Author
|
Topic: Crewing Skylab in wake of rescue mission
|
carmelo Member Posts: 1051 From: Messina, Sicilia, Italia Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted 02-03-2020 09:55 PM
When the Command-Service Module (CSM) of Skylab 3 lost two RCS (Reaction Control System) quads, was considered to fly the Skylab rescue mission, with Vance Brand and Don Lind. They would have flown a CSM modified with two extra low profile couches attached to the aft bulkhead. After docking with Skylab, they would return the crew to Earth. But Vance Brand and Don Lind worked the simulators to develop procedures to bring them down without a rescue. My question is, in case that Skylab rescue mission had been necessary, and had flown to recover Skylab 3 crew, Skylab 4 would have flown or would have been cancelled? |
LM-12 Member Posts: 3324 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 02-03-2020 11:45 PM
Sounds like Skylab 4 would have flown.From the Skylab news conference on August 3, 1973 with Flight Director Charles Lewis participating: We've got some questions from the Cape ... says, if the Saturn-Apollo at Cape and CSM for SL-IV has to be used for rescue mission, what will they use for SL-IV? Would they use the ASTP rocket and our spacecraft? And I think that's the plan. If they had to, they'd pull in the ASTP vehicle as a rescue vehicle for the SL-IV. |
Henry Heatherbank Member Posts: 250 From: Adelaide, South Australia Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted 02-04-2020 05:11 AM
Hang on, I’m confused. Is the question about SL-4 and the answer about an SL-4 rescue?Was the SL-3 rescue vehicle the SL-4 hardware? Or dedicated rescue hardware, so that if it was used on SL-3, the ASTP hardware would have been “called up” to support an SL-4 rescue if needed? If SL-3 rescue was not SL-4 prime hardware, then ASTP hardware is irrelevant isn’t it? |
LM-12 Member Posts: 3324 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 02-04-2020 08:30 AM
In a later press conference that day, Skylab program director William Schneider mentioned the confusion about the "Skylab-IV" mission designation: Just how - to make sure everybody knows our numbering system. You know, Skylab's-I, II, IIIs and IV, as far as we're concerned, the rescue vehicle, if launched would have the designation of the launch of SL-R. And the next in line - (laughter). You've got to say we're inventive. The next in line launch of full bore 56-day mission, is - would still be SL-IV. As I understand it, Skylab 4 hardware would have been used to rescue Skylab 3. And had that rescue mission (SL-R) been flown, then the ASTP hardware would have been the if-needed rescue vehicle for the "new" Skylab 4 mission. |
Fra Mauro Member Posts: 1624 From: Bethpage, N.Y. Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 02-04-2020 03:57 PM
Would the Skylab 3 crew have been rescued after their 56-day flight was over or earlier? I will assume that the Skylab 3 CSM would have been deorbited later by Mission Control. |
Dwight Member Posts: 577 From: Germany Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 02-05-2020 01:45 AM
In our film, "Searching for Skylab", footage is shown of Chris Kraft discussing this very topic with the crew in a conference call. He states, "we're proceeding here as if we're going to have a nominal mission" and left it open for the crew to determine if they agreed with that decision or not. At that point it had not been determined what had caused the 2 RCS problems. Given that the SL-3 crew was safe in the OWS, it made perfect sense to continue the mission.Al Bean replied, "We've been hoping you'd say that all day." Kraft states they prepped the rescue vehicle on "an accelerated basis" so that it would be quickly ready at any point during the mission should it be necessary. |
Headshot Member Posts: 891 From: Vancouver, WA, USA Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 02-05-2020 10:47 AM
So a rescue mission would have been launched with the Saturn Ib destined for the third manned Skylab mission? The same one where technicians discovered cracks in the eight stabilizer fins only a few days before launch. That leads to some uncomfortable scenarios. |
dtemple Member Posts: 730 From: Longview, Texas, USA Registered: Apr 2000
|
posted 02-06-2020 01:34 AM
Unless I just do not remember correctly, I have seen a photograph or two of SA-209 with CSM-119 being rolled out to Pad 39-B. If my memory is correct on this, then SA-209 would have launched the rescue crew. SA-209 was later the backup hardware for ASTP. It was never assigned to launch SL-4. SA-208 was used for SL-4. |
LM-12 Member Posts: 3324 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 02-06-2020 02:08 AM
Skylab 3 was the rescue vehicle for Skylab 2. Skylab 4 was the rescue vehicle for Skylab 3. SA-209/CSM-119 was the rescue vehicle for Skylab 4.Skylab 4 was launched on November 16, 1973. The Skylab Rescue Vehicle (SA-209/CSM-119) for that mission was rolled out to the pad on December 3, 1973. It remained on the pad until the Skylab 4 splashdown.
|
rlobinske Member Posts: 155 From: Crawfordville, FL Registered: Oct 2014
|
posted 02-06-2020 07:47 AM
For the potential of rescuing Al Bean's SM-3 crew, CSM-119 Skylab Rescue was stacked on Saturn Ib SA-208 that was already being prepared on ML-1 for Gerry Carr's SM-4 mission. After it was determined that SM-3 would return on their existing CSM, CSM-119 was removed from SA-208 and CSM-118 mounted. For SM-4, CSM-119 would be mounted on SA-209 as a contingency rescue vehicle. |
LM-12 Member Posts: 3324 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 02-06-2020 11:03 AM
Skylab 4 rolled out to the pad on August 14, 1973 and launched on November 16.This excerpt is from a KSC new release dated September 11, 1973: Skylab 4 Ready for Rescue or Normal MissionCheckout operations for the Skylab 4 space vehicle went into a hold period at Kennedy Space Center this morning. The checkout preparations have continued up to this time at a somewhat accelerated pace so the Skylab 4 could be in a position to act as a rescue vehicle if needed ... The current planning date for Skylab 4 launch is November 11. After a successful recovery of the Skylab 3 crew, scheduled for September 25, the launch team at Kennedy Space Center will begin its normal flow leading to a November 11 launch. |
LM-12 Member Posts: 3324 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 02-07-2020 12:36 PM
quote: Originally posted by rlobinske: CSM-119 was removed from SA-208 and CSM-118 mounted.
SLA-22 was for CSM-119. SLA-24 was for CSM-118. |
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1332 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted 02-07-2020 08:03 PM
I don't want to change the subject but what is the production number of the CSM at the National Air and Space Museum for the Apollo-Soyuz display? I thought this spacecraft was a back-up for ASTP or Skylab. |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 02-07-2020 08:47 PM
It is CSM-105, per the museum: This Block II Apollo Command and Service Module combination (CSM 105), manufactured by North American Rockwell, was originally used for vibration and acoustic tests. In 1973 it was refurbished for display at the Paris Air Show. The CSM was displayed docked to a Soviet Soyuz spacecraft, as was planned for the Apollo-Soyuz Test Program (ASTP) mission that took place in July 1975. The Soyuz spacecraft was made of residual test hardware.In 1976 this combined exhibit was installed in the National Air and Space Museum after its transfer from NASA. |
carmelo Member Posts: 1051 From: Messina, Sicilia, Italia Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted 02-08-2020 10:18 PM
Ok, let's clarify. If Skylab rescue use Skylab 4 hardware, and Skylab 4 use ASTP hardware, ASTP is cancelled?I have read that a some point was a proposal for another Skylab mission with Vance Brand, Don Lind and William Lenoir. The hardware that could be used for this mission would have been the hardware for ASTP? |
LM-12 Member Posts: 3324 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 02-08-2020 10:39 PM
If the Skylab 4 hardware had been used to rescue Skylab 3, then perhaps the new Skylab 4 mission would have flown with SA-209/CSM-119, with the ASTP hardware as its (if needed) rescue vehicle. And if that rescue mission was not needed, then the ASTP mission still could have been flown. |
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1332 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted 02-09-2020 10:24 AM
That's the number I was looking for, CSM-119. Anyone know where it is? |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 02-09-2020 10:52 AM
CSM-119, the Skylab rescue vehicle, is on display at the Apollo/Saturn V Center at Kennedy Space Center in Florida. |
carmelo Member Posts: 1051 From: Messina, Sicilia, Italia Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted 02-12-2020 10:48 AM
Was a rescue veichle for ASTP? |
oly Member Posts: 971 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2015
|
posted 02-12-2020 11:20 PM
This Wikipedia page for the Skylab Rescue mission compiles many details of the Skylab/ASTP rescue vehicle plans.I believe that five out of six of the external links at the bottom of the page still work and link to some interesting reading on this subject. |
LM-12 Member Posts: 3324 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 02-13-2020 01:17 AM
The ASTP press kit includes this paragraph:
The ASTP launch is the final scheduled launch of a Saturn IB vehicle. After the ASTP mission, if only one Saturn IB is used, there will remain two complete Saturn IB vehicles in reserve, SA-209 and SA-211. SA-209/CSM-119 was the backup vehicle for the ASTP mission.Where is SA-211 today? |
rlobinske Member Posts: 155 From: Crawfordville, FL Registered: Oct 2014
|
posted 02-13-2020 09:39 AM
S-I-B-11 is at the Alabama Welcome Center on I-65. S-IV-B-211 is part of the outdoor Skylab display at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center. |
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1332 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted 02-13-2020 04:07 PM
Does CSM-119 have three or five seats in it? |
Robert Pearlman Editor Posts: 43576 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 02-13-2020 04:35 PM
Based on the available view through the open docking tunnel, there are no seats installed. |
Blackarrow Member Posts: 3160 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 02-13-2020 04:48 PM
quote: Originally posted by LM-12: SA-209/CSM-119 was the backup vehicle for the ASTP mission.
What the press kit actually says is "SA-210 is the Saturn 1B launch vehicle scheduled for use in ASTP on July 15 1975, with SA-209 as a back-up vehicle." I take that to mean that if a serious fault developed (pre-mission) in SA-210, the prime crew would launch on SA-209. I'm open to correction, but I'm not aware of any plan to fly a rescue mission. Apollo was initially launched into a fairly low orbit so if an early SPS fault showed up, re-entry should have been possible using the RCS thrusters. Although the docked phase of the mission was at a higher orbital altitude, it was still well below the orbital altitude of Skylab. That made the need for a rescue vehicle somewhat less significant. If there was a plan to launch a rescue mission, who would have crewed it, bearing in mind half of the two-man Skylab rescue team would have been in the orbiting Apollo? |
Fra Mauro Member Posts: 1624 From: Bethpage, N.Y. Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 02-14-2020 04:40 PM
I am not aware of any plan of a rescue mission for ASTP. |
oly Member Posts: 971 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2015
|
posted 02-14-2020 06:30 PM
Referring to the information provided on Wikipedia, the "AS 209 and CSM 119 were later used as a backup to the ASTP mission." I am not aware if the backup vehicle had been "stacked," but given that the history of SLC-34: - October 1968 - Held in standby status for possible use in the Skylab program.
- 1 January 1969 - Complex deactivated
- November 1971 - Complex mothballed
- April 1972 - Service structure scrapped
...SLC-34 had been scrapped, and the only facility capable of launching the rescue vehicle was the "milkstool" launch platform from Pad 39.I doubt that the mobile launcher could be turned around, stacked, checked out, staged, and launched within the ASTP mission timeframe (planned 8 day staging and test for an already stacked vehicle; ASTP 9 day mission). 1973 November 26 - The Skylab rescue mission hardware was on schedule. Vehicle rollout to the launch complex was scheduled for 5 December. Integrated testing and the flight readiness test would be completed about 13 December. Flight readiness review dates would only be established if a rescue launch was required. The entry on Astronautica indicates that: 1974 February 8 - Plans for the Skylab rescue capability discontinued.KSC was directed to discontinue plans for the Skylab rescue capability and to move the rescue vehicle (SA-209 and CSM-119) back to the Vehicle Assembly Building. Upon completion of this action, Headquarters responsibility for the SA-209 and CSM-119 would be transferred to the Program Director of the Apollo-Soyuz Test Program. |
rlobinske Member Posts: 155 From: Crawfordville, FL Registered: Oct 2014
|
posted 02-17-2020 01:47 PM
quote: Originally posted by Lou Chinal: Does CSM-119 have three or five seats in it?
CSM-119 currently has no seats in it, only partial frames. You can see the aft bulkhead mounting points from the front observation platform. |
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1332 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted 02-19-2020 07:03 AM
Thanks. |