|
Author
|
Topic: Skylab: Identifying photo of Saturn IB on pad
|
J.L
Member Posts: 681
From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 04-24-2012 12:13 PM
   
Been doing detective work on this photo for some time now. Are there any Saturn 1B experts put there who might want to help determine which mission this is? I can say for sure it is not the Skylab Rescue Vehicle or ASTP.  |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 3160
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-25-2012 04:59 PM
That picture seems to have been taken shortly before sunset or shortly after dawn, so anyone with a good knowledge of the orientation of the launch-pad might be able to deduce the mission from the sun's position relative to the pad (since the launches were on 25th May, 28th July and 16th November,all 1973). There would be some element of guess-work depending on the times between the Saturn reaching the pad and being launched. Does this help at all? |
Ken Havekotte
Member Posts: 2983
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 04-25-2012 05:19 PM
J.L., can you somehow magnify or enlarge the photo image of the Saturn 1B rocket to see what AS-2__ number is on it to identify the Skylab mission? I am more inclined to say it would be AS-208/SL-4. |
Go4Launch
Member Posts: 549
From: Seminole, Fla.
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 04-25-2012 09:34 PM
That picture is looking toward the west-northwest, with the sunrise in the east behind and to the right of the photographer. |
J.L
Member Posts: 681
From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 04-26-2012 12:15 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
J.L., can you somehow magnify or enlarge the photo image of the Saturn 1B rocket to see what AS-2__ number is on it to identify the Skylab mission?
I will dig the slides out and re-scan them. I had always assumed they were SL-4 as well, until I realized it was totally dark when the MSS was retracted. It was cloudy at SL-3 retraction, and it looks too nice out for SL-2. This leaves the countdown test for SL-2? SL-3 and SL-4 had fueling tests, but this vehicle does not appear to be fueled.I will report back after I get some new scans. They are too beautiful to be without a mission designation! |
Headshot
Member Posts: 891
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 04-26-2012 06:47 AM
If the slides you have are originals and were developed by Kodak, there should be a month/year date stamp, either embossed on the cardboard mount, or inked on.Just a thought. |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 3160
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-26-2012 05:20 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Go4Launch:
That picture is looking toward the west-northwest, with the sunrise in the east behind and to the right of the photographer.
Surely if the camera is facing WNW, that's sunSET to the right. Assuming this is a week or two before launch, it must be mid-summer, which suggests the second Skylab mission, which launched on 28th July. |
Go4Launch
Member Posts: 549
From: Seminole, Fla.
Registered: Jul 2003
|
posted 04-26-2012 10:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Blackarrow:
Surely if the camera is facing WNW, that's sunSET to the right.
No, if you're looking WNW, which is toward the left of the photo, then east is to the right. If you were taking this photo, the Atlantic Ocean would be behind you with the sun coming up. At least on this side of the Atlantic. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 04-27-2012 08:39 AM
Considering the rockets are practically identical looking (only seeing the number at the base would give a clue as to the specific one) it is very hard to determine that. Even ASTP looked almost identical except for a couple of the fins being swapped for ones on the backup Saturn.It looks to me like a sunset shot. Without knowing the film exposures it is hard to say though. But the pad and the rocket seem to be illuminated almost entirely by the xenons while the concrete base it is on looks dark. If the sun were creeping up behind the photographer, I would expect the LUT to have more illumination on it than that (I think the film exposure is at least showing them). The clouds in the sky are also are darkened somewhat with the sun appearing to be setting behind them. So I would say this is likely a shot taken before fueling had begun the night before a launch. That would explain the flood lights being on. With that bit of "using the force," I am going to take a blind stab and say SL-4. Reason being, is the launch took place in mid-November. When I was down for Ares 1-X which launched at the end of October, the sun angles I got in my night before the launch shots are very similar. One would figure if it is a pad countdown test photo, that would still place it within similar lighting conditions to what I experienced. Both rockets went off of pad 39B as well. In my case, most of my photos were taken of Ares 1-X looking to the WSW say about a 30 degree offset compared to this photo since you can see the LHX tank in the background and KSC had the photographers set up close to the LOX tank (with it being in the foreground of a couple of my pictures) and both tanks are a little north of the pads. But I concede it still could be any one of the three. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 04-27-2012 10:35 AM
I believe it was on Skylab 4 that the damaged stabilization fins were replaced on the Saturn 1B (SA-208) launch vehicle. Was this done at the pad? |
Ken Havekotte
Member Posts: 2983
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 04-27-2012 10:42 AM
Am still checking my own photo files, but rest assured, it certainly isn't AS-210/ASTP as there is no 80-foot-tall fiberglass lightning mast mounted atop MLP-1's LUT.But there were a number of different images like this shot of SL-4 once the launch vehicle arrived at the pad on Aug. 14, 1973 and throughout the nearly 3-month period it was on the pad before its Nov. 16 liftoff. |
J.L
Member Posts: 681
From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 04-27-2012 11:02 AM
The main reason I doubt it is SL-4 — it was totally dark when the MSS began retracting from the vehicle on launch eve. There would not have been any sunset photo ops with the vehicle exposed like this. Ken, I believe the shot you are thinking of is a NASA release taken at sunrise on launch morning.Also, someone had mentioned looking at the slides. These were shot by a private individual and the the frames were in unmounted strips. I had to put them in slide mounts, so unfortunately there were never any dates. That would have been a huge help. |
Ken Havekotte
Member Posts: 2983
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 04-27-2012 11:55 AM
Was the photo referred to here shot by a NASA/contractor photographer, or, was it by a photojournalist? For sure, if shot by a member of the press corps, it might limit — but not in all cases — a particular time-frame or news media photo opportunity. By any chance, did it come from Tiziou? |
J.L
Member Posts: 681
From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 04-27-2012 02:07 PM
Photojournalist yes, Tiziou no. |
Tom
Member Posts: 1610
From: New York
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 04-29-2012 12:04 PM
I found a similar photo (taken from the opposite side) of Skylab 4 (courtesy of Specefacts.de). |
golddog
Member Posts: 210
From: australia
Registered: Feb 2008
|
posted 04-29-2012 02:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by LM-12:
Was this done at the pad?
SL 4's fins were replaced on the pad. In Dick Latimer's book "All We Did Was Fly to the Moon" (page 112) there is a photograph of this being done. |
J.L
Member Posts: 681
From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 04-29-2012 02:50 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Tom:
I found a similar photo (taken from the opposite side) of Skylab 4 (courtesy of Specefacts.de).
Just to prove my point with regards to why the initial photo cannot be Skylab 4. The photo in question has no MSS attached. The B&W photo below was taken on launch eve. Note that it is totally dark.  |
Headshot
Member Posts: 891
From: Vancouver, WA, USA
Registered: Feb 2012
|
posted 04-29-2012 04:20 PM
I notice that there appears to be LOX venting in Tom's image, but I am not very certain there is similar venting in J.L.'s image in question. How soon before launch did they load the LOX on board a Saturn IB? |
garyd2831
Member Posts: 641
From: Syracuse, New York, USA
Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 04-29-2012 06:01 PM
What Saturn IB is in this photo? If you look closely, you will notice extra structure support between the launch tower and the milk-stool.None of the later photos I have seen show this extra structural support? Could this have been a fit test prior to the Skylab?  |
Ken Havekotte
Member Posts: 2983
From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard
Registered: Mar 2001
|
posted 04-29-2012 07:02 PM
If I recall, the above photo is an technical or mechanical rendering of what a 1B would look like on Pad 39. It wasn't a "real" photograph and let me comment later, as I am waiting on more photo-info., regarding J.L.'s 1B picture that started this topic. |
Tom
Member Posts: 1610
From: New York
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 04-29-2012 07:11 PM
quote:
Originally posted by garyd2831:
Could this have been a fit test prior to the Skylab?
It's definitely not a Skylab launch vehicle. The first stage markings look more like those of Apollo 7. See example. |
golddog
Member Posts: 210
From: australia
Registered: Feb 2008
|
posted 04-29-2012 10:46 PM
It cannot be Apollo 7, as that mission was launched from LC34, where it was mounted on a launch pedestal and not the "milk stool" |
J.L
Member Posts: 681
From: Bloomington, Illinois, USA
Registered: May 2005
|
posted 04-29-2012 11:03 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Ken Havekotte:
If I recall, the above photo is an technical or mechanical rendering of what a 1B would look like on Pad 39.
Exactly as Ken has stated. This is a technical rendering or "preview" of what the Saturn 1B would look like sitting on the LC-39 extension (milkstool). The photo number is 70PC-32 (KSC) and is dated June 10, 1970. The Saturn 1B for Skylab 2 was first rolled to Pad 39A on January 11, 1973 with a "facilities" SLA and CSM attached, and without an LES. This rollout allowed launch teams the opportunity to do fit checks with the Saturn 1B and "milkstool". Actual rollout with flight hardware did not take place until February 26, 1973. |
Rusty B
Member Posts: 239
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 04-30-2012 12:28 AM
Here's a newspaper photo of the Skylab 2 rollout test on Jan 10, 1973, without a LES. |
Tom
Member Posts: 1610
From: New York
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 04-30-2012 06:50 AM
quote:
Originally posted by golddog:
It cannot be Apollo 7, as that mission was launched from LC34, where it was mounted on a launch pedestal and not the "milk stool"
As Ken noted earlier, the photo is no doubt a "composite".The vehicle they superimposed is similar to the Apollo 7 vehicle, see markings on first stage, less "black" on Skylab and ASTP versions. |
Rusty B
Member Posts: 239
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 04-30-2012 08:35 AM
Here's a December 1970 issue of Popular Mechanics magazine that has an article about plans for Skylab. There is a composite picture showing what the Saturn IB would look like on the Saturn V pad. Notice the "milk stool" legs are triangular shaped in this illustration, very different than what was ultimately built. |
garyd2831
Member Posts: 641
From: Syracuse, New York, USA
Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 04-30-2012 11:33 AM
Thanks for all the great inputs in regards to my photo. If you look at the Dec 1970 Popular Mechanics magazine photo showing the Saturn 1B, it appears to be the same photo as mine but with a different milk-stool configuration. |
Rusty B
Member Posts: 239
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted 04-30-2012 12:20 PM
Gary, I found your photo on a NASA KSC server. Your photo number is NASA Photo ID: S71-00163 (photo description). |
garyd2831
Member Posts: 641
From: Syracuse, New York, USA
Registered: Oct 2009
|
posted 04-30-2012 04:18 PM
Thanks Rusty B for the research. It is a great photo of a concept that wasn't to far off. I love seeing and owning vintage photos of the things that might be. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 10-08-2018 06:45 AM
Regarding the first photo, the Skylab 4 service module had a white thermal coating over the battery compartment on the Bay 1 panel. That thermal modification was not on the Skylab 2 and Skylab 3 service modules.Only the Skylab 2 service module had thermal tape on radiator panels 1, 4 and 5. Without having seen a high res version of the photo in question, I would say it looks like the sunset view of the Skylab 2 vehicle seen in the S73-25654 double exposure of Skylab 1 and Skylab 2. |
Jim Behling
Member Posts: 1488
From: Cape Canaveral, FL
Registered: Mar 2010
|
posted 10-09-2018 09:34 AM
quote:
Originally posted by J.L:
I can say for sure it is not the Skylab Rescue Vehicle or ASTP.
The rescue vehicle would not have had spotlights targeted on it. Spotlights are only used during countdown ops. |
LM-12
Member Posts: 3324
From: Ontario, Canada
Registered: Oct 2010
|
posted 11-10-2018 01:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Tom:
The vehicle they superimposed is similar to the Apollo 7 vehicle, see markings on first stage, less "black" on Skylab and ASTP versions.
A "white" Saturn IB first stage was actually sitting on a pad before Apollo 7.The SA-206 stage that launched Skylab 2 had initially been assigned to launch the unmanned LM-1 mission. It was erected on LC-37B in January 1967, a few days before the Apollo 1 fire. |
advertisement