|
Author
|
Topic: Apollo 9 launch vehicle: Saturn IB vs. Saturn V
|
Fra Mauro
Member Posts: 1624
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 04-12-2012 07:59 PM
   
Why wasn't a Saturn IB used for Apollo 9 since it wasn't going to the moon? Seems like a waste of a Saturn V, unless weight was the issue. |
SpaceAholic
Member Posts: 4494
From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 04-12-2012 08:32 PM
To carry the LM. |
APG85
Member Posts: 307
From:
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted 04-12-2012 08:32 PM
I believe you are correct... it was due to weight. I was lucky enough to see Apollo 9 on the pad when I was a small child. I have a blurry memory of it... but I was there!  |
Jim Behling
Member Posts: 1488
From: Cape Canaveral, FL
Registered: Mar 2010
|
posted 04-12-2012 08:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Fra Mauro:
Why wasn't a Saturn IB used for Apollo 9 since it wasn't going to the moon?
Saturn IB couldn't lift a lunar configured (fueled) CSM. |
golddog
Member Posts: 210
From: australia
Registered: Feb 2008
|
posted 04-12-2012 08:40 PM
Fully fueled CSM/LM combination too heavy for IB. To launch into earth orbit or to the moon required the Saturn V. Only Saturn IB flight with a LM was unmanned and did not include the CSM. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 04-12-2012 11:19 PM
Well, as I recall from some research I conducted, the mission that became Apollo 9 (the manned Earth orbit test of a LM) was originally manifested to use one or two Saturn IBs for a CSM and an LM, probably because at the time it was manifested, Apollo 4 and 6 had not done their all up testing flights yet. Pads 34 and 37 were the Saturn IB pads with Pad 34 being the manned pad. So Spider could have been lofted off of Pad 37 unmanned, just like Apollo 5 was.I can't recall exactly when the change was made, but I am fairly certain it was related to Apollo 4's success on at least the first unmanned launch. Apollo 6 didn't go as well, but the fixes were verified on Apollo 8 and relatively easy to trace due to Apollo 4's flight success. So one of the Saturn V airframes became surplus at that point and they could do the testing of two craft on one launch vehicle. The Apollo Applications program (what became Skylab) benefited from the decision though as then they had access to a pair of already built Saturn IB boosters for their uses. When a Saturn V was made available for launching of the Skylab workshop after Apollo 11's landing, it meant that they could go dry lab with the setup and didn't have to use a Saturn IB to launch a wet lab (so yet another one became available for a Skylab crew). |
ilbasso
Member Posts: 1522
From: Greensboro, NC USA
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 04-12-2012 11:21 PM
If I recall correctly, some early diagrams of the proposed Saturn family of vehicles depicted a Saturn IB with a LM and CSM. As the program progressed and designs were refined, it became clear that the weight of a fueled CSM and LM would exceed the lift capability of the Saturn IB. The unmanned test of LM-1 (Apollo 5) flew on a Saturn IB that had no CSM, only a small payload fairing sitting atop the SLA. See this photo for reference. EDIT: There were also discussions about having a CSM and LM launched into Earth orbit on two separate Saturn IBs and have them rendezvous in orbit. |
advertisement