Piloted Flights

Astronauts

Wernher von Braun and astronaut Gordon Cooper in the blockhouse during MR-3 recovery operations May 5, 1961.The first Americans to venture into space were drawn from a group of 110 military pilots chosen for their flight test experience and because they met certain physical requirements. Seven of those 110 became astronauts in April 1959. Six of the seven flew Mercury missions (Deke Slayton was removed from flight status due to a heart condition). Beginning with Alan Shepard's Freedom 7 flight, the astronauts named their own spacecraft, and all added "7" to the name to acknowledge the teamwork of their fellow astronauts

Malcolm Scott Carpenter, USN (1925-)

Leroy Gordon "Gordo" Cooper, Jr., USAF (1927-2004)

John Herschel Glenn. Jr., USMC (1921-) First American to orbit the earth.

Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom, USAF (1926-1967)

Walter Marty Schirra, Jr., USN (1923-)

Alan Bartlett Shepard, Jr., USN (1923-1998) First American in space.

Donald Kent "Deke" Slayton, USAF (1924-1993) Grounded in 1962 due to irregular heartbeat, reinstated in 1972 and later flew on the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project in 1975.

Mission Rocket Designation Pilot Launch Date Launch Time Duration Remarks

Mercury 3 Redstone MR-3 Shepard May 5, 1961 14:34 UTC 00d 00h

15m 28s Capsule call sign "Freedom 7". First American to make a suborbital flight into space.

Mercury 4 Redstone MR-4 Grissom July 21, 1961 12:20 UTC 00d 00h

15m 37s "Liberty Bell 7". Second suborbital flight. Capsule sank before recovery when hatch unexpectedly blew off.

Mercury 6 Atlas MA-6 Glenn February 20, 1962 14:47 UTC 00d 04h

55m 23s "Friendship 7". First American to orbit the Earth (for a total of 3 orbits). Capsule's retropack retained during re-entry due to concerns about heatshield.

Mercury 7 Atlas MA-7 Carpenter May 24, 1962 12:45 UTC 00d 04h

56m 15s "Aurora 7". 3 orbits. Reentered off-target by 402 km. Pilot Carpenter replaced Deke Slayton.

Mercury 8 Atlas MA-8 Schirra October 3, 1962 12:15 UTC 00d 09h

13m 11s "Sigma 7". Carried out engineering tests. 6 orbits.

Mercury 9 Atlas MA-9 Cooper May 15, 1963 13:04 UTC 01d 10h

19m 49s "Faith 7". First American in space for over a day. 22 orbits.

Mercury 10 Atlas MA-10 Shepard N/A N/A N/A "Freedom 7-II". Intended to be a 3-day mission in October, 1963. Cancelled June 13, 1963.

Piloted Mercury launches

Flight patches that purport to be patches from various Mercury missions are available to the public. In reality, these patches were designed by private entrepreneurs long after the Mercury program ended. When genuine flight patches were created by crews in the Gemini program, this caused a public demand for Mercury flight patches, which was filled by these private entrepreneurs. The only patches the Mercury astronauts wore were the NASA logo and a name tag. Each manned Mercury spacecraft, however, was decorated with a flight insignia. These are the genuine Mercury flight insignias.

McDonnell Gemini spacecraft

Gemini spacecraft in orbit.

Description

Role: Orbital spaceflight

Crew: two; cmd pilot, pilot

Dimensions

Height: 18.6 ft 5.67 m

Diameter: 10 ft 3.05 m

Volume: 90 ft3 2.55 m3

Weights

Reentry module: 4,372 lb 1 983 kg

Retrograde module: 1,303 lb 591 kg

Equipment module: 2,815 lb 1 277 kg

Total: 8,490 lb 3 851 kg

Rocket engines

Retros (solid fuel) x 4: 2,500 lbf ea 11.12 kN

Reentry Control System (N2O4/MMHH) x 16: 25 lbf ea 111 N

OAMS

(N2O4/MMHH) x 2: 85 lbf ea 378 N

OAMS

(N2O4/MMHH) x 6: 100 lbf ea 445 N

OAMS

(N2O4/MMHH) x 8: 25 lbf ea 111 N

Performance

Endurance: 14 days 206 orbits

Apogee: 250 miles 402 km

Perigee: 100 miles 160 km

Spacecraft delta v: 728 ft/s 222 m/s

Gemini spacecraft diagram

Gemini spacecraft diagram (NASA)

McDonnell Gemini Spacecraft

Project Gemini was the second human spaceflight program in which the United States of America sent humans into space, between Projects Mercury and Apollo, during the years 1963-1966. Its objective was to develop techniques for advanced space travel, notably those necessary for Apollo, whose objective was to land men on the Moon. Gemini missions involved extravehicular activity and orbital maneuvers including rendezvous and docking.

Gemini was originally seen as a simple extrapolation of the Mercury program, and thus early on was called Mercury Mark II. The final program had little in common with Mercury and was in fact superior to even Apollo in some ways. (See Big Gemini.) This was mainly a result of its late start date, which allowed it to benefit from much that had been learned by that time on the Apollo project (which, despite its later launch dates, was actually begun before Gemini).

Its primary difference from Mercury was that the earlier spacecraft had all systems other than the reentry rockets sited within the capsule, nearly all of which had to be accessed through the astronaut's hatchway, while Gemini had many power, propulsion, and life-support systems in a detachable module like a huge bowl; many components in the capsule itself were reachable each through its own small access door. The original intention was for Gemini to use a paraglider instead of a parachute, and the crew to be seated upright controlling the forward motion of the craft before its landing. To facilitate this, the parachute cord does not just attach to the nose of the craft; there is an additional attachment point for balance near the heat shield. This cord is covered by a strip of metal between the doors. Early short-duration missions had their electrical power supplied by batteries; later endurance missions had the first fuel cells in manned spacecraft.

The "Gemini" designation comes from the fact that each spacecraft held two men, as "gemini" in Latin means "twins". Gemini is also the name of the third constellation of the Zodiac and its twin stars, Castor and Pollux.

Unlike Mercury, which could only change its orientation in space, the Gemini capsule could alter its own orbit. It could also dock with other spacecraft--one of which, the Agena Target Vehicle, had its own large rocket engine which was used to perform large orbital changes. Gemini was the first American manned spacecraft to include an onboard computer, the Gemini Guidance Computer, to facilitate management and control of mission maneuvers. It was also unlike other NASA craft in that it used ejection seats, in-flight radar and an artificial horizon - devices borrowed from the aviation industry. Using ejection seats to push astronauts to safety was first employed by the Soviet Union in the Vostok craft manned by cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin.

The design for Gemini was developed by a Canadian, Jim Chamberlin, formerly the chief aerodynamicist on the Avro Arrow fighter interceptor program with Avro Canada. Chamberlin joined NASA along with 25 senior Avro engineers after cancellation of the Arrow program, and became head of the U.S. Space Task Group’s engineering division in charge of Gemini. The main contractor was McDonnell, who had lost out on main contracts for the Apollo Project. McDonnell sought to extend the program by proposing a Gemini craft could be used to fly a cislunar mission and even achieve a manned lunar landing earlier and at less cost than Apollo, but these proposals were rejected.

The Gemini program cost $5.4 billion dollars. See NASA Budget.

Announcement

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) announced December 7, 1961, a plan to extend the existing manned space flight program by the development of a two-man spacecraft. The program was officially designated Gemini on January 3, 1962.

Team

The Gemini program was managed by the Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, Texas, under direction of the Office of Manned Space Flight, NASA Headquarters, Washington, D.C, Dr. George E. Mueller, Associate Administrator of NASA for Manned Space Flight, served as acting director of the Gemini program. William C. Schneider, Deputy Director of Manned Space Flight for Mission Operations, served as Mission Director on all Gemini flights beginning with Gemini V.

The Manned Spacecraft Center Gemini effort was headed by Dr. Robert R. Gilruth, director of the Center, and Charles W. Matthews, Gemini Program Manager. The Gemini spacecraft was designed by Canadian Jim Chamberlin, who joined the Gemini Program in 1961 after being recruited by NASA shortly after the AVRO Arrow project was dismantled by the Canadian Diefenbaker government.

Program objectives

The Gemini Program was conceived after it became evident to NASA officials that an intermediate step was required between the projects Mercury and Apollo. The major objectives assigned to Gemini were:

To subject two men and supporting equipment to long-duration flights, a requirement for projected later trips to the Moon or deeper space.

To effect rendezvous and docking with other orbiting vehicles, and to maneuver the docked vehicles in space, using the propulsion system of the target vehicle for such maneuvers.

To perfect methods of reentry and landing the spacecraft at a pre-selected land-landing point.

To gain additional information concerning the effects of weightlessness on crew members and to record the physiological reactions of crew members during long-duration flights.

After 10 successful flights, the Gemini program clearly placed the United States in the lead over the Soviet Union in manned spaceflight. The flight of Gemini VIII included the successful emergency recovery of the tumbling orbiting capsule by Neil Armstrong.

Gemini Applications

Replica of a Gemini capsule at the Armstrong Air and Space Museum.The United States Air Force had an interest in the system, and decided to use their own modification of the spacecraft as the crew vehicle for the Manned Orbiting Laboratory. To this end, one of the unmanned Gemini spacecraft was refurbished and flown again atop a mockup of the MOL, sent into space by a Titan III-M. This was the first time a spacecraft went into space twice.

The USAF also had the notion of adapting the Gemini spacecraft for trying out military applications, such as crude observation of the ground (no specialized reconnaissance camera could be carried) and practicing making rendezvous with suspicious satellites. This project was called Blue Gemini. The US Air Force did not like the fact that Gemini would have to be recovered by the US Navy, so they intended for Blue Gemini eventually to use the paraglider and land on three skids, something from the original design of Gemini.

At first some within NASA welcomed sharing of the cost with the USAF, but it was later agreed that NASA was better off operating Project Gemini by itself. MOL was cancelled in 1968 and Blue Gemini too was cancelled without any use by military astronauts.

In 2005, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin announced that the new Crew Exploration Vehicle, an Apollo-derived spacecraft, would use the Gemini/Agena chasedown and docking technique when NASA starts sending crews back out to the Moon by 2019. The CEV, which will replace the Space Shuttle (which currently lands on a conventional runway similar to the early Gemini and Blue Gemini paraglider/skids technique), will use deployable airbags, eliminating a large naval recovery force.

Liftoff of Gemini 6A from Pad 19 with astronauts Walter Schirra and Thomas Stafford aboard

Astronauts

The following astronauts flew Gemini missions:

From the Mercury Seven:

Leroy Gordon Cooper, Jr., USAF – Gemini V

Virgil Ivan "Gus" Grissom, USAF – Gemini III

Walter Marty Schirra, Jr., USN – Gemini VI-A

From Astronaut Group 2:

Neil Alden Armstrong – Gemini VIII

Frank Frederick Borman II, USAF – Gemini VII

Charles "Pete" Conrad, Jr., USN – Gemini V, Gemini XI

James Arthur Lovell, Jr., USN – Gemini VII, Gemini XII

James Alton McDivitt, USAF – Gemini IV

Thomas Patten Stafford, USAF – Gemini VI-A, Gemini IX-A

Edward Higgins White II, USAF – Gemini IV

John Watts Young, USN – Gemini III, Gemini X

From Astronaut Group 3:

Edwin Eugene "Buzz" Aldrin, USAF – Gemini XII

Eugene Andrew Cernan, USN – Gemini IX-A

Michael Collins, USAF – Gemini X

Richard Francis Gordon, Jr., USN – Gemini XI

David Randolph Scott, USAF – Gemini VIII

Crew Selection

Deke Slayton as head of the Astronaut Office had the main role in the choice of crews for the Gemini program. This selection process, with the prospect of more ambitious missions that would follow with Apollo, became even more political than in the Mercury Program. With Gemini it became a procedure that each flight had a primary crew and backup crew and that the backup crew would rotate to primary crew status three flights later. Slayton also intended for first choice of mission commands to be given to the four remaining active astronauts of the Mercury Seven, Alan Shepard, Gus Grissom, Gordon Cooper and Wally Schirra. John Glenn had retired from NASA in January 1964 and Scott Carpenter, who was blamed by some in NASA management for the problematic reentry of Aurora 7, was on leave to participate in the Navy's SEALAB project and was grounded from flight in July 1964. Slayton himself continued to be grounded due to his heart problem.

In late 1963, Slayton selected Alan Shepard and Thomas Stafford for Gemini 3, James McDivitt and Ed White for Gemini 4, and Wally Schirra and John Young for Gemini 5 (the first Agena rendezvous mission). Gemini 3 was backed up by Gus Grissom and Frank Borman, who were also slated for Gemini 6, the first long-duration mission. Finally Pete Conrad and James Lovell were assigned as the backup for Gemini 4.

Delays in the production of the Agena Target Vehicle caused the first rearrangement of the crew rotation. The Schirra and Young mission was bumped to Gemini 6 and they now were the backup crew for Shepard and Stafford. Grissom and Borman now had their long-duration mission assigned to Gemini 5.

The second rearrangment occurred when Alan Shepard developed Meniere's disease, an inner ear problem. Gus Grissom was moved to command Gemini 3. Slayton felt that Young was a better personality match with Grissom and switched Stafford and Young. Finally Slayton tapped Gordon Cooper to command the long-duration Gemini 5. Again for reasons of compatibility he moved Pete Conrad from being the backup commander of Gemini 4 to be the pilot of Gemini 5, and Frank Borman to the backup command of Gemini 4. Finally he assigned Neil Armstrong and Elliot See to be the backup crew for Gemini 5.

The third rearrangement of crew assignment occurred when Deke Slayton felt that Elliot See wasn't up to the physical demands of EVA on Gemini 8. He reassigned Elliot See to be the prime commander of Gemini 9 and put Dave Scott as pilot of Gemini 8 and Charles Bassett as the pilot of Gemini 9.

The fourth and final rearrangement of the Gemini crew assignment occurred after the deaths of Elliot See and Charles Bassett in a plane crash in St. Louis. The backup crew of Tom Stafford and Eugene Cernan was moved up to become the new prime crew of Gemini 9. James Lovell and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin were moved from being the backup crew of Gemini 10 to be the backup crew of Gemini 9. This cleared the way through the crew rotation for Lovell and Aldrin to become the prime crew of Gemini 12. Along with the deaths of Grissom, White, and Chaffee in the fire of Apollo 1, this rearrangement is what finally determined the makeup of the early Apollo crews. These events were decisive in determining who would be in position to walk on the Moon.

In his autobiography "Deke!" Slayton relates that he would probably have replaced Aldrin with Eugene Cernan, the backup pilot for Gemini 12, if the second flight of the AMU had flown on Gemini 12.

Missions

Gemini involved 12 flights, including two unmanned flight tests of the equipment.

Unmanned

Mission Rocket LV Serial No Mission Dates Launch Time Duration Remarks

Gemini 1 Titan II GLV-1 12556 April 8-12, 1964 16:01 UTC 03d 23h First test flight of Gemini

Gemini 2 Titan II GLV-2 12557 January 19, 1965 14:03 UTC 00d 00h 18m 16s Suborbital flight to test heat shield

Manned

Mission Rocket LV Serial No Command Pilot Pilot Mission Dates Launch Time Duration Remarks

Gemini III Titan II GLV-3 12558 Grissom Young March 23, 1965 14:24 UTC 00d 04h

52m 31s First manned Gemini flight, three orbits. The only major incident during the mission involved a contraband corned beef sandwich that Young had snuck on board. The crew each took a few bites before the sandwich had to be restowed. The crumbs it released could have wreaked havoc with the craft's electronics, so the crew were reprimanded when they returned to Earth. The capsule's name, Molly Brown, was a reference to the musical The Unsinkable Molly Brown, and was allegedly chosen by Grissom in honour of his Mercury capsule (Liberty Bell 7), which did sink. Following this, NASA banned crews from naming their vehicles until relatively late in the Apollo program, and even then only with supervision.

Gemini IV Titan II GLV-4 12559 McDivitt White June 03-07, 1965 15:15 UTC 04d 01h 56m 12s Included first extravehicular activity (EVA) by an American; White's "space walk" was a 22 minute EVA exercise.

Gemini V Titan II GLV-5 12560 Cooper Conrad August 21-29, 1965 13:59 UTC 07d 22h 55m 14s First week-long flight; first use of fuel cells for electrical power; evaluated guidance and navigation system for future rendezvous missions. Completed 120 orbits.

Gemini VII Titan II GLV-7 12562 Borman Lovell December 04-18, 1965 19:30 UTC 13d 18h 35m 01s When the original Gemini VI mission was scrubbed because its Agena target for rendezvous and docking failed, Gemini VII was used for the rendezvous instead. Primary objective was to determine whether humans could live in space for 14 days.

Gemini VI-A Titan II GLV-6 12561 Schirra Stafford December 15-16, 1965 13:37 UTC 01d 01h 51m 24s First space rendezvous accomplished with Gemini VII, station-keeping for over five hours at distances from 0.3 to 90 m (1 to 295 ft).

Gemini VIII Titan II GLV-8 12563 Armstrong Scott March 16, 1966 16:41 UTC 00d 10h 41m 26s Accomplished first docking with another space vehicle, an unmanned Agena stage. A malfunction caused uncontrollable spinning of the craft; the crew undocked and effected the first emergency landing of a manned U.S. space mission.

Gemini IX-A Titan II GLV-9 12564 Stafford Cernan June 03-06, 1966 13:39 UTC 03d 00h 21m 50s Rescheduled from May to rendezvous and dock with augmented target docking adapter (ATDA) after original Agena target vehicle failed to orbit. ATDA shroud did not completely separate, making docking impossible. Three different types of rendezvous, two hours of EVA, and 44 orbits were completed.

Gemini X Titan II GLV-10 12565 Young Collins July 18-21, 1966 22:20 UTC 02d 22h 46m 39s First use of Agena target vehicle's propulsion systems. Spacecraft also rendezvoused with Gemini VIII target vehicle. Collins had 49 minutes of EVA standing in the hatch and 39 minutes of EVA to retrieve experiment from Agena stage. 43 orbits completed.

Gemini XI Titan II GLV-11 12566 Conrad Gordon September 12-15, 1966 14:42 UTC 02d 23h 17m 08s Gemini record altitude, 1,189.3 km (739.2 mi) reached using Agena propulsion system after first orbit rendezvous and docking. Gordon made 33-minute EVA and two-hour standup EVA. 44 orbits.

Gemini XII Titan II GLV-12 12567 Lovell Aldrin November 11-15, 1966 20:46 UTC 03d 22h 34m 31s Final Gemini flight. Rendezvoused and docked manually with its target Agena and kept station with it during EVA. Aldrin set an EVA record of 5 hours, 30 minutes for one space walk and two stand-up exercises.

Gemini-Titan launches and serial numbers

All Gemini Launches from GT-1 through GT-12.

The Gemini-Titan launch vehicles, like the Mercury-Atlas vehicles before them, were ordered by NASA through the U. S. Air Force and were in reality missiles. The Gemini-Titan II rockets were assigned U.S. Air Force serial numbers, which were painted in four places on each Titan II (on opposite sides on each of the first and second stages). U.S. Air Force crews maintained Launch Complex 19 and prepared and launched all of the Gemini-Titan II launch vehicles.

Gemini 6A launch. USAF serial number location on Titan II.These are the USAF serial numbers assigned to the Gemini-Titan launch vehicles. They were ordered in 1962 so the serial is "62-12XXX", but only "12XXX" is painted on the Titan II:

12556 - GLV-1 - Gemini 1

12557 - GLV-2 - Gemini 2

12558 - GLV-3 - Gemini 3

12559 - GLV-4 - Gemini 4

12560 - GLV-5 - Gemini 5

12561 - GLV-6 - Gemini 6A

12562 - GLV-7 - Gemini 7

12563 - GLV-8 - Gemini 8

12564 - GLV-9 - Gemini 9A

12565 - GLV-10 - Gemini 10

12566 - GLV-11 - Gemini 11

12567 - GLV-12 - Gemini 12

12568 - GLV-13 Ordered by NASA 1962, not built, cancelled July 30, 1964

12569 - GLV-14 Ordered by NASA 1962, not built, cancelled July 30, 1964

12570 - GLV-15 Ordered by NASA 1962, not built, cancelled July 30, 1964

The program continued into the early 1970s to carry out the initial hands-on scientific exploration of the Moon, with a total of six successful landings. As of 2006, there has not been any further human spaceflight beyond low earth orbit. The later Skylab program and the joint American-Soviet Apollo-Soyuz Test Project used equipment originally produced for Apollo, and are often considered to be part of the overall program.

Despite the successes, there were several major failures, most notably the deaths of astronauts Virgil Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee in the Apollo 1 launchpad fire, the explosion on Apollo 13 which nearly killed three other astronauts, and a release of poisonous gases during re-entry of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project spacecraft that nearly killed three more.

The Apollo project was named after the Greek god of light.

Background

The Apollo Program was originally conceived late in the Eisenhower administration as a follow-on to the Mercury program, doing advanced manned earth-orbital missions. In fact, it became the third program, following Gemini. The Apollo Program was dramatically reoriented to an aggressive lunar landing goal by President Kennedy with his announcement at a special joint session of Congress on May 25, 1961:

"...I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important in the long-range exploration of space; and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish..."[1]

Another excerpt from Kennedy's Special Message to Congress:

"I believe we should go to the moon. But I think every citizen of this country as well as the Members of the Congress should consider the matter carefully in making their judgment, to which we have given attention over many weeks and months, because it is a heavy burden, and there is no sense in agreeing or desiring that the United States take an affirmative position in outer space, unless we are prepared to do the work and bear the burdens to make it successful. If we are not,

we should decide today and this year.

Lunar lander LM2 at the National Air and Space Museum."This decision demands a major national commitment of scientific and technical manpower, material and facilities, and the possibility of their diversion from other important activities where they are already thinly spread. It means a degree of dedication, organization and discipline which have not always characterized our research and development efforts. It means we cannot afford undue work stoppages, inflated costs of material or talent, wasteful interagency rivalries, or a high turnover of key personnel.

"New objectives and new money cannot solve these problems. They could in fact, aggravate them further--unless every scientist, every engineer, every serviceman, every technician, contractor, and civil servant gives his personal pledge that this nation will move forward, with the full speed of freedom, in the exciting adventure of space."[1]

The Apollo program was at least partly motivated by psycho-political considerations, in the context of the Cold War and the Space Race.

Choosing a mission mode

Having settled upon the Moon as a target, the Apollo mission planners were faced with the challenge of designing a set of flights that would meet Kennedy's stated goal while minimizing risk to human life, cost, and demands on technology and astronaut skill.

Four possible plans were considered.

The entire spacecraft would land on and return from the Moon. This would have required a far more powerful rocket than the most powerful proposed at the time, the Nova rocket.

Earth Orbit Rendezvous: This plan, known as Earth orbit rendezvous (EOR), would have required the launch of two Saturn V rockets, one containing the spaceship and one containing fuel. The spaceship would have docked in earth orbit and be fueled with enough fuel to make it to the Moon and back. Again, the entire spacecraft would have landed on the Moon.

Lunar Surface Rendezvous: This would have required two spacecraft to be launched - the first one, being an automated vehicle carrying propellants, would land on the Moon, to be followed some time later by the manned vehicle. Propellant would be transferred from the automated vehicle to the manned vehicle before the manned vehicle could return to Earth.

Lunar Orbit Rendezvous: This plan, which was adopted, is credited to John Houbolt and used the technique of 'Lunar Orbit Rendezvous' (LOR). The spacecraft was modular, composed of a 'Command/Service Module' (CSM) and a 'Lunar Module' (LM; originally Lunar Excursion Module {LEM}). The CSM contained the life support systems for the three-man crew's five-day round trip to the Moon and the heat shield for their reentry to Earth's atmosphere. The LM would separate from the CSM in lunar orbit and carry two astronauts for the descent to the lunar surface, then back up to the CSM.

In contrast with the other plans, the LOR plan required only a small part of the spacecraft to land on the Moon, thereby minimizing the mass to be launched from the Moon's surface for the return trip. The mass to be launched was further minimized by leaving part of the LM (that with the descent engine) behind on the Moon.

Apollo LM on lunar surface.The Lunar Module itself was composed of a descent stage and an ascent stage, the former serving as a launch platform for the latter when the lunar exploration party blasted off for lunar orbit where they would dock with the CSM prior to returning to Earth. The plan had the advantage that since the LM was to be eventually discarded, it could be made very light, so the Moon mission could be launched with a single Saturn V rocket. However, at the time that LOR was decided, some mission planners were uneasy at the large number of dockings and undockings called for by the plan.

To learn lunar landing techniques, astronauts practiced in the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV), a flying vehicle that simulated (by means of a special, additional jet engine) the reduced gravity that the Lunar Module would actually fly in.

Spacecraft

The Apollo spacecraft consisted of three main sections, plus two minor sections.

The Command Module (CM) was the part in which the astronauts spent most of their time, including launch and landing. It was the only part that returned to Earth after the mission.

The Service Module (SM) housed the equipment needed by the astronauts, such as oxygen tanks, and the engine that would take the spacecraft into and out of lunar orbit. The combined Command and Service modules were called the CSM.

The Lunar Module (LM) (also known as Lunar Excursion Module, or LEM), was the part of the spacecraft that actually landed on the moon. It was comprised of two stages, one for descent, and one for ascent.The Launch Escape Tower (LET) would carry the Command Module clear of the launch vehicle, should it explode during launch, and the Spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter (SLA) was used to connect the spacecraft to the Launch Vehicle. In addition, on Apollos 9 - 17, it housed and protected the Lunar Module and on the ASTP flight, it housed the docking adapter.

Astronauts

The following astronauts flew Apollo missions:

From the Mercury Seven

Walter Marty Schirra, Jr., USN – Apollo 7

Alan Bartlett Shepard, Jr., USN – Apollo 14

From Astronaut Group 2

Neil Alden Armstrong – Apollo 11

Frank Frederick Borman II, USAF – Apollo 8

Charles "Pete" Conrad, Jr., USN – Apollo 12, Skylab 2

James Arthur Lovell, Jr., USN – Apollo 8, Apollo 13

James Alton McDivitt, USAF – Apollo 9

Thomas Patten Stafford, USAF – Apollo 10, Apollo-Soyuz Test Project

John Watts Young, USN – Apollo 10, Apollo 16

From Astronaut Group 3

Edwin Eugene "Buzz" Aldrin, USAF – Apollo 11

William Alison Anders, USAF – Apollo 8

Alan LaVern Bean, USN – Apollo 12, Skylab 3

Eugene Andrew Cernan, USN – Apollo 10, Apollo 17

Michael Collins, USAF – Apollo 11

Walter Cunningham, USMC – Apollo 7

Donn Fulton Eisele, USAF – Apollo 7

Richard Francis Gordon, Jr., USN – Apollo 12

Russell Louis "Rusty" Schweickart, USAF – Apollo 9

David Randolph Scott, USAF – Apollo 9, Apollo 15

From Astronaut Group 4

Harrison Hagan "Jack" Schmitt – Apollo 17

From Astronaut Group 5

Charles Moss Duke, Jr., USAF – Apollo 16

Ronald Ellwin Evans, Jr., USN – Apollo 17

Fred Wallace Haise, Jr., USMC – Apollo 13

James Benson Irwin, USAF – Apollo 15

Thomas Kenneth Mattingly II, USN – Apollo 16

Edgar Dean Mitchell, USN – Apollo 14

Stuart Allen Roosa, USAF – Apollo 14

John Leonard "Jack" Swigert, Jr., USAF – Apollo 13

Alfred Merrill Worden, USAF – Apollo 15

In addition, the following astronauts flew on Post-Apollo missions using Apollo hardware:

From the Mercury Seven

Donald Kent "Deke" Slayton, USAF – Apollo-Soyuz Test Project

From Astronaut Group 4

Owen Kay Garriott – Skylab 3

Edward George Gibson – Skylab 4

Joseph Peter Kerwin, USN – Skylab 2

From Astronaut Group 5

Vance DeVoe Brand, USMC – Skylab Rescue (never flown), Apollo-Soyuz Test Project

Gerald Paul Carr, USMC – Skylab 4

Jack Robert Lousma, USMC – Skylab 3

William Reid Pogue, USAF – Skylab 4

Paul Joseph Weitz, USN – Skylab 2

Missions

Location of Apollo missions on the moonThe Apollo program used four types of launch vehicles:

Little Joe II - unmanned suborbital launch escape system development.

Saturn I - unmanned suborbital and orbital hardware development.

Saturn IB - unmanned and manned earth orbit development and operational missions.

Saturn V - unmanned and manned earth orbit and lunar missions.

The Marshall Space Flight Center, which designed the Saturn rockets, referred to the flights as Saturn-Apollo (SA), while Kennedy Space Center referred to the flights as Apollo-Saturn (AS). This is why the unmanned Saturn 1 flights are referred to as SA and the unmanned Saturn 1B are referred to as AS.

Dates given below are dates of launch.

Unmanned missions

Saturn I

Mission LV Serial No Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

SA-1 S-101 October 27, 1961 15:06 GMT Test of the Saturn 1 Rocket

SA-2 S-102 April 25, 1962 14:00 GMT Test of the S-1 Rocket and carried 109 m³ of water into the upper atmosphere to investigate effects on radio transmission and changes in local weather conditions.

SA-3 AS-103 November 16, 1962 17:45 GMT Repeat of the SA-2 mission.

SA-4 AS-104 March 28, 1963 20:11 GMT Test effects of premature engine shutdown

SA-5 AS-105 January 29, 1964 16:25 GMT First flight of live second stage

A-101 AS-106 May 28, 1964 17:07 GMT Tested the structural integrity of a boilerplate Apollo Command and Service Module

A-102 AS-107 September 18, 1964 17:22 GMT Carried the first programmable computer on the Saturn I vehicle; last test flight

A-103 AS-109 February 16, 1965 14:37 GMT Carried Pegasus A micrometeorite satellite plus a CSM boilerplate

*A-104 AS-108 May 25, 1965 07:35 GMT Carried Pegasus B micrometeorite satellite plus a CSM boilerplate

A-105 AS-110 July 30, 1965 13:00 GMT Carried Pegasus C micrometeorite satellite plus a CSM boilerplate

Pad abort tests

Pad Abort Test (NASA)Mission Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

Pad Abort Test-1 November 7, 1963 16:00 GMT Launch Escape System (LES) abort test from launch pad.

Pad Abort Test-2 June 29, 1965 13:00 GMT LES pad abort test of near Block-I CM.

Little Joe II

Mission LV Serial No Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

QTV August 28, 1963 13:05 GMT Little Joe II qualification test.

A-001 May 13, 1964 13:00 GMT LES transonic abort test.

A-002 December 8, 1964 15:00 GMT LES maximum altitude, Max-Q abort test.

A-003 May 19, 1965 13:01 GMT LES canard maximum altitude abort test.

A-004 January 20, 1966 15:17 GMT LES test of maximum weight, tumbling Block-I CM.

Unmanned Apollo-Saturn IB and Saturn V

Mission Rocket LV Serial No Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

AS-201 Saturn IB AS-201 February 26, 1966 16:12 GMT First test flight of Saturn IB rocket

AS-203 Saturn IB AS-203 July 5, 1966 14:53 GMT Investigated effects of weightlessness on fuel tanks of S-IVB

AS-202 Saturn IB AS-202 August 25, 1966 17:15 GMT Sub-orbital test flight of Command and Service Module

Apollo 4 Saturn V AS-501 November 9, 1967 12:00 GMT First test of the Saturn V booster

Apollo 5 Saturn IB AS-204 January 22, 1968 22:48 GMT Test of the Saturn IB booster and Lunar Module

Apollo 6 Saturn V AS-502 April 4, 1968 16:12 GMT Test of the Saturn V booster

Skylab 1 Saturn INT-21 AS-513 May 14, 1973 17:30 GMT Unmanned launch of Skylab 1 workshop using Saturn INT-21 (two-stage version of the Saturn V booster). Last flight of Saturn V booster.

Manned missions

Mission Rocket LV Serial No Commander Senior Pilot Pilot CM Name LM Name Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

Apollo 1 Saturn IB AS-204 Grissom White Chaffee N/A No LM February 21, 1967 (Planned) N/A Unlaunched - On January 27, 1967 Gus Grissom, Edward White, and Roger Chaffee are killed when fire erupts in their Apollo spacecraft during a test on the launch pad.

Apollo 7 Saturn IB AS-205 Schirra Eisele Cunningham N/A No LM October 11, 1968 15:02 GMT First manned Apollo flight, first manned flight of the Saturn IB.

Apollo 8 Saturn V AS-503 Borman Lovell Anders N/A No LM December 21, 1968 12:51 GMT First manned flight around the Moon, first manned flight of the Saturn V.

Mission Rocket LV Serial No Commander CM Pilot LM Pilot CM Name LM Name Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

Apollo 9 Saturn V AS-504 McDivitt Scott Schweickart Gumdrop Spider March 3, 1969 16:00 GMT First manned flight of the Lunar Module.

Apollo 10 Saturn V AS-505 Stafford Young Cernan Charlie Brown Snoopy May 18, 1969 16:49 GMT First manned flight of the Lunar Module around the Moon.

Apollo 11 Saturn V AS-506 Armstrong Collins Aldrin Columbia Eagle July 16, 1969 13:32 GMT First manned landing on the Moon, July 20.

Apollo 12 Saturn V AS-507 Conrad Gordon Bean Yankee Clipper Intrepid November 14, 1969 16:22 GMT First precise manned landing on the Moon. Recovered part of Surveyor 3 probe.

Apollo 13 Saturn V AS-508 Lovell Swigert Haise Odyssey Aquarius April 11, 1970 19:13 GMT Oxygen tank exploded en route, forcing cancellation of landing.

First (and, as of 2006, only) manned non-orbital lunar flight.

Apollo 14 Saturn V AS-509 Shepard Roosa Mitchell Kitty Hawk Antares January 31, 1971 21:03 GMT Alan Shepard, the sole astronaut of the Mercury MR-3 mission - and thus the first American in space - walks on the Moon.

Apollo 15 Saturn V AS-510 Scott Worden Irwin Endeavour Falcon July 26, 1971 13:34 GMT First mission with the Lunar Rover vehicle.

Apollo 16 Saturn V AS-511 Young Mattingly Duke Casper Orion April 16, 1972 17:54 GMT First landing in the lunar highlands.

Apollo 17 Saturn V AS-512 Cernan Evans Schmitt America Challenger December 7, 1972 05:33 GMT Final Apollo lunar mission, first night launch, only mission with a professional geologist.

The original pre-lunar landing program was more conservative but, as the 'all-up' test flights for the Saturn V proved successful, some missions were deleted. The revised schedule published in October 1967 had the first manned Apollo CSM earth orbit mission (Apollo 7) followed by an Earth Orbit Rendezvous of the CSM and LM launched on two Saturn 1Bs (Apollo 8) followed by a Saturn V launched CSM on a Large Earth Orbit Mission (Apollo 9) followed by the Saturn V launched dress rehearsal in Lunar Orbit with Apollo 10. By the summer of 1968 it became clear to program managers that a fully functional LM would not be available for the Apollo 8 mission. Rather than perform a simple earth orbiting mission, they chose to send Apollo 8 around the moon during Christmas. The original idea for this switch was the brainchild of George Low. Although it has often been claimed that this change was made as a direct response to Soviet attempts to fly a piloted Zond spacecraft around the moon, there is no evidence that this was actually the case. NASA officials were aware of the Soviet Zond flights, but the timing of the Zond missions does not correspond well with the extensive written record from NASA about the Apollo 8 decision. It is relatively certain that the Apollo 8 decision was primarily based upon the LM schedule, rather than fear of the Soviets beating the Americans to the moon.

Cancelled lunar missions

Mission name/designation Commander CM Pilot LM Pilot Mission date Date of cancellation Reason for cancellation

Apollo 15 Haise Pogue Carr February 1972 September 2, 1970 Budget cuts - NOTE: The Apollo 15 designation was re-used as Apollo 16 became 15, 17 became 16, and 18 became 17.

Apollo 19 Gordon Brand Schmitt July 1972 September 2, 1970 Budget cuts

Apollo 20 Roosa Lousma Lind December 1972 January 4, 1970 Launch vehicle needed to launch Skylab

Post-Apollo missions using Apollo hardware and Saturn IB

Mission Rocket LV Serial No Commander Pilot Science Pilot Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

Skylab 2 Saturn IB AS-206 Conrad Weitz Kerwin May 25, 1973 13:00 GMT First crew of the Skylab Space Station.

Skylab 3 Saturn IB AS-207 Bean Lousma Garriott July 28, 1973 11:10 GMT Second Skylab crew. SM thruster malfunction nearly necessitated a Rescue Mission.

Skylab 4 Saturn IB AS-208 Carr Pogue Gibson November 16, 1973 14:01 GMT Third and final Skylab crew. Penultimate flight of Apollo.

Mission Rocket LV Serial No Commander CM Pilot Docking Module Pilot Launch Date Launch Time Remarks

Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (Apollo 18) Saturn IB AS-209 Stafford Brand Slayton July 15, 1975 12:20 GMT Final flight of both Apollo and the Saturn Ib. Rendezvous and docking with Soyuz 19 spacecraft.

Launch Complex utilization

Launch Complex 34 - SA-1, SA-2, SA-3, SA-4, AS-201, AS-202, AS-204 (Apollo 1), AS-205 (Apollo 7)

Launch Complex 37A - no launches

Launch Complex 37B - SA-5, A-101, A-102, A-103, A-104, A-105, AS-203, AS-204 (Apollo 5)

Launch Complex 39A - AS-501 (Apollo 4), AS-502 (Apollo 6), AS-503 (Apollo 8), AS-504 (Apollo 9), AS-506 (Apollo 11), AS-507 (Apollo 12), AS-508 (Apollo 13), AS-509 (Apollo 14), AS-510 (Apollo 15), AS-511 (Apollo 16), AS-512 (Apollo 17), AS-513 (Skylab 1)

Launch Complex 39B - AS-505 (Apollo 10), AS-206 (Skylab 2), AS-207 (Skylab 3), AS-208 (Skylab 4), AS-210 (ASTP).

Samples Returned

Ferroan Anorthosite, collected by Apollo 16.Lunar

Mission Sample

Returned

Apollo 11 22 kg

Apollo 12 34 kg

Apollo 14 43 kg

Apollo 15 77 kg

Apollo 16 95 kg

Apollo 17 111 kg

Main article: Moon rock

Apollo returned 381.7kg (841.5 lb) of rocks and other material from the Moon; much is stored at the Lunar Receiving Laboratory in Houston.

In general the rocks collected from the Moon are extremely old compared to rocks found on the Earth, as measured by radiometric dating techniques. The youngest of the rocks is older than the oldest rocks seen on Earth. They range in age from 3.2 billion years from the basalt samples from the lunar mare, up to 4.6 billion years in the highlands. As such they represent samples from a very early period in the formation of the Solar System.

One of the most important rocks found during the Apollo Program was the Genesis Rock, retrived by astronauts James Irwin and David Scott of Apollo 15. The rock dates back to the formation of the moon.

Many of the rocks appear to be littered with micrometeoroid impact craters, something which is never seen on earth due to the thick atmosphere, but which is possible on the moon.

Apollo Applications

In the speech which initiated Apollo, Kennedy declared that no other program would have as great a long-range effect on America's ambitions in outer space. Following the success of Project Apollo, both NASA and its major contractors investigated several post-lunar applications for the Apollo hardware. The "Apollo Extension Series", later called the "Apollo Applications Program", proposed up to thirty flights to Earth Orbit. Many of these would use the space that the lunar module took up in the Saturn rocket to carry scientific equipment.

One plan involved using the Saturn IB to take the Command/Service Module (CSM) to a variety of low-earth orbits for missions lasting up to 45 days. Some missions would involve the docking of two CSMs, and transfer of supplies. The Saturn V would be necessary to take it to polar orbit, or sun-synchronous orbit (neither of which has yet been achieved by any manned spacecraft), and even to the geosynchronous orbit of Syncom 3, a communications satellite not quite in geostationary orbit. This was the first functioning communications satellite at that now-common great distance from the Earth, and it was small enough to be carried through the hatch and taken back to Earth for study as to the effects of radiation on its electronic components in that environment over a period of years. A return to the moon was also planned, this time to orbit for a longer time to map the surface with high-precision equipment. This mission would not include a landing.

Of all the plans, only two were implemented: the Skylab space station (May 1973 – February 1974), and the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (July 1975). Skylab's fuselage was constructed from the second stage of a Saturn IB, and the station was equipped with the Apollo Telescope Mount, itself based on a lunar module. The station's three crews were ferried into orbit atop Saturn IBs, riding in CSMs; the station itself had been launched with a modified Saturn V. Skylab's last crew departed the station on February 8, 1974, whilst the station itself returned prematurely to Earth in 1979, by which time it had become the oldest operational Apollo component.

The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project involved a docking in Earth orbit between an unnamed CSM and a Soviet Soyuz spacecraft. The mission lasted from July 15 to July 24, 1975. Although the Soviet Union continued to operate the Soyuz and Salyut space vehicles, NASA's next manned mission would not be until STS-1 on April 12, 1981.

In 1964/5 Grumman, the primary contrator for the Apollo LM systems, attempted to interest the USAF and Navy in a military version of CSM/LM configuration. The LM would have been equipped with a manipulator arm and projectile weapons to intercept and disable enemy satellites. The proposal was never fully developed and was abandoned in 1967.

End of the program

Unflown command module CM-007 in a museumOriginally three additional lunar landing missions had been planned, as Apollo 18 through Apollo 20. In light of the drastically shrinking NASA budget and the decision not to produce a second batch of Saturn Vs, these missions were cancelled to make funds available for the development of the Space Shuttle, and to make their Apollo spacecraft and Saturn V launch vehicles available to the Skylab program. Only one of the remaining Saturn Vs was actually used; the others became museum exhibits.

The next generation of NASA spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), which is to replace the Space Shuttle following its retirement in 2010, is influenced largely by the Apollo Program. The most notable difference is that the CEV will return to Earth on land, much like the Russian Soyuz spacecraft, rather than at sea as the Apollos did.

The Apollo program stimulated many areas of technology. The flight computer design used in both the lunar and command modules was, along with the Minuteman Missile System, the driving force behind early research into integrated circuits. The fuel cell developed for this program was the first practical fuel cell. Computer-controlled machining (CNC) was pioneered in fabricating Apollo structural components.

Many astronauts and cosmonauts have commented on the profound effects that seeing Earth from space has had on them. One of the most important legacies of the Apollo program was the now-common, but not universal, view of Earth as a fragile, small planet, captured in the photographs taken by the astronauts during the lunar missions. The most famous of these photographs, taken by the Apollo 17 astronauts, is "The Blue Marble". These photographs have also motivated many people toward environmentalism and space colonization.

The cost of the entire program is estimated at $135 billion (2006) Dollars ($25.4 billion in 1969 Dollars). The Apollo spacecraft cost $28 billion (2006) dollars to develop: $17 billion for the command and service modules, and $11 billion for the Lunar Module. The Saturn I, IB and V launch vehicle development cost about $46 billion.

Apollo-Soyuz Test Project

Mission Statistics (Soyuz)

Mission Name: Soyuz 19

Call Sign: (Soyuz - "Union")

Number of

Crew: 2

Launch: July 15, 1975

12:20:00 UTC

Baikonur

Apogee: 231 km

Perigee: 218 km

Period: 88.92 min

Inclination: 51.76 deg .

Landing: July 21, 1975

10:50:00 UTC

57° N 67° E

Duration: 5 d 22 h 30 min 54 s

Number of

Orbits: 96

Distance

Traveled: ~2,400,000 mi

(~3,900,000 km)

Mass: Soyuz 6,790 kg

Mission Insignia

Mission Statistics (Apollo)

Mission Name: Apollo (No Official Mission Number Assigned)

Call Sign: Apollo

Number of

Crew: 3

Launch: July 15, 1975

19:50:00 UTC

Kennedy Space Center

LC-39B

Apogee: 231 km

Perigee: 217 km

Period: 88.91 min

Inclination: 51.75 deg

Landing: July 24, 1975

21:18:00 UTC

21°52'N 162°45'W

Duration: 9 d 1 h 28 min 24 s

Number of

Orbits: 148

Distance

Traveled: ~3,700,000 mi

(~5,990,000 km)

Mass: CSM 14,768 kg

DM 2,012 kg

Crew Picture

ASTP Crew

The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project was the first joint flight of the US and Soviet space programs. The mission took place in July 1975. For the United States of America, it was the last Apollo flight, as well as the last manned space launch until the flight of the first Space Shuttle in April 1981. For the Soviet Union it was the last manned space flight until Soyuz 21 in June 1976.

Apollo Crew

Thomas Stafford (flew on Gemini 6A, Gemini 9A, Apollo 10, & Apollo-Soyuz) - Apollo Commander

Vance Brand (flew on Apollo-Soyuz, STS-5, STS-41-B, & STS-35) - Apollo Command Module Pilot

Deke Slayton (flew on Apollo-Soyuz) - Apollo Docking Module Pilot

Jack Swigert had originally been assigned as the Command Module Pilot in the original ASTP prime crew, but prior to the official announcement was removed as punishment for his involvement in the Apollo 15 Postage Stamp Scandal. (Swigert was not involved in the controversial Apollo 15 stamp deal, but in the investigation that followed the scandal he initially denied having any involvement in similar schemes. When evidence against him started to build up he confessed to Deke Slayton and was consequently considered to be undesirable from a public relations viewpoint.)

Backup Crew

Alan Bean

Ronald Evans

Jack Lousma

Soyuz Crew

Alexei Leonov (2) - Soyuz 19 Commander

Valery Kubasov (3) - Soyuz 19 Engineer

(1) number of spaceflights each crew member has completed, including this mission.

Backup Crew

Anatoli Filipchenko

Nikolai Rukavishnikov

Mission parameters

Mass:

14,768 kg (Apollo),

6,790 kg (Soyuz)

Perigee:

152 km (Apollo),

186 km (Soyuz)

Apogee:

166 km (Apollo),

220 km (Soyuz)

Inclination:

51.7° (Apollo),

51.8° (Soyuz)

Period:

87.6 minutes (Apollo),

88.5 minutes (Soyuz)

Docking

First Docking: July 17, 1975 - 16:19:09 UTC

Last Undocking: July 19, 1975 - 15:26:12 UTC

Time Docked: 1 day, 23 hours, 07 minutes, 03 seconds

Mission highlights

The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) took place in the second half of July 1975 and entailed the docking of an American Apollo spacecraft with the Soviet Soyuz 19 space craft. While the Soyuz was given a mission designation number, officially the Apollo was not given one, as it was intended to represent the entire program and its conclusion. Some histories list this Apollo flight as Apollo 18, but per NASA this is incorrect.

The Apollo flew with the following crew on board: Tom Stafford, Vance Brand and Deke Slayton. The Soyuz 19 flew with Alexei Leonov and Valery Kubasov.

ASTP was in part inspired by the 1968 film Marooned, in which a stranded US Apollo crew is rescued by a Soviet spacecraft. Although the equipment developed for ASTP was only of use as a one-off, the program allowed NASA to maintain a manned space focus following the end of the Apollo and Skylab missions. As the Apollo's Saturn IB launcher and CSM were all surplus material, ASTP was the most inexpensive manned space program ever mounted.

The Soyuz 19 and Apollo flights launched within seven-and-a-half hours of each other July 15, and docked on July 17. Three hours later the two mission commanders, Stafford and Leonov, exchanged the first international handshake in space through the open hatch of the Soyuz. NASA had calculated that the historic handshake would have taken place over the British seaside resort of Bognor Regis, [1] but a delay resulted in its actual occurrence being over the town of Metz in France. [2]

The two spacecraft remained linked for 44 hours, long enough for the three Americans and two Soviets to exchange flags and gifts (including tree seeds which were later planted in the two countries), sign certificates, pay visits to each other's ships, eat together and converse in each other's languages. There were also docking and redocking maneuvers during which the two spacecraft reversed roles and the Soyuz became the "active" ship. The Soviets remained in space for five days, the Americans for nine, during which the Soviets also conducted experiments in Earth observation.

Soyuz 19 spacecraft as seen from Apollo CMWhile docked, the two crews conducted joint scientific experiments and spent time in each others' craft. After forty-four hours together, the two ships separated, and maneuvered to use the Apollo to create an artificial solar eclipse to allow the crew of the Soyuz to take photographs of the solar corona. Another brief docking was made before the ships went their separate ways.

The mission was a great success, both technically and as a public-relations exercise for both sides. As an aside, the Apollo-Soyuz mission was the first mission carrying a handheld programmable pocket calculator (the HP-65); the calculator was programmed to perform several backup computations to partly stand in for the Apollo mission computer in case the latter should malfunction or cease to function altogether (neither of which occurred).

Launch of the Saturn IB rocket carrying the Apollo Command Module into orbit.The only serious problem that arose was due to the Apollo crew making a mistake during their preparations for re-entry that resulted in a very rough landing and the capsule filling with noxious fumes. The reaction control system was inadvertently left on during descent, producing uncombusted thruster propellant which was then sucked into the capsule as its pressure equalized with the outside air. Fortunately, there were no serious injuries.

This was the final flight of an Apollo spacecraft. The Command Module is on display at California Science Center, Los Angeles, California

Human spaceflight is space exploration with a human crew and possibly passengers, which is in contrast to robotic space probes or remotely-controlled unmanned space missions.

On occasion, passengers of other species have ridden aboard spacecraft, although not all survived the return to earth. Dogs, not humans, were the first large mammals launched from Earth. The first human spaceflight was Vostok 1 on April 12, 1961; Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin made one orbit around the earth; following the success of his flight, the head engineer of the Vostok program suggested the formation of women cosmonauts; Valentina Tereshkova became the first woman in space onboard Vostok 6 on June 16, 1963.

The highest Earth orbit attained by a piloted vehicle was Gemini 11 in 1966, which reached a height of 1374 km. The Space Shuttle on the missions to launch and service the Hubble Space Telescope has also reached high earth orbit at an altitude of around 600 km.

The destination of human spaceflight missions beyond Earth orbit has only been the Moon, which is itself in Earth orbit. On the first such mission, Apollo 8, the crew orbited the Moon. Apollo 10 was the next mission, and it tested the lunar landing craft in lunar orbit without actually landing. The six missions that landed were Apollo 11-17, excluding Apollo 13. On each mission, two of the three astronauts involved landed on the moon; thus, in the late 1960s and early 1970s NASA's Apollo program landed twelve men on the Moon--returning them all to Earth.

Currently the following spacecrafts and spaceports are used:

International Space Station (includes Soyuz TMA as an emergency lander; normal crew transport with the following two spacecraft)

Soyuz TMA with Soyuz launch vehicle - Baikonur Cosmodrome

Space Shuttle - John F. Kennedy Space Center

Shenzhou spacecraft with Long March rocket - Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center

Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne with Scaled Composites White Knight (the latter does not enter space itself) - Mojave Spaceport

In an attempt to win the $10 million X-Prize, numerous private companies attempted to build their own manned spacecraft capable of repeated sub-orbital flights. The first private spaceflight took place on June 21, 2004, when SpaceShipOne conducted a sub-orbital flight. With its second flight within one week, SpaceShipOne captured the prize on October 4, 2004.

NASA now uses the term "human spaceflight" to refer to its programme of launching people into space. Traditionally, these endeavours have been referred to as "manned space missions". The term "manned" does not reflect gender, but means "crewed", or "operated by a person":

An astronaut, cosmonaut, afronaut (referring to Africans), spationaut or taikonaut (Chinese: taikongren) is a person who travels into space, or who makes a career of doing so. The criteria for determining who has achieved human spaceflight vary (see edge of space). In the United States, people who travel above an altitude of 50 miles (80 km) are designated as astronauts. The FAI defines spaceflight as over 100 km (62 miles). As of March 30, 2006, a total of 449 humans have reached space according to the U.S. definition, 443 people qualify under the FAI definition, while 439 people have reached Earth orbit or beyond. These individuals have spent over 28,000 crew-days (or a cumulative total of over 77 years) in space including over 100 crew-days of spacewalks. A person who has traveled in space is said to hold astronaut wings. Astronauts from at least 35 countries have gone into space.

International variations

Countries whose astronauts have flown in spaceBy convention, a space traveller employed by the Russian Aviation and Space Agency (or its Soviet predecessor) is called a cosmonaut. The word is an anglicisation of the Russian word, which in turn derives from the Greek words kosmos ("universe") and nautes ("sailor").

In the U.S., a space traveller is called an astronaut. The term derives from the Greek words ástron ("star") and nautes, ("sailor"). For the most part, "cosmonaut" and "astronaut" are synonyms in all languages, and the usage of choice is often dictated by political reasons. However in the United States, the term "astronaut" is typically applied to the individual as soon as training begins, while in Russia, an individual is not labeled a cosmonaut until successful space flight. The first known use of the term "astronaut" was by Neil R. Jones in his short story The Death's Head Meteor in 1930. On March 14, 1995 astronaut Norman Thagard became the first American to ride to space on board a Russian launch vehicle, arguably becoming the first American cosmonaut in the process.

In France space travellers are sometimes called spationauts (from the Latin words spatium, "space", and nauta, "sailor"). Apart from the Soviet Union, Europe has not yet produced manned spacecraft, but has sent men and women into space in cooperation with Russia and the United States.

Taikonaut is sometimes used in English for astronauts from China by Western news media. The term was coined in May 1998 by Chiew Lee Yih from Malaysia, who used it first in newsgroups. Almost simultaneously, Chen Lan coined it for use in the Western media based on the term tàikong ( literally "great emptiness"), Chinese for "space". In Chinese itself, however, a single term yuháng yuán ("universe navigator") has long been used for astronauts. The closest term using taikong is a colloquialism tàikong rén ("space person"), which refers to people who have actually been in space. Official English texts issued by the Chinese government use astronaut (Simplified Chinese: ; pinyin: hángtian yuán).

Space milestones

The first attempt ever in human history to use a rocket for spaceflight was done in the 16th century by a Chinese Ming dynasty official, a skilled stargazer named Wan Hu.[1] This attempt was not successful.

The first cosmonaut was Yuri Gagarin, who was launched into space on April 12, 1961 aboard Vostok 1. The first woman cosmonaut was Valentina Tereshkova, launched into space in June 1963 aboard Vostok 6. Alan Shepard became the first American in space in May 1961, while the first American woman in space was Sally Ride on June 18, 1983. Vladimir Remek, a Czech, became the first non-Soviet European in space in 1978 on a Russian Soyuz rocket. On July 23, 1980, Pham Tuan of Vietnam became the first Asian in space when he flew aboard Soyuz 37. Also in 1980, Cuban Arnaldo Tamayo Méndez became the first person of African descent to fly in space. (The first person born in Africa to fly in space was Patrick Baudry.) In April 1985 Taylor Wang became the first Chinese-born person in space; later that year, Rodolfo Neri became the first Mexican-born person in space. In 2002, Mark Shuttleworth became the first citizen of an African country to fly in space. On 15 October 2003, Yang Liwei became China's first astronaut on the Shenzhou 5 spacecraft. The first mission to orbit the moon was Apollo 8 which included William Anders - who was born in Hong Kong, making him the first Asian-born astronaut in 1968.

The youngest person to fly in space is Gherman Titov, who was roughly 26 years old when he flew Vostok 2 (he was also the first to suffer "space sickness"), and the oldest is John Glenn, who was 77 when he flew on STS-95. The longest stay in space was 438 days by Valeri Polyakov. As of 2005, the most spaceflights by an individual astronaut was seven, a record held by both Jerry L. Ross and Franklin Chang-Diaz. The furthest distance from Earth an astronaut has traveled was 401 056 km (during the Apollo 13 emergency).

The first non-governmental astronaut was Byron K. Lichtenberg, an MIT researcher who flew on Space Shuttle mission STS-9 in 1983. In December 1990, Toyohiro Akiyama became the first commercial space-farer as a reporter for Tokyo Broadcasting System, who paid for his flight. The first self-funded space tourist was Dennis Tito on 28 April 2001, while the first astronaut to fly on an entirely privately-funded mission was Mike Melvill, on SpaceShipOne flight 15P (which he piloted), though this flight was sub-orbital.

In the United States, persons selected as astronaut candidates receive silver Astronaut wings. Once they have flown in space they receive gold Astronaut wings. The United States Air Force also presents Astronaut wings to its pilots who exceed 50 miles (80 km) in altitude.

Astronaut training

The first astronauts, both in the U.S. and USSR, tended to be jet fighter pilots, often test pilots, from military backgrounds. U.S. military astronauts receive a special qualification badge, known as the Astronaut Badge upon completion of Astronaut training and participation in a space flight.

Astronaut deaths

Dick Scobee, commander of the Space Shuttle Challenger during the STS-51-L mission.To date, eighteen astronauts have been killed on space missions, and at least ten more have been killed in ground-based training accidents. See also: space disaster.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which was established on July 29, 1958 by the National Aeronautics and Space Act,[1] is the agency responsible for the public space program of the United States of America. It is also responsible for long-term civilian and military aerospace research.

History

Following the Soviet space program's launch of the world's first man-made satellite (Sputnik 1) on October 4, 1957, the attention of the United States turned toward its own fledgling space efforts. The U.S. Congress, alarmed by the perceived threat to U.S. security and technological leadership (known as "Sputnik Shock"), urged immediate and swift action; President Dwight D. Eisenhower and his advisors counseled more deliberate measures. Several months of debate produced agreement that a new federal agency was needed to conduct all nonmilitary activity in space.

On July 29, 1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the National Aeronautics and Space Act establishing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). When it began operations on October 1, 1958, NASA consisted mainly of the four laboratories and some 8,000 employees of the government's 46-year-old research agency for aeronautics, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), though the probably most important contribution actually had its roots in the German rocket program led by Wernher von Braun, who is today regarded as the father of the United States space program. Elements of the Army Ballistic Missile Agency (of which von Braun's team was a part) and the Naval Research Laboratory were incorporated into NASA.

NASA's early programs were research into human spaceflight, and were conducted under the pressure of the competition between the USA and the USSR (the Space Race) that existed during the Cold War. The Mercury program, initiated in 1958, started NASA down the path of human space exploration with missions designed to discover simply if man could survive in space. Representatives from the U.S. Army (M.L. Raines, LTC, USA), Navy (P.L. Havenstein, CDR, USN) and Air Force (K.G. Lindell, COL, USAF) were selected/requested to provide assistance to the NASA Space Task Group through coordination with the existing U.S. military research and defense contracting infrastructure, and technical assistance resulting from experimental aircraft (and the associated military test pilot pool) development in the 1950s. On May 5, 1961, astronaut Alan B. Shepard Jr. became the first American in space when he piloted Freedom 7 on a 15-minute suborbital flight. John Glenn became the first American to orbit the Earth on February 20, 1962 during the 5-hour flight of Friendship 7.

Once the Mercury project proved that human spaceflight was possible, project Gemini was launched to conduct experiments and work out issues relating to a moon mission. The first Gemini flight with astronauts on board, Gemini III, was flown by Virgil "Gus" Grissom and John W. Young on March 23, 1965. Nine other missions followed, showing that long-duration human space flight was possible, proving that rendezvous and docking with another vehicle in space was possible, and gathering medical data on the effects of weightlessness on humans.

Apollo program

The Apollo program was designed to land humans on the Moon and bring them safely back to Earth. Six of the missions (Apollos 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17) achieved this goal. Apollos 7 and 9 were Earth orbiting missions to test the Command and Lunar Modules, and did not return lunar data. Apollos 8 and 10 tested various components while orbiting the Moon, and returned photography of the lunar surface. Apollo 13 did not land on the Moon due to a malfunction, but also returned photographs. The six missions that landed on the Moon returned a wealth of scientific data and almost 400 kilograms of lunar samples. Experiments included soil mechanics, meteoroids, seismic, heat flow, lunar ranging, magnetic fields, and solar wind experiments.[1]

Other early missions

Although the vast majority of NASA's budget has been spent on human spaceflight, there have been many robotic missions instigated by the space agency. In 1962 the Mariner 2 mission was launched and became the first spacecraft to make a flyby of another planet – in this case Venus. The Ranger, Surveyor, and Lunar Orbiter missions were essential to assessing lunar conditions before attempting Apollo landings with humans on board. Later, the two Viking probes landed on the surface of Mars and sent color images back to Earth, but perhaps more impressive were the Pioneer and particularly Voyager missions that visited Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune sending back scientific information and color images.

Having lost the moon race, the Soviet Union had, along with the USA, changed its approach. On July 17, 1975 Apollo 18 (finding a new use after the cancelling of planned lunar flights) was docked to the Soviet Soyuz 19 spacecraft, in the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project. Although the Cold War would last many more years, this was a critical point in NASA's history and much of the international co-operation in space exploration that exists today has its genesis with this mission. America's first space station, Skylab, occupied NASA from the end of Apollo until the late 1970s.

Shuttle era

The space shuttle became the major focus of NASA in the late 1970s and the 1980s. Planned to be a frequently launchable and mostly reusable vehicle, four space shuttles were built by 1985. The first to launch, Columbia did so on April 12, 1981.[2]

The shuttle was not all good news for NASA — flights were much more expensive than initially projected, and even after the 1986 Challenger disaster highlighted the risks of space flight, the public again lost interest as missions appeared to become mundane. Work began on Space Station Freedom as a focus for the manned space program but within NASA there was argument that these projects came at the expense of more inspiring unmanned missions such as the Voyager probes. The Challenger disaster, aside from the late 1980s, marked a low point for NASA.

Nonetheless, the shuttle has been used to launch milestone projects like the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). The HST was created with a relatively small budget of $2 billion but has continued operation since 1990 and has delighted both scientists and the public. Some of the images it has returned have become near-legendary, such as the groundbreaking Hubble Deep Field images. The HST is a joint project between the European Space Agency (ESA) and NASA, and its success has paved the way for greater collaboration between the agencies.

In 1995 Russian-American interaction would again be achieved as the Shuttle-Mir missions began, and once more a Russian craft (this time a full-fledged space station) docked with an American vehicle. This cooperation continues to the present day, with Russia and America the two biggest partners in the largest space station ever built – the International Space Station (ISS). The strength of their cooperation on this project was even more evident when NASA began relying on Russian launch vehicles to service the ISS following the 2003 Columbia disaster, which grounded the shuttle fleet for well over two years.

Costing over one hundred billion dollars, it has been difficult at times for NASA to justify the ISS. The population at large have historically been hard to impress with details of scientific experiments in space, preferring news of grand projects to exotic locations. Even now, the ISS cannot accommodate as many scientists as planned.

During much of the 1990s, NASA was faced with shrinking annual budgets due to Congressional belt-tightening in Washington, DC. In response, NASA's ninth administrator, Daniel S. Goldin, pioneered the "faster, better, cheaper" approach that enabled NASA to cut costs while still delivering a wide variety of aerospace programs (Discovery Program). That method was criticized and re-evaluated following the twin losses of Mars Climate Orbiter and Mars Polar Lander in 1999.

NASA's shuttle program has made over 112 successful launches.

NASA's future

Left to Right: Saturn V, which last carried men to the moon, the Space Shuttle and the planned crew and heavy lift launch vehiclesNASA's most publicly-inspiring mission of recent years has probably been the Mars Pathfinder mission of 1997. Newspapers around the world carried images of the lander dispatching its own rover, Sojourner, to explore the surface of Mars. Less publicly acclaimed but performing science from 1997 to date (2005) has been the Mars Global Surveyor orbiter. Since 2001, the orbiting Mars Odyssey has been searching for evidence of past or present water and volcanic activity on the red planet. NASA expects to continue exploring the Red Planet with more spacecraft such as the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, which reached Mars in 2006.

The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster in 2003, which killed the crew of six Americans and one Israeli, caused a 29-month hiatus in space shuttle flights and triggered a serious re-examination of NASA's priorities. The U.S. government, various scientists, and the public all considered the future of the space program.

On January 14, 2004, ten days after the landing of Mars Exploration Rover Spirit, President George W. Bush announced a new plan for NASA's future, dubbed the Vision for Space Exploration. According to this plan, humankind will return to the moon by 2018, and set up outposts as a testbed and potential resource for future missions. The space shuttle will be retired in 2010 and the Crew Exploration Vehicle will replace it by 2014, capable of both docking with the ISS and leaving the Earth's orbit. The future of the ISS is somewhat uncertain — construction will be completed, but beyond that is less clear. Although the plan initially met with skepticism from Congress, in late 2004 Congress agreed to provide start-up funds for the first year's worth of the new space vision.

Hoping to spur innovation from the private sector, NASA established a series of Centennial Challenges, technology prizes for non-government teams, in 2004. The Challenges include tasks that will be useful for implementing the Vision for Space Exploration, such as building more efficient astronaut gloves.

Criticisms

Some commentators, such as Mark Wade, note that NASA has suffered from a 'stop-start' approach to its human spaceflight programs. The Apollo spacecraft and Saturn family of launch vehicles were abandoned in the 1970's after billions of dollars had been spent on their development. In 2004 the U.S. Government proposed eventually replacing the Shuttle with a Crew Exploration Vehicle that would allow the agency to again send astronauts to the Moon. Despite the reduction of its budget following project Apollo, NASA has maintained a top-heavy bureaucracy resulting in inflated costs and compromised hardware.

Currently, the ISS relies on the Shuttle fleet for all major construction shipments. The Shuttle fleet has lost two spacecraft and fourteen astronauts in two disasters in 1986 and 2003. While the 1986 loss was made up with a space shuttle built from replacement parts, NASA does not plan to build another shuttle to replace the second loss. (See also CEV.) The ISS, which was intended to have a crew of seven as of 2005, now has a skeleton crew of two, causing many intended research projects to be delayed. However, Anatoli Perminov, director of Roskosmos, told Russian news agency Itar-Tass that from 2009 there would be six permanent crew members on board the station. Since the Columbia Shuttle accident, the permanent space station crew has comprised one Russian and one American, on board for six months at a time, meaning European and Japanese astronauts could not stay for longer missions. An increase in the number of crew members has been in the pipeline for some time but was delayed following the Columbia disaster in February 2003. Other nations that have invested heavily in the space station's construction, such as the members of the European Space Agency, are fearful that the ISS's fate will soon match the fate of Skylab.

NASA spaceflight missions

It has been suggested that this section be split into a new article entitled NASA Missions. (Discuss)

Human spaceflight

Mercury program

Gemini program

Apollo program

Apollo-Soyuz (Soviet Union partnership)

Skylab

Space Shuttle

Shuttle-Mir Program (Russian partnership)

International Space Station (working together with Russia, Canada, ESA, and JAXA along with co-cooperaters, ASI and Brazil)

Project Constellation

Robotic space missions

Earth Observing

Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite

THEMIS

TIMED (Thermosphere Ionosphere Mesosphere Energetics and Dynamics)

Lunar missions

Ranger

Surveyor

Lunar Orbiter

Clementine

Lunar Prospector

Moon Mineralogy Mapper (NASA instrument for ISRO's Chandraayan-1 spacecraft planned for 2007)

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (Planned for 2008)

Mercury missions

Mariner 10

MESSENGER

Venus missions

Mariner 2, 5 and 10

Pioneer Venus

Magellan

Mars missions

Mariner 4, 6, 7 and 9

Viking 1 and 2

Mars Observer

Mars Pathfinder

Mars Climate Orbiter

Mars Polar Lander

Mars Global Surveyor

2001 Mars Odyssey

Mars Exploration Rovers

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter

Phoenix Lander (Planned for 2007)

Mars Science Laboratory (Planned for 2009)

Mars 2011 (Planned for 2011)

Astrobiology Field Laboratory (Planned for 2016)

Mars Sample Return Mission (ESA partnership) (Planned for 2016-2024)Citation needed

Jupiter missions

Pioneer 10

Galileo

Juno (Planned for 2010)

Saturn missions

Cassini-Huygens together with ESA

Neptune missions

Neptune Orbiter (Planned for 2016)

Pluto missions

New Horizons

Multi-planet missions

Pioneer 11 – Jupiter and Saturn

Mariner 10 – Venus and Mercury

Voyager 1 – Jupiter and Saturn

Voyager 2 – Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune

Asteroidal/cometary missions

NEAR Shoemaker

Deep Space 1

Stardust

Deep Impact

Dawn (Planned for 2007)

Canceled planetary-asteroid missions

Mars Telecommunications Orbiter (cancelled)

JIMO (cancelled)

CRAF (cancelled)

NetLander (cancelled)

Pluto Kuiper Express (cancelled; New Horizons is replacement)

Proposed planetary-asteroid missions

Glory (proposed)

Sun observing missions

SOHO – ESA partnership

Ulysses – ESA partnership

STEREO (Planned for 2006)

Great Observatories for Space Astrophysics

Hubble Space Telescope – ESA partnership

Compton Gamma Ray Observatory

Chandra X-ray Observatory

Spitzer Space Telescope (formerly known as the Space Infrared Telescope Facility, SIRTF)

Other observatories

COBE

FUSE

Infrared Astronomical Satellite

James Webb Space Telescope – ESA partnership (Planned for 2013)

WMAP

List of NASA administrators

T. Keith Glennan (1958–1961)

James E. Webb (1961–1968)

Thomas O. Paine (1969–1970)

James C. Fletcher (1971–1977)

Robert A. Frosch (1977–1981)

James M. Beggs (1981–1985)

James C. Fletcher (1986–1989)

Richard H. Truly (1989–1992)

Daniel S. Goldin (1992–2001)

Sean O'Keefe (2001–2005)

Michael D. Griffin (2005–)

Field installations

NASA's headquarters are located in Washington, DC.

NASA has field and research installations at (by type); some facilities have more than one mission assigned to them due to historical or administrative reasons.

Research Centers

Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, New York

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, near Pasadena, California

Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia

Test Facilities

Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California

Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California

John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field, Cleveland, Ohio

Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland

Independent Verification and Validation Facility, Fairmont, West Virginia

Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia

John C. Stennis Space Center, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

Wallops Flight Facility, Wallops Island, Virginia

Construction & Launch Facilities

George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama

John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas

Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans, Louisiana

White Sands Test Facility, Las Cruces, New Mexico

Deep Space Network

Deep Space Network (DSN) stations

Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex, Barstow, California

Madrid Deep Space Communication Complex, Madrid, Spain

Canberra Deep Space Communications Complex, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory

Tourism & Museum Facilities

Canberra Deep Space Communications Complex, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory

John C. Stennis Space Center, Bay St. Louis, Mississippi

John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas

United States Space & Rocket Center, Huntsville, Alabama

Awards and decorations

NASA presently bestows a number of medals and decorations to astronauts and other NASA personnel. Some awards are authorized for wear on active duty military uniforms. Current NASA awards are as follows:

Congressional Space Medal of Honor

NASA Distinguished Service Medal and NASA Distinguished Public Service Medal

NASA Equal Employment Opportunity Medal

NASA Exceptional Achievement Medal

NASA Exceptional Administrative Achievement Medal

NASA Exceptional Bravery Medal

NASA Exceptional Engineering Achievement Medal

NASA Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal

NASA Exceptional Service Medal

NASA Exceptional Technological Achievement Medal

NASA Outstanding Leadership Medal

NASA Public Service Medal

NASA Space Flight Medal

Related legislation

1958 – National Aeronautics and Space Administration PL 85-568 (passed on July 29)

1961 – Apollo mission funding PL 87-98 A

1970 – National Aeronautics and Space Administration Research and Development Act PL 91-119

1984 – National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act PL 98-361

1988 – National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act PL 100-685

NASA Budget 1958–2005 in 1996 Constant Year Dollars

See also

List of aerospace engineering topics

Operation Paperclip

Astronaut

Small Aircraft Transportation System

Space Shuttle

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Space exploration

Space race

Robert Gilruth, Chris Kraft, Gene Kranz (flight directors)

KC-135 Reduced Gravity Aircraft

Shirley Thomas

Stewart Brand

Astronomy Picture of the Day

Vision for Space Exploration

Asteroid 11365 NASA is named after the organization.

Other space agencies

Canadian Space Agency

CNES (Centre National d'Études Spatiales)

China National Space Administration

European Space Agency (ESA)

German Space Agency

Italian Space Agency

SUPARCO (Pakistani Space Agency)

Indian Space Research Organisation

Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency

National Space Agency of Ukraine

Russian Federal Space Agency

Soviet space program (historical)

Russian Federal Space Agency

The Russian Federal Space Agency (commonly known as Roskosmos), formerly the Russian Aviation and Space Agency (RKA commonly known as Rosaviakosmos) is the government agency responsible for Russia's space science programme and general aerospace research. Roskosmos is located near Moscow in a town known as Star City. In March 2004 Anatoly Perminov became Roskosmos' General Director and since then he has led Russia's efforts to consolidate its space program.

History

Foundation and early years of its existence

The American Space Shuttle Atlantis docked to the Russian Mir Space StationRKA was formed after the breakup of the former Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Soviet space program. The RKA uses the technology and launch sites that belonged to the former Soviet space program. The RKA has centralized control of Russia's civilian space program, including all manned and unmanned non-military space flights.

During the first years of its existence the Russian Space Agency, as the Soviet space program before it, has been consistently dogged by a lack of funding which has complicated efforts from the moon mission to cooperation on the International Space Station. The 1990s decreased the cash flow to Roskosmos in a way, so that engineers and scientists were constantly drawn to improvise and seek other ways to keep space programs running, which positively led to Roskosmos' leading role in commercial satellite launches and the launch of the first space tourists. While scientific missions such as interplanetary probes or astronomy missions during these years played a very small role, Roskosmos managed to operate the space station Mir well past its lifetime, contribute to the International Space Station and continue to fly Soyuz and Progress missions.

2005 and new perspectives

However as of 2005 the outlook for future funding looks more favorable, as the Russian economy boomed during the last years alongside strong demand and high prices for oil and gas exported by Russia. The Russian government and duma approved a 305 billion rubles (ca. 11 billion dollar) budget for the Russian space program from 2006-2015, and overall space expenditures in Russia shall total 425 billion rubles for the same time period. [1] The budget for 2006 will be as high as 25 billion rubles (ca. 900 million dollars), which is more than one third higher than the RKA's space budget for 2005. During the 10 year space plan that was approved the budget shall increase between 5-10% per year thus providing the space agency with a strong and constant inflow of money.

In addition to the federal budget, Roskosmos plans to have over 130 billion rubles flowing into its budget by other means, that is through industry investions and profit gains by commercial space launches.

Current programs

ISS involvement

The Zarya module was the first module of the ISS, launched in 1998The Russian Space Agency is one of the partners in the International Space Station (ISS) program, it contributed the core space modules Zarya and Zvezda, which were both launched by Proton rockets and later were joined by NASA's Unity Module. Roskosmos is furthermore responsible for expedition crew launches by Soyuz-TMA spacecrafts and resupplies the space station with Progress space transporters. After the initial ISS contract with NASA expired, RKA and NASA, with the approval of the US government, entered into a space contract running until 2011, according to that Roskosmos will sell NASA spots on Soyuz spacecrafts for approximately $21 million per person each way (thus 42 million to and back from the ISS per person) as well as provide Progress transport flights (50 million per progress as oultined in the ESAS study [2]). RKA has announced that according to this arrangement, manned Soyuz flights will be doubled to 4 per year and Progress flights also doubled to 8 per year beginning in 2008.

RKA also provides space tourism for fare-paying passengers to ISS through the Space Adventures company. Currently three space tourists have contracted with Roskosmos and have flown into space, each for an announced fee of $20 million.

Roskosmos has committed itself to further provide two additional modules to the ISS, both scheduled to be launched by Proton rockets. The first one, the Multipurpose Laboratory Module is currently scheduled for launch in 2007 or 2008, with one Russian Research Module following in 2009.

Science programs

RKA operates a number of other programs for earth science, communication, and scientific research. Future projects include the Soyuz successor, the shuttle Kliper, scientific robotic missions to one of the Mars moons as well as an increase in Earth orbit research satellites.

Rockets

Roskosmos is using a launch family of several rockets, the most famous of them is the R-7, commonly known as the Soyuz rocket, capable of launching about 7.5 tons into LEO. The Proton rocket (or UK-500) also developed in the 60s but still flying, has a lift capacity of over 20 tons to LEO. Smaller rockets include Cosmos-3M, the German-Russian cooperation Rockot and other launchers.

Currently rocket development encompasses both a new rocket system, Angara, as well as enhancements of the Soyuz rocket, Soyuz-2 and Soyuz-3. One modification of the Soyuz, the Soyuz-2a has already been successfully tested, enhancing the launch capacity to 8 tons to LEO, with the Soyuz-2b to follow this year with a launch capacity from Baikonur of 8.5 tons.

RKA manages by far the most commercial launches per year, in 2005 it launched nearly 50 % of all commercial satellites into space. [3]

Kliper

Winged Kliper mockup at the Le Bourget Air ShowOne of RKA's projects that has made a large impact on the media in 2005 is Kliper, a small lifting body reusable space-craft. While Roskosmos has reached out to ESA and JAXA as well as others to share development costs of the project, it also has stated that it will go forward with the project even without support of other space agencies. This statement was backed by the above described approval of its budget for 2006-2015 which includes the necessary funding of Kliper.

Information on Kliper's entry into service and development status vary. Some sources state 2010 as the first orbital test flight, others 2012. As of January 2006, the final decision on Kliper will be made from among 3 proposals of different Russian contractors with a decision to be announced in February 2006.

Launch control

The military counterpart of the RKA is the Military Space Forces (VKS). The VKS controls Russia's Plesetsk Cosmodrome launch facility. The RKA and VKS share control of the Baikonur Cosmodrome, where the RKA reimburses the VKS for the wages of many of the flight controllers during civilian launches. The RKA and VKS also share control of the Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center.

Though its roots lie in early rocket technology and in the international tensions following World War II, the Space Race effectively began after the Soviet launch of Sputnik 1 on 4 October 1957. The term originated as an analogy to the arms race. The Space Race became an important part of the cultural and technological rivalry between the USSR and the United States during the Cold War. Space technology became a particularly important arena in this conflict, both because of its potential military applications and due to the morale-boosting psychological benefits.

Background

Early military influences

Rockets have interested scientists and amateurs for centuries. The Chinese used them as weapons as early as the 11th century. Russian scientist Konstantin Tsiolkovsky theorized in the 1880s on multi-stage, liquid fuel rockets which might reach space, but only in 1926 did the American Robert Goddard design a practical liquid fuel rocket.

Goddard performed his work on rocketry in obscurity, as the scientific community, the public, and even The New York Times scoffed at him. It took war to catapult rocketry to notoriety. This proved a harbinger for the future, as any "space race" would become inextricably linked to military ambitions of the nations involved, despite its mostly scientific character and peaceful rhetoric.

German contributions

In the mid-1920s, German scientists began experimenting with rockets powered by liquid propellants that were capable of reaching relatively high altitudes and distances. In 1932, the Reichswehr, predecessor of the Wehrmacht, took an interest in rocketry for long-range artillery fire. Wernher von Braun, an aspiring rocket scientist, joined the effort and developed such weapons for Nazi Germany's use in World War II. Von Braun borrowed heavily from Robert Goddard's original research, studying and improving on Goddard's rockets.

The German A-4 Rocket, launched in 1942, became the first such projectile to reach space. In 1943, Germany began production of its successor, the V-2 rocket, with a range of 300 km (185 miles) and carrying a 1000 kg (2200 lb) warhead. The Wehrmacht fired thousands of V-2s at Allied nations, causing massive damage and loss of life. However, more laborers were killed in the production of V2s than were killed by them in attacks.

As World War II drew to a close, Soviet, British, and American military and scientific crews raced to capture technology and trained personnel from the German rocket program installation at Peenemünde. The USSR and Britain had some success, but the United States arguably benefited most, taking a large number of German rocket scientists – many of them members of the Nazi Party, including von Braun – from Germany to the United States as part of Operation Paperclip. There scientists adapted the German rockets – intended for use against Britain – to other uses. Post-war scientists, including von Braun, turned to rockets to study high-altitude conditions of temperature and pressure of the atmosphere, cosmic rays, and other topics.

Cold War roots

After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union became locked in a bitter Cold War of espionage and propaganda. Space exploration and satellite technology could feed into the cold war on both fronts. Satellite-borne equipment could spy on other countries, while space-faring accomplishments could serve as propaganda to tout a country's scientific prowess and military potential. The same rockets that might send a human into orbit or hit a specific spot on the Moon could send an atom bomb to a specific enemy city. Much of the technological development required for space travel applied equally well to wartime rockets such as Intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Along with other aspects of the arms race, progress in space appeared as an indicator of technological and economic prowess, demonstrating the superiority of the ideology of that country. Space research had a dual purpose: it could serve peaceful ends, but could also contribute to military goals.

The two superpowers each worked to gain an edge in space research, neither knowing who might make a breakthrough first. They had each laid the groundwork for a race to space, and awaited only the starter's gun.

Artificial satellites

Sputnik

Sputnik 1 weighed more than 80 kg and orbited the Earth for more than two months.On 4 October 1957, the USSR successfully launched Sputnik 1, the first artificial satellite to reach orbit, and the Space Race began. Because of its military and economic implications, Sputnik caused fear and stirred political debate in the United States. At the same time, the Sputnik launch was seen in the Soviet Union as an important sign of scientific and engineering capabilities of the nation.

In the Soviet Union the launch of Sputnik and the following program of space exploration was met with great interest from the public. For the country recently recovered from devastating war it was important and encouraging to see the proof of technical prowess in the new era.

Before Sputnik, the average American assumed that the U.S. had superiority in all fields of technology. Von Braun's counterpart in the Soviet Union, Sergei Korolev, the chief engineer who designed the R-7 rocket which sent Sputnik into orbit, would later engineer the N-1, designed to launch cosmonauts to the Moon. In response to Sputnik, the U.S. would launch a huge effort to regain technological supremacy, including revamping the school curricula in the hope of producing more von Brauns and Korolevs. This reaction is nowadays known as the Sputnik crisis.

Lyndon B. Johnson, Vice President to President John F. Kennedy, expressed the motivation for these American efforts as follows:

In the eyes of the world, first in space means first, period; second in space is second in everything.[1]

The American public, initially discouraged and frightened by Sputnik, became captivated by the American projects which followed. Schoolchildren followed the succession of launches, and building replicas of rockets became a popular hobby. President Kennedy gave speeches encouraging people to support the space program and trying to overcome the skepticism of many who felt the millions of dollars might better go on building stocks of proven, existing armaments, or on fighting poverty.

The very first satellites were already used for scientific purposes. Both Sputnik and Explorer I were launched as part of each country's participation in the International Geophysical Year. Sputnik helped to determine the density of the upper atmosphere and Explorer I flight data led to discovery by James Van Allen of the Van Allen radiation belt.

Satellite communications

The first communications satellite, Project SCORE, launched on December 18, 1958, relayed a Christmas message from President Eisenhower to the world. Other notable examples of satellite communication during (or spawned by) the Space Race include:

1962: Telstar: the first "active" communications satellite (experimental transoceanic)

1972: Anik 1: first domestic communications satellite (Canada)

1974: WESTAR: first U.S. domestic communications satellite

1976: MARISAT: first mobile communications satellite

Other noteworthy satellites

The U.S. launched the first geosynchronous satellite, Syncom-2, on July 26, 1963. The success of this class of satellite meant that a simple satellite dish no longer needed to track the orbit of the satellite, as that orbit remained geostationary. Henceforth ordinary citizens could use satellite-mediated communications transmissions for television broadcasts, after a one-time setup.

Living creatures in space

Animals in space

Laika became the first living being in orbit on Sputnik 2Fruit flies launched by the U.S. on captured German V-2 rockets in 1946 became the first animals sent into space for scientific study. The first domestic animal sent into orbit, the dog Laika, traveled in the USSR's Sputnik 2 in 1957. While in any event the technology did not exist at the time to recover Laika after her flight, she died of stress and overheating soon after reaching space. In 1960 Russian space dogs Belka and Strelka orbited the earth and successfully returned. The American space program imported chimpanzees from Africa, and sent at least two into space before launching their first human orbiter. In June 1997 the Air Force announced it would be giving away the last of its chimps through a public divestiture authorized by Congress. Two months after their transfer to the Coulston Foundation, a New Mexico research laboratory, the Save the Chimps Foundation filed suit to remove them. This action eventually allowed their "release" to semi-wild conditions in 1999 in a South Florida sanctuary. Soviet-launched turtles on Zond 5 became the first animals to fly around the Moon (September 1968).

Humans in space

Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space.Yuri Gagarin became the first successful cosmonaut when he entered orbit in Russia's Vostok 1 on April 12, 1961, a day now celebrated as a holiday in Russia and in many other countries. 23 days later, on mission Freedom 7, Alan Shepard first entered space for the U.S. John Glenn, in Friendship 7, became the first American to successfully orbit Earth, completing three orbits on February 20, 1962.

The first dual-manned flight also originated in the USSR, August 11 - 15, 1962. Soviet Valentina Tereshkova became the first woman in space on June 16, 1963 in Vostok 6. Korolev had initially scheduled further Vostok missions of longer duration, but following the announcement of the Apollo Program, Premier Khrushchev demanded more firsts. The first flight with more than one crew member, the USSR's Voskhod 1, a modified version of the Vostok craft, took off on October 12, 1964 carrying Komarov, Feoktistov and Yegorov onboard. This flight also marked the first occasion on which a crew did not wear spacesuits.

Aleksei Leonov, from Voskhod 2, launched by the USSR on March 18, 1965, carried out the first spacewalk. This mission nearly ended in disaster; Leonov almost failed to return to the capsule and, due to a poor retrorocket fire, the ship landed 1000 miles (1600 km) off target. By this time Khrushchev had left office and the new Soviet leadership would not commit to an all-out effort.

Lunar missions

Though the achievements made by the US and the USSR brought great pride to their respective nations, the ideological climate ensured that the Space Race would continue at least until the first human walked on the Moon. Before this achievement, unmanned spacecraft had to first explore the Moon by photography and demonstrate their ability to land safely on it.

Unmanned probes

Following the Soviet success in placing the first satellite into orbit, the Americans focused their efforts on sending a probe to the Moon. They called the first attempt to do this the Pioneer program. The Soviet Luna program became operational with the launch of Luna 1 on January 4, 1959, and Luna 1 became the first probe to reach the Moon. In addition to the Pioneer program, there were three specific American programs: the Ranger program, the Lunar Orbiter program, and the robotic Surveyor program, with the goal of locating potential Apollo landing sites on the Moon.

Lunar landing

While the Soviets beat the Americans to most of the Space Race's initial firsts, they failed to beat the U.S. Apollo program to land a man on the Moon. After the early Soviet successes, especially Gagarin's flight, President Kennedy and Vice President Johnson looked for an American project that would capture the public’s imagination. The Apollo Program met many of their objectives and promised to defeat arguments from politicians both on the left (who favored social programs) and the right (who favored a more military project). Apollo’s advantages included:

economic benefits to several key states in the next election;

closing the “missile gap” claimed by Kennedy during the 1960 election through dual-use technology;

technical and scientific spin-off benefits

In conversation with NASA’s director, James E. Webb, Kennedy said:

Everything we do ought to really be tied in to getting on to the Moon ahead of the Russians... otherwise we shouldn't be spending that kind of money, because I'm not interested in space... The only justification (for the cost) is because we hope to beat the USSR to demonstrate that instead of being behind by a couple of years, by God, we passed them.[2]

Kennedy and Johnson managed to swing public opinion: by 1965, 58% of Americans favored Apollo, up from 33% in 1963. After Johnson became President in 1963, his continuing support allowed the program to succeed.

The USSR showed a greater ambivalence about human visits to the Moon. Soviet leader Khrushchev wanted neither "defeat" by another power, nor the expense of such a project. In October 1963 he characterized the USSR as "not at present planning flight by cosmonauts to the Moon", while adding that they had not dropped out of the race. A year passed before the USSR committed itself to a Moon-landing attempt.

Kennedy proposed joint programs, such as a Moon landing by Soviet and American astronauts and improved weather-monitoring satellites. Khrushchev, sensing an attempt to steal superior Russian space technology, rejected these ideas. Korolev, the Soviet Space Agency's chief designer, had started promoting his Soyuz craft and the N1 launcher rocket that had the capacity for a manned Moon landing. Khrushchev directed Korolev's design bureau to arrange further space firsts by modifying the existing Vostok technology, while a second team started building a completely new launcher and craft, the Proton booster and the Zond, for a manned cislunar flight in 1966. In 1964 the new Soviet leadership gave Korolev the backing for a Moon landing effort and brought all manned projects under his direction. With Korolev's death and the failure of the first Soyuz flight in 1967, the co-ordination of the Soviet Moon landing program quickly unraveled. The Soviets built a landing craft and selected cosmonauts for the mission that would have placed Aleksei Leonov on the Moon's surface, but with the successive launch failures of the N1 booster in 1969, plans for a manned landing suffered first delay and then cancellation.

While unmanned Soviet probes had reached the Moon before any U.S. craft, American Neil Armstrong became the first person to set foot on the lunar surface on 21 July 1969, after landing the previous day. Commander of the Apollo 11 mission, Armstrong received backup from command-module pilot Michael Collins and lunar-module pilot Buzz Aldrin in an event watched by over 500 million people around the world. Social commentators widely recognize the lunar landing as one of the defining moments of the 20th century, and Armstrong's words on his first touching the Moon's surface became similarly memorable:

Neil Armstrong's comment upon stepping onto the moon (file info)

"That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind."

Problems playing the files? See media help.

Unlike other international rivalries, the Space Race was not motivated by the desire for territorial expansion. After its successful landings on the Moon, the U.S. explicitly disclaimed the right to ownership of any part of the Moon.

Other successes

Missions to other planets

Venus became the first planet flown past by a spacecraft in December 14, 1962.The Soviet Union first sent planetary probes to both Venus and Mars in 1960. The first spacecraft to successfully fly by Venus, the U.S.'s Mariner 2, did so on December 14, 1962. It sent back surprising data on the high surface temperature and air density of Venus. Since it carried no cameras, its findings did not capture public attention as did images from space probes, which far exceeded the capacity of astronomers' Earth-based telescopes.

The USSR's Venera 7, launched in 1971, became the first craft to land on Venus. Venera 9 then transmitted the first pictures from the surface of another planet. These represent only two in the long Venera series; several other previous Venera spacecraft performed flyby operations and attempted landing missions. Seven other Venera landers followed.

The US launched Mariner 10, which flew by Venus on its way to Mercury, in 1974. It became the first, and so far the only, spacecraft to fly by Mercury.

Mariner 4, launched in 1965 by the U.S., became the first probe to fly by Mars; it transmitted completely unexpected images. The first spacecraft on Mars, Mars 3, launched in 1971 by the USSR, did not return pictures. The US Viking landers of 1976 transmitted the first such pictures.

The U.S also sent Pioneer 10 on a successful flyby of Jupiter in 1973. This foreshadowed the first flyby of Saturn in 1979 with Pioneer 11, and the first and only flybys of Uranus and Neptune with Voyager 2.

Launches and docking

The first space rendezvous took place between Gemini 6 and Gemini 7, both U.S. craft, on December 15, 1965. Their successor, Gemini 8, performed the first space docking on March 16, 1966. The first automatic space docking linked the USSR's Cosmos-186 and Cosmos-188 (two unmanned Soyuz spacecraft) on October 30, 1967.

The first launch from the sea took place with the U.S.'s Scout B, on April 26, 1967. The first space station, the USSR's Salyut 1, commenced operations on June 7, 1971.

Military competition

Out of view, but no less real a competition, the drive to develop space for military uses paralleled scientific efforts. Well before the launch of Sputnik 1, both the US and the USSR started developing plans for reconnaissance satellites. The Soviet Zenit spacecraft, which by the dual-use designed in by Korolev eventually became Vostok, began as a photoimaging satellite. It competed with the US Air Force's Discoverer series. Discoverer XIII provided the first payload recovered from space in August 1960 - one day ahead of the first Soviet recovered payload.

Both the US and USSR developed major military space programs, often following a pattern whereby the US only completed a mockup before its program ended, while the USSR built, or even orbited, theirs:

Supersonic Intercontinental Cruise Missile: Navaho (test program stopped) vs. Buran cruise missile (plan)

Small Winged Spacecraft: X-20 Dyna-Soar (mockup) vs. MiG-105 (flight-tested)

Satellite Inspection Capsule: Blue Gemini (mockup) vs. Soyuz interceptor (plan)

Military Space Station: MOL (plan) vs. Almaz (flown somewhat modified as Salyut 2, 3, and 5)

Military Capsule with hatch in heat shield: Gemini B (tested crewless in space) vs. VA TKS, also known as Merkur space capsule (flown crewless as part of TKS)

Ferry to Military Space Station: Gemini Ferry (plan) vs. TKS (flown crewless in space, and docked with a Salyut)

The "end" of the Space Race

The July 17, 1975 rendezvous of the Apollo and Soyuz spacecraft marks the traditional end of the Space Race.While the Sputnik 1 launch can clearly be called the start of the Space Race, its end is more debatable. Most hotly contested during the 1960s, the Space Race continued apace through the Apollo moon landing of 1969. Although they followed Apollo 11 with five more manned lunar landings, American space scientists turned to new arenas. Skylab would gather data, and the Space Shuttle would work on returning spaceships intact from space journeys. Americans would claim that by first landing a man on the moon they had won this unofficial "race". Soviet scientists meanwhile pushed ahead with their own projects, and would likely not have conceded anything like defeat. In any event, as the Cold War cooled, and as other nations began to develop their own space programs, the notion of a continuing "race" between the two superpowers became less real.

Both nations had developed manned military space programs. The USAF had proposed using its Titan missile to launch the Dyna-Soar hypersonic glider to use in intercepting enemy satellites. The plan for the Manned Orbiting Laboratory (using hardware based on the Gemini program to carry out surveillance missions) superseded Dyna-Soar, but this also suffered cancellation. The USSR commissioned the Almaz program for a similar manned military space station, which merged with the Salyut program.

The Space Race slowed after the Apollo landing, which many observers describe as its apex or even as its end. Others, including space historian Carole Scott and Romanian Dr. Florin Pop's Cold War Project, feel its end came most clearly with the joint Apollo-Soyuz mission of 1975. The Soviet craft Soyuz 19 met and docked in space with America's Apollo, allowing astronauts from the "rival" nations to pass into each other's ships and participate in combined experimentation. Although each country's endeavors in space persisted, they went largely in different "directions", and the notion of a continuing two-nation "race" became outdated after Apollo-Soyuz.

Even at this point of cooperation the Soviet leadership was alarmed at the prospect of USAF involvement with the Space Shuttle program and began the competing Buran and Energia projects. In the early 1980s the commencement of the US Strategic Defense Initiative further escalated competition that only resolved with the collapse of the Eastern Bloc in 1989.

Organization, funding, and economic impact

The huge expenditures and bureaucracy needed to organize successful space exploration led to the creation of national space agencies. The United States and the Soviet Union developed programs focused solely on the scientific and industrial requirements for these efforts.

On July 29, 1958, President Eisenhower signed the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 establishing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). When it began operations on October 1, 1958, NASA consisted mainly of the four laboratories and some 8,000 employees of the government's 46-year-old research agency for aeronautics, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA). While its predecessor, NACA, operated on a $5 million budget, NASA funding rapidly accelerated to $5 billion per year, including huge sums for subcontractors from the private sector. The Apollo 11 Moon landing, the high point of NASA's success, cost an estimated $US 20 to 25 billion.

Lack of reliable statistics makes it difficult to compare U.S. and Soviet space spending, especially during the Khrushchev years. However in 1989, the then-Chief of Staff of the Soviet Armed Services, General M. Moiseyev, reported that the Soviet Union had allocated 6.9 billion rubles (about $4 billion) to its space program that year.[3] Other Soviet officials estimated that their total manned space expenses totalled about that amount over the entire duration of the programs, with some lower unofficial estimates of about four and half billion rubles. In addition to the murkiness of the figures, such comparisons must also take into account the likely effect of Soviet propaganda, which pursued the goal of making the Soviet Union look strong and of confusing the Western analysis.

Organizational issues, particularly internal rivalries, also plagued the Soviet effort. The USSR had nothing like NASA (the Russian Aviation and Space Agency originated only in the 1990s). Too many political issues in science and too many personal views handicapped Soviet progress. Every Soviet chief designer had to stand for his own ideas, looking for the patronage of a communist official. In 1964, between the various chief designers, the USSR was developing 30 different programs of launcher and spacecraft design. Following the death of Korolev the Soviet space program became reactive, attempting to maintain parity with the US. In 1974 the USSR reorganized their space program, creating the Energia project to duplicate the US Space Shuttle with Buran.

The Soviets also operated in the face of an economic disadvantage. Although the Soviet economy was the second largest in the world, the US economy was the largest. Eventually the Soviets' inefficient organization and lack of funds led them to lose their early advantage. Some observers have argued that the high economic cost of the space race, along with the extremely expensive arms race, eventually deepened the economic crisis of the Soviet system during the late 1970's and 80's and was one of the factors that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Legacy

Deaths

When America's Apollo 15 left the moon, the astronauts left behind a memorial to astronauts from both nations who had perished during the efforts to reach the Moon. In the United States, the first astronauts to die during direct participation in space travel or preparation served in Apollo 1: Command Pilot Virgil "Gus" Grissom, Senior Pilot Edward White, and Pilot Roger Chaffee. These three died in a fire during a ground test on January 27, 1967.

Flights of the Soviet Union's Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11 also resulted in cosmonaut deaths. Soyuz 1, launched into orbit on April 23, 1967, carried a single cosmonaut, Colonel Vladimir Mikhailovich Komarov, who died when the spacecraft crashed after return to Earth. In 1971, Soyuz 11's cosmonauts Georgi Dobrovolski, Viktor Patsayev, and Vladislav Volkov asphyxiated during reentry.

Other astronauts died in related missions, including four Americans who died in crashes of T-38 aircraft. Russian Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space, met a similar death when he crashed in a MiG-15 fighter in 1968.

Advances in technology and education

Technology, especially in aerospace engineering and electronic communication, advanced greatly during this period. The effects of the Space Race however went far beyond rocketry, physics, and astronomy. "Space age technology" extended to fields as diverse as home economics and forest defoliation studies, and the push to win the race changed the very ways in which students learned science.

American concerns that they had fallen so quickly behind the Soviets in the race to space led quickly to a push by legislators and educators for greater emphasis on mathematics and on the physical sciences in U.S. schools. America's National Defense Education Act of 1958 increased funding for these goals from childhood education through the post-graduate level. To this day over 1,200 U.S. High Schools retain their own planetarium installations, a situation unparalled in any other country worldwide and a direct consequence of the Space Race.

The scientists fostered by these efforts helped develop for space exploration technologies which have seen adapted uses ranging from the kitchen to athletic fields. Dried and ready-to-eat foods, stay-dry clothing, and even no-fog ski goggles have their roots in space science.

Today over a thousand artificial satellites orbit earth, relaying communications data around the planet and facilitating remote sensing of data on weather, vegetation, and human movements to nations who employ them. In addition, much of the micro-technology which fuels everyday activities from time-keeping to enjoying music derives from research initially driven by the Space Race.

The USSR remained the undisputed leader in rocketry, even up to the end of the Cold War. The U.S. became superior in electronics, remote sensing, vehicle guidance, and robotic control.

Recent events

Although its pace has slowed, space exploration continues to advance long after the demise of the Space Race. The USA launched the first reusable spacecraft (space shuttle) on the 20th anniversary of Gagarin's flight, April 12, 1981. On November 15, 1988, the USSR launched Buran, the first and only automatic reusable spacecraft. These and other nations continue to launch probes, satellites of many types, and huge space telescopes.

The possibility of a second international space race appeared at the end of the 20th century, with the European Space Agency taking the lead in commercial rocket launches with Ariane 4, and competing in unmanned space exploration with NASA. ESA's efforts have culminated into ambitious plans such as the Aurora Programme that intends to send a human mission to Mars no later than 2030, and has set various flagship missions to reach this goal. With US President Bush's similar announcement in 2004, outlining a timeframe for the construction and mission plan of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (a subsequent return to the Moon and later to Mars by 2030), the two major space agencies have similar plans. As of 2005 ESA might have a headstart, as it has teamed up with Russia. They are likely to co-fund and develop the CEV counterpart Kliper spacecraft that is scheduled to first launch in 2011, years earlier than its American opponent, which is yet in an early draft status. As of 2006 the ESA has yet to fund a study of Kliper.

Other nations are also capable of increasing competition in space exploration, most notably China. Although China's funding is not in the same league with ESA or NASA, the successful m