Stacking the Saturn V in the VAB high bays

Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

collectSPACE: Messages

Mercury - Gemini - Apollo

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Stacking the Saturn V in the VAB high bays
Rick Teklits Member Posts: 21 From: Yardville, NJ USA Registered: Dec 2010	posted 12-10-2010 04:56 PM I am reading a book on Apollo 10 and apparently the Saturn V was stacked in high bay 2 of the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), which required the transporter to maneuver the entire stack around the VAB and then out towards pad B. I never realized that. Is this the only time NASA used high bay 2 and/or had to maneuver a stack around the VAB? All of the pictures I have seen seem to show a relatively straight road right out of the VAB.
ilbasso Member Posts: 1527 From: Greensboro, NC USA Registered: Feb 2006	posted 12-10-2010 05:25 PM I don't recall which bays were in use, but Apollos 12 and 13 were stacked at the same time. The Apollo 13 launch vehicle was rolled around from one bay to another in August(?) 1969 with a boilerplate CSM on top of the stack.
heng44 Member Posts: 3739 From: Netherlands Registered: Nov 2001	posted 12-15-2010 12:11 AM I believe Skylab 1 was also rolled out from the same high bay as Apollo 10.
ilbasso Member Posts: 1527 From: Greensboro, NC USA Registered: Feb 2006	posted 12-15-2010 08:26 AM Found the reference photos in the Apollo 13 Image Library. Apollo 13 was rolled around from High Bay 2 to High Bay 3 with a boilerplate CSM on August 8, 1969.
Rick Teklits Member Posts: 21 From: Yardville, NJ USA Registered: Dec 2010	posted 12-20-2010 08:48 PM Thanks, you can see the pressure NASA was under to get the vehicles prepared prior to the end of 1969 with Apollo 12 and Apollo 13 being stacked at the same time! It is my understanding that high bay 4 was never used. I thought I read somewhere where they never fully outfitted high bay 4. Your post makes sense. High bay 2 was used to stack Apollo 10 then Apollo 13, after Apollo 11 landed, the pressure was off and I presume there was no need to use that high bay. Can you imagine that many Saturn Vs in one building all being prepped at the same time? quote: Originally posted by heng44: I believe Skylab 1 was also rolled out from the same high bay as Apollo 10. The Project Apollo image gallery shows pics of Skylab 1 being stacked in high bay 2 as well as roll out. I never knew that they maneuvered the entire stack around the VAB.
mikej Member Posts: 483 From: Germantown, WI USA Registered: Jan 2004	posted 12-23-2010 05:27 PM quote: Originally posted by Rick Teklits: Can you imagine that many Saturn Vs in one building all being prepped at the same time? Early plans had a VAB with six high bays. Although built with "only" four high bays, the design allowed for the addition of more high bays.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 02-03-2013 09:05 PM With three active High Bays and a busy flight schedule, it was normal for the Saturn launch vehicle processing to overlap back during Apollo. For instance, the stacking for Apollo 9 began before Apollo 8 was rolled out, and the stacking for Apollo 10 began before Apollo 9 was rolled out ... and so on. Here is an interesting photo of the Skylab rollout from VAB High Bay 2 on the west side of the building.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 02-03-2013 10:50 PM quote: Originally posted by ilbasso: Apollo 13 was rolled around from High Bay 2 to High Bay 3 Wasn't it High Bay 2 to High Bay 1? I think Apollo 12 was still in High Bay 3 at the time.
Headshot Member Posts: 1304 From: Vancouver, WA, USA Registered: Feb 2012	posted 02-04-2013 07:18 AM In 1969 the plan was for NASA to make three lunar landing attempts. Apollo 11 was schedule for a July attempt, should it have failed, Apollo 12 would have launched in September of 1969. Had 12 failed, Apollo 13 would have launched in late November-ealy December 1969. Of course after 11 landed successfully, the schedule relaxed. But NASA could not assume initial success and had the hardware for 12 and 13 in the pipeline already.
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1389 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007	posted 02-04-2013 11:12 AM If I remember correctly the only time the B pad was used was for Apollo 10. For the moon shots anyway.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 02-04-2013 02:43 PM This photo shows both Skylab in High Bay 2 and Skylab 2 in High Bay 1.
Jay Chladek Member Posts: 2272 From: Bellevue, NE, USA Registered: Aug 2007	posted 02-05-2013 11:05 PM That period with Skylab 1 and 2 being stacked also had some early elements of it going on when Apollo 17 was undergoing its final checkout work as the Skylab itself underwent a protracted period of testing upon its arrival at KSC. Then you had the requirements to outfit one of the Saturn V LUTs with the milkstool to accomodate the Saturn 1B and incorporate some of the Saturn 1B specific hardware from pads 34 and 37.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 02-06-2013 08:19 AM August 1972 is the period I believe you are referring to Jay. The Skylab 1 stacking had begun early that month in High Bay 2. Then Apollo 17 rolled out of High Bay 3 on the 28th. A few days later, the stacking for Skylab 2 began in High Bay 1. NASA photo KSC-72P-454 shows both the Apollo 17 spacecraft and SA-206, the first stage of the Skylab 2 launch vehicle, in the VAB transfer aisle on Aug 23rd. It would be very interesting to see a flow chart of all the VAB High Bay activity during the Apollo years, and to see how those processing flows overlapped.
Rick Teklits Member Posts: 21 From: Yardville, NJ USA Registered: Dec 2010	posted 02-08-2013 05:17 AM Is there any reason why Pad B was not used for more of the Apollo launches?
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1389 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007	posted 02-08-2013 07:26 AM Rick, I must admit I don't know. There was originally a "C" pad planned, for LC 39. I guess they figured they just didn't need it.
garyd2831 Member Posts: 641 From: Syracuse, New York, USA Registered: Oct 2009	posted 02-08-2013 09:47 AM I think it would have been great to have a 39C pad and an actually operating space/moon port at the Cape. Personally, I think more attention should have been given to the advancements that could have been made to the Saturn V and its heavy lift capability.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 02-09-2013 05:01 PM Back in 1963, the Launch Complex 39 design included Pad A, B, C, D and E.
Lou Chinal Member Posts: 1389 From: Staten Island, NY Registered: Jun 2007	posted 02-12-2013 09:04 AM I didn't know about the "D" and "E" pads.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 02-02-2014 12:45 PM In this Apollo 10 launch photo, you can see where the crawlerway would have continued north to the additional pads that were never built. The crawlerway section leading to pad B looks a bit unusual in the photo.
Ronpur Member Posts: 1260 From: Brandon, Fl Registered: May 2012	posted 02-02-2014 08:06 PM I have a LIFE magazine from September 25, 1964 that has a beautiful painting of the Cape with all three pads. I can't get a scan of the whole thing, so here is a detail of Complex 39 right after a Saturn V launch from 39C.
Rick Teklits Member Posts: 21 From: Yardville, NJ USA Registered: Dec 2010	posted 02-02-2014 08:43 PM That is a neat picture. I have never seen that before.
mikej Member Posts: 483 From: Germantown, WI USA Registered: Jan 2004	posted 02-03-2014 06:04 PM I have a number of diagrams showing Pads A through D on my web site.
mach3valkyrie Member Posts: 754 From: Albany, Oregon Registered: Jul 2006	posted 02-03-2014 06:51 PM The March 1964 National Geographic Magazine has a similar illustration as a foldout. Well worth a look.
Ronpur Member Posts: 1260 From: Brandon, Fl Registered: May 2012	posted 02-03-2014 07:03 PM quote: Originally posted by mikej: I have a number of diagrams showing Pads A through D on my web site. Yes, you have the complete cover on your page. Great information there. I had know about Pad C for a long time, but D and E are news to me! The warning sign picture is in the KSC tour book from around 1969 or so.
Jim Behling Member Posts: 1905 From: Cape Canaveral, FL Registered: Mar 2010	posted 02-03-2014 08:11 PM quote: Originally posted by Ronpur: I have a LIFE magazine from September 25, 1964 that has a beautiful painting of the Cape with all 3 pads. Proposed but never built Titan-III pad LC-42 is also represented.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 07-27-2022 10:42 PM When the S-II stages of Apollo 4 and Apollo 6 were stacked in the VAB, they did not have the interstage ring attached. It was already mated to the S-IC stage. When the S-II stages of Apollo 8 and later vehicles were stacked in the VAB, they did have the interstage ring attached when the S-II was mated to the S-IC stage. Also of note, I have read that when the S-IC stage separated during launch, it took with it a bottom section (about two-feet) of the interstage ring, because that is where the charge was located. You can see where it would separate in this Apollo 10 photo of the S-II stage.
Jim Behling Member Posts: 1905 From: Cape Canaveral, FL Registered: Mar 2010	posted 07-27-2022 10:53 PM quote: Originally posted by LM-12: ...it took with it a bottom section (about two-feet) of the interstage ring, because that is where the charge was located. That is because the separation plane was different from the assembly plane. That is common with separations that are cut. Even with the CSM and SLA.
damnyankee36 Member Posts: 64 From: Alamogordo, NM USA Registered: Aug 2017	posted 07-28-2022 01:04 PM I didn't know that. Any photos of the CSM and SLA planes? Did the assembly and cut planes of the S-II and S-IVB also differ?
Jim Behling Member Posts: 1905 From: Cape Canaveral, FL Registered: Mar 2010	posted 07-28-2022 03:15 PM Yes.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 08-07-2022 04:21 PM The Saturn Illustrated Chronology mentions this: AS-503 was de-stacked after initial stacking to allow S-II to go back to MSFC for man-rating checks. When in 1968 was the S-II stage of Apollo 8 re-stacked in the VAB? I have seen several different dates: July 24 - Saturn Illustrated Chronology July 29 - Apollo Image Gallery (photo above) August 6 - Apollo by the Numbers
J.L Member Posts: 694 From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA Registered: May 2005	posted 08-07-2022 04:35 PM I believe July 24 is the correct date.
AlanLawrie Member Posts: 108 From: hitchin, herts, UK Registered: Oct 2003	posted 08-07-2022 06:15 PM According to the MSFC Flight Evaluation report (the usual bible for these dates) the date was 24 July (as JL reported above).
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 08-08-2022 12:36 AM Okay, I see that now in Table 3-1. Thanks.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 05-13-2024 01:55 PM Some of the red "UNITED STATES" letters were missing on the S-II-8 second stage (for Apollo 13) when it was stacked in the Vehicle Assembly Building's High Bay 2 at Kennedy Space Center. The Apollo 13 launch vehicle (with a boilerplate spacecraft) was later rolled around to High Bay 1. Was this photo taken in High Bay 2 before the boilerplate spacecraft was stacked, or in High Bay 1 after the boilerplate spacecraft was de-stacked?
mgspacecadet Member Posts: 25 From: Registered: Apr 2012	posted 05-13-2024 07:56 PM This NASA article, dated Aug. 6, 2019, includes said photo, and states the vehicle was in VAB High Bay 2.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 05-13-2024 08:28 PM Interestingly, there is also photo 69-HC-1147 that shows the Apollo 13 spacecraft being stacked on the launch vehicle. So that must be High Bay 1. The scaffolding location would seem to indicate that they may still have been working on the red letters.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 05-14-2024 03:03 AM This info from the launch vehicle flight evaluation report might have something to do with the missing red letters: The S-II-8 was the first stage to utilize spray-on foam as the external insulation for the LH2 tank sidewalls and forward skirt.
LM-12 Member Posts: 3942 From: Ontario, Canada Registered: Oct 2010	posted 05-17-2024 08:32 AM This roll around photo of the Apollo 13 vehicle entering High Bay 1 shows that the red letters still had to be fixed. The vertical motion targets look normal.