Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Space History Photo of the Week
  Photo of the week 363 (October 15, 2011)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Photo of the week 363 (October 15, 2011)
heng44
Member

Posts: 3387
From: Netherlands
Registered: Nov 2001

posted 10-15-2011 02:50 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for heng44   Click Here to Email heng44     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

The spent S-IVB stage is seen over Israel following the launch of the second Skylab crew on July 28, 1973. The Dead Sea is at bottom center. Cyprus can be seen beyond the S-IVB and Turkey is visible near the horizon.

Ed Hengeveld

space1
Member

Posts: 853
From: Danville, Ohio
Registered: Dec 2002

posted 10-15-2011 04:27 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for space1   Click Here to Email space1     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Obviously one of those images taken on a sound stage in the desert. Note the "50" label for the sea prop in the foreground

I hadn't realized that the Skylab Apollo S-IVB's retained their "petals."

wickball
Member

Posts: 107
From: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 10-15-2011 05:27 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for wickball   Click Here to Email wickball     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Modern technology combined with the land of Biblical times. To me, very cool.

Joel Katzowitz
Member

Posts: 808
From: Marietta GA USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 10-15-2011 08:17 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Joel Katzowitz   Click Here to Email Joel Katzowitz     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It's strange, yet so natural, to look at earth views like this and not see the country's "borders" that ultimately define politics.

tfrielin
Member

Posts: 162
From: Athens, GA
Registered: Feb 2007

posted 10-15-2011 12:23 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for tfrielin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I saw this launch in person at that great viewing spot --the lawn in front of the VAB so when this shot was taken, I was packing up the car to return to the Visitor's Center.

Shortly after this shot was taken, NASA vented the resudual propellents through the J-2 and de-orbited it if I recall correctly.

tfrielin
Member

Posts: 162
From: Athens, GA
Registered: Feb 2007

posted 10-15-2011 12:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for tfrielin     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by space1:
I hadn't realized that the Skylab Apollo S-IVB's retained their "petals."
No particular reason to bother--there was no LEM to extract. Leave 'em attached and its four fewer pieces of space debris.

Tom
Member

Posts: 1597
From: New York
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 10-15-2011 01:15 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tom   Click Here to Email Tom     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Speaking of space debris, were the S-IVB stages of the earth-orbiting Apollo and Skylab/ASTP flights left in their original orbit after spacecraft separation?

ilbasso
Member

Posts: 1522
From: Greensboro, NC USA
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 10-15-2011 03:38 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ilbasso   Click Here to Email ilbasso     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
According to the SA-206 [Skylab 2] Flight Evaluation Report, a "thermal coating experiment" on the S-IVB was initiated a little less than an hour into the flight. A de-orbit command was issued about 4-1/2 hours into the flight, and the S-IVB "impacted" about 6 hours after launch. I assume this was similar for other Skylab flights.

Another thing that was different about the S-IVB's on the Skylab flights than the Moon flights was that in Skylab missions, after the ullage rockets were fired to settle the propellants and separate the S-IVB from the first stage, they were blown off the side of the stage to save weight during the ascent to orbit. The S-IVB ullage motors were needed on the lunar flights several times, in Earth orbit insertion, Trans-Lunar Injection, and finally in the maneuver to send the S-IVB on toward lunar impact.

mikej
Member

Posts: 481
From: Germantown, WI USA
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 10-15-2011 06:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for mikej   Click Here to Email mikej     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Originally posted by ilbasso:
Another thing that was different about the S-IVB's on the Skylab flights than the Moon flights was that in Skylab missions, after the ullage rockets were fired to settle the propellants and separate the S-IVB from the first stage, they were blown off the side of the stage to save weight during the ascent to orbit.
Actually, the ullage motors on all of the S-IV and S-IVB stages were jettisoned after they were done firing. Refer, for example, to the "Significant Event Times Summary" table in the AS-506 Flight Evaluation Report: The "S-IVB Ullage Case Jettison" took place at 561.0 seconds.

On the lunar flights, the Auxiliary Propulsion System was used for the additional duties you mentioned (and, perusing SA-206's FER, it looks like SA-206 retained its APS engines through de-orbit).

ilbasso
Member

Posts: 1522
From: Greensboro, NC USA
Registered: Feb 2006

posted 10-15-2011 09:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for ilbasso   Click Here to Email ilbasso     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ah, thanks for clarifying that.

Michael Davis
Member

Posts: 528
From: Houston, Texas
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 10-16-2011 02:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Michael Davis   Click Here to Email Michael Davis     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
So why have the panels deploy at all on a Skylab mission? I had always assumed that the only purpose for doing so was to extract the LM. I can see testing them on the Saturn 1B on Apollo 7 for functionality, but on Skylab there would seem to be no reason. Was panel deployment designed into the system? I'm assuming that the CSM pushing away from the S-IVB would not be an issue with or without the panels deployed.

Lou Chinal
Member

Posts: 1306
From: Staten Island, NY
Registered: Jun 2007

posted 10-16-2011 03:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lou Chinal   Click Here to Email Lou Chinal     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Mike you make a good point.

But remember Skylab was done on a shoestring. The separation plane between SM and the SIVB was aready a proven way of doing things. Why redesign a new system?

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 2020 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement