Follow On Experiments Project Mercury Capsules

m
_
l
I
L
l
I
L
.
I
L
_
I
Z
0 0 0
I
'
-
-
I
_
L
,
v
Z
-
0
<
-
I
-
-
<
2
"
+
+
=
+
e
r
+
+
+
f
;
:
L
i
+
+
+
+
<
+
+
-
.
.
;
.
+
+
i
+
_
:
_
=
t
i
l
k
;
+
:
-
G
;
+
Y
:
:
.
+
+
:
+
/
"
,

,

"
l
o
L
l

'
0

Q
)

.
"

(
)

r
'

0

.... -
\

+
-
"

e
e
,

0

.

.
-
\

-
.
-
\

- a
.
:
:
:

l
o
L
l

1
:
0

U
1

U
l

(
\
l

r
l

0

I

0
\

w
i

,

-
,

(
J
)
,

(
}
1
:

<
;

.
.
.
.
-
1
1

(
)
;

-
:
:
'
"
1

(
'
-
I

-
'
I
I

-
-
'
I

1

0

\
.
1

'
"
'

\

0
.
.
.
.
,

I
'

'
\
1
'
1

"

'
i
o
'

;
!

-
'
"
"
I

N

J
'
t

I

'
,
-
,

.
:
-
'

.
,
-
:

" .,,:
)
,

_
0
1

.
J

:
,
:
1

'
U

P
.

-
-
1

l
o
L
l

.
.

I
:

c
b
l
J
l

L

S
l
'
l
J
\
l
L

C
.

e
n

I
-
Z

W

w

0
-
>
<

w

Z

0

I

0

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

0

L
L

p

(
-
O
J

S
i
1
0
S
d
V
J

L
J
H
r
O
a
a

N
O

M
3
1
1
J
d

(

/

e
n

r

1

,
(

,

I

f

'
,
.

.

.

L
'
,
,
.
\
0
'
,
,
0
,
,
,
,
0
i
v
0 i
J
U
l
C
O
Z m e
v
l
_
i
J
u
_
l
Z i C
O
Z I
L
l
0 Z >
-
n
_
0
L
U
o
,
a
,
,
a
.
.
,
,
-
i
"
"
0
=
6
_
z
U
.
l
I
-
-
u
'
_
-
-
I
a
.
a
'
_
,
0
0 0
I
c
3
J
I
-
-
Z L
U

Ii
J

\

(
t
i
,
l,
t
\
,
l
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER 1959
TOTAL NO. OF PAGES 345
0-00653
FOLLOW ON
(I tV - 7 J/ fr2l

ENGINEERING REPORT 6919
COpy NO.
EXPERIMENTS
PROJECT MERCURY CAPSULES
ins information affecting I {/ fl7_
d States, wlth- ' . '7" /1
Laws Title 18,
the transmission
DEC 1 1959
McDONNELL
AIRCRAFT CORPORATION
NASA IE.
, . ; . LA..,\;GLCY CE.'\ n:.R,
',..' .
Langley Field., Va.
i
-
u
_
=
_
o
_
o
_
_
g
g

_
'
_
I
_
_
.
e
l
_
o
_
_
0
_
_
m Z m Z m
m m
_
Z
m m
m
"
,
:
m
0
m '
,
,
0
_
0
i
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
PROPRIETARY RIGHTS
The reports, drawings, and data herewith were developed by McDonnell
Aircraft Corporation (M. A. C.). These documents were intended only
for distribution and evaluation to personnel of the National Aeronautical
and Space Administration. It is requested that these documents not be
listed by ASTIA nor distributed to any unauthorized personnel.
O
,
O
,
0 U
,
I
I
_
1
0
_
-
Z m I
,
I
,
I
Z m 0 Z U
,
I
,
%
8
_
d
.
_
_
.
_
-
-
-
_
-
1
-
_
.
_
-
-
.
_
.
_
-
_
-
=
t
-
i
_
-
1
"
-
_
o
.
o
_
o
_
_
%
9
?
.
_
)
.
,
4
0
r
-
I
O
J
o
q
.
z
_
L
m
.
_
%
[
'-
G
O
0
"
,
0
_
r
_
,
1
"
-
I
"
_
t
_
J
_
n
_
.
:
.
T
_
1
"
_
1
"
.
-
2
_
I
"
.
z
.
_
.
_
_
<
_
_
_
_
-
_
+
,
-
I
,
-
4
,
-
I
H
,
-
I
4
4
&
,
,
,
,
u
m
u
_
u
m
u
-
_
u
m
O
O
O
_
o
.
_
%
0
_
o
_
=
o
0
_
m
,
C
_
0
iiiiiiiiiii
E
r
q
-
J
_
9
_
_
4
m
o
_
0
.
,
_
_
_
-
I
0
_
0
,
]
f
:
'
l
.
-
_
l
t
h
k
.
f
[
'
-
(
C
.
O
"
,
O
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
-
4
k
_
k
4
D
<
:
_
k
_
<
C
<
'
.
k
O
k
C
'
k
O
k
_
"
,
4
?
?
?
?
?
?
_
T
?
?
.
.
.
.
.
o
o
.
.
.
A
A
A
,
.
.
.
.
r
.
.
4
_
-
I
_
-
_
r
-
4
,
-
-
'1
A
A
&
'
'
g
L
)
u
)
.
g
.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
.
_
0
_
_
I
_
I
b
]
.
,
-
t
d
&
d
d
_
d
_
S
o
_
_
"
,
_
,
a
o
,
m
,
_
u
0
U
t
..

l.
I

r
I,
,I
,

!
1
,
,
\
[FOLLoW ON EXPERIMENTS I
TC!JC:IDC\.I!r C(,;':TGOL
1.0
1.1 Concept
1. 2 ';ehicle Cocli'i,';',E'a tiOl}
1.3 Abol't SId 3.::ct.pc
7ouchdown Accuracy
1.5 i of \To.ryl.:'!t; :--.c::...:.1ge
1.6 Applica;;ion of Lift to c",,>s:lie
1. 7 Ee-lIDtry co:.trol Techni'J.'.le
1.8 Fe-Entry Guidance ">YSCcLl
1.9 and 3tructural Considerations
i :A:lETm'C: ItT O:'0IT
2.0 Introduction
2.1 ,;asic Concept
2.2 Vehicle
2.3 I,lissio;). Profile
2.4 :"oost and ::aneuverine 'ilirust Systems
2.5 Tr'd.'1.sfer Experiments vith :\ercury
2.6 Rendezvous-Intercept Techniques
SELF-CONTAr.rED GUIDAnCE
3.0
31
32
33
3.4
Introduction
:asic Concept
'lehicle Configuration
LallilCh, Abort and Escape Considerations
'ilie Description of Guida'lce Jystem
PaGe
1.1-1
1.1-1
1.2-1
1.3-1

1.5-1
1.6-1
1. 7-1
1.8-1
1.9-1
2.1-1
2.1-1
2.2-1
23-1
2.4-1
25-1
2.6-1
3.1-1
31-1
3.2-1
33-1
3.4-1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
C;;' CO';TSJ!T3
FClDTlm: DAY 1:ISSION
4.0 Introduction
Lasic Concept
4.2 Vehicle Configuration
4.3 Orbit 3election
4. I; ::ission Profile
4.5 Launch Considerations
4.6 Abor t and Escape
: . 7 Considerations
4.8 A tti tude Con tro1
1:.9 Description of Structure
4.10 Envirorunental Control 3ystelll
4.il Auxiliary Power System
4.13 ]uman Factors
1+.14 Reliability
JIA',!fEl) r.:sco:r:rAIS3AUCE
5.0 Introduction
5.1 Concept
5.2 Vehicle Configuration
'). = Laun.c'l, Abort a."ld Re-Entry Considerations
5.:1 P'lowCruphic Technical Considera.tions
UITIM, OS'=-IT ?2'-SN'F.'Y
6.0
6.1
<:.2
h.3
I) .I.
fi.5

6.:
'5.8
'5.9
6.10
Introduction
Concept
Vehic1ce
Lission Profile
Law1ch and Orbit Characteristics
LtL'1.nr F.e-Entry Considerations
.iea t Protection
Structural Considerations
Zlectronics Considerations
Electrical Power 3ystem
Equipment Envirorurenta1 Control 3ystem
I'uce
h.l-1
1, .1-1
4.2-1
'.3-1
4.1.-1
1 S-l
; . 6-1
1,.7-1

!..10-il
4.11-1
4.13-1
1,.14-1
5.1-1
5.1-1
5.2-1
53-1
5.
1
1-1
':;.0-1
6.1-1
':;.2-1
?3-1
I).' -1
?)-1
?/-1
6.
':;.1'3-1
?,?-1
"'.10-1
ii
D
,
_
o
I
J
,
e
l
)
D
_
d
)
0 4 p
.
c
l
-
_
d
0 _
0
C
q
t
_
p
_
o
"
0
C
_
0
D
.
d
-
_
0
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
_
0
_
0
0
_
0
I
lf
lt
t
ilt
lf
lt
lllllt
t
lllt
llt
t
lllllt
llit
t
_
0
_
0
_
o
1
!
_
_
1
_
o
_
_
1
1
.
o
_
o
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
illlt
lt
lt
illlllllllllllll
_
_
o
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
|
l
l
l
l
l
|
l
i
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
|
l
l
l
l
l
|
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
|
l
l
l
l
|
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
!
I
I
t
0
,
,
_
r
0
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
|
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
|
I
|
|
I
!
!
!
!
!
I
-
q
C
_
,
'
,
.
_
_
-
'
b
a
I
'
0
1
_
0
_
0
G
o
-
q
C
_
l
4
_
L
_
i
_
I
-
'
0
O
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
i
l
t
i
l
t
l
l
t
t
l
i
l
l
i
l
i
l
i
l
l
I
I
I
I
I
_
_
H
_
_
_
H
H
_
H
H
H
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
0
I
-
I
0 Q 0
I
-
.
-
4
I
THIS REPORT CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING PAGES
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
Title 1.6-7 2.2-2 3.2-0
4.4-2
4.10-15 4.13-3
63-2 6.6-7
1
1.6-8 2.2-3 32-1
4.5-1 4.10-16 4.13-4
6.4-1
6.6-8
ii 1.6-9
2.2-4
32-2
4.5-2 4.10-17 4.13-5 6.4-2 6.6-9
iii 1.6-10 2.2-5
32-3
*4.5-3
4.10-18 4.13-6
*6.4-3
6.6-10
iv 1.6-11 2.2-6 3.2-4
5-4
4.10-19 4.13-7
*6.4-4
6.6-11
v
1. 7-1
2.2-7 3.2-5
*45-5
4.10-20 4.13-8
*6.4-5
6.6-12
vi
17-2
2.2-8
32-6
*45-6
4.10-21 4.13-9
65-1
6.6-13
vii-viii 1. 7 -3 2.2-9 3.2-7 *45-7 4.10-22 4.13-10
6.5-2
6.6-14
1.1-1 1.7-4
2.2-10 3.2-8 *45-8 4.10-23 4.14-1
65-3
6:6-15
1.1-2
17-5
2.2-11
33-1
4.6-1
4.10-24 4.14-2
6.5-4
6.6-16
1.2-1 1.7-6 23-1
33-2 47-1 4.10-25 4.14-3
6.5-5
6;7-1
1.2-2
1. 7-7
23-2 3.4-1 4.7-2
4.11-1 4.14-4
6.5-6

1.2-3
1. 7-8
2.4-1
34-2 4.7-3 4.11-2 4.14-5
6.5-7 6.7-3
1.2-4
17-9
* 2.4-2
34-3
4.7-4
4.11-3 4.14-6
6.5-8
6.7-4
1.2-5 1.7-10 * 2.4-3 34-4 4.7-5 4.11-4 4.14-7
6.5-9
6.7-5
1.2-6
1.8-1 * 2.4-4 3.4-5 4.7-6
4.11-5 51-1 6.5-10 6.7-6
1.2-7 1.8-2
2.4-5
34-6 4.7-7 4.11-6 52-1
65-ll
6.7-7
1.2-8
1.8-3
2.5-1 3.4-7
4.8-1
4.ll-7 52-2 6.5-12 67-8
1.3-1 1.8-4 25-2 3.4-8 49-1 4.11-8 52-3 6.5-13 67-9
* 1. 3-2 1.8-5 25-3 3.4-9 49-2 4.12-1 5.2-4
65-14
6.8-1
1.4-1
1.8-6
2.5-4 4.1-1
49-3 4.12-2 52-5
65-15
6.8-2
1.4-2 1.8-7
2.5-5 4.2-1
49-4 4.12-3 5.2-6
65-16
6.8-3
1.4-3 1.8-8
2.5-6 .2-2 49-5 4.12-4 5 3-1 6.5-17
6.8-4
1.5-1 1.8-9 25-7 4.2-3 9-6
4.12-5 *53-2 6.5-18 6.9-1
15-2 1.8-10 25-8 .2-4
49-7 4.12-6 54-1
65-19
69-2
1.5-3 1.8-11 2.5-9 4.2-5 4.10-1
4.12-7 5.4-2 6.5-20 69-3
15-4 1.8-12 25-10 4.2-6 4.10-2
4.12-8 6.0-1
65-21
6.10-1
15-5 1.9-1
2.5-11 4.2-7 4.10-3
4.12-9 6.1-1
65-22
6.10-2
1.5-6 1.9-2 25-12 4.2-8 4.10-4
4.12-10 6.2-1
6. 5-2a
6.10-3
1.5-7 19-3
2.5-13 4.2-9 4.10-5
4.12-11 6.2-2
65-2 6.10-4
1.5-8 1.9-4
2.6-1 4.2-10 4.10-6
4.12-12 6.2-3 6.5-25 6.10-5
1.5-9
19-5
2.6-2 4.2-11 4.10-7
4.12-13 6.2-4 6.5-26
1.5-10
19-6
2.6-3 4.2-12 4.10-8
4.12-14 6.2-5 65-27
1.6-1
1.9-7
2.6-4 4.2-13 4.10-9 4.12-15 6.2-6 6.6-1
1.6-2
19-8
2.6-5
43-1
4.10-10
4.12-16 6.2-7 6.6-2
1.6-3 1.9-9
2.6-6 4.3-2 4.10-11
4.12-17 6.2-8 6.6-3
1.6-4
19-10
2.6-7
43-3
4.10-12
4.12-18 6.2-9 6.6-4
1.6-5 19-11
2.6-8 4.3-4 4.10-13
4.13-1 6.2-10 6.6-5
1.6-6 2.1-1 31-1 4.4-1 4.10-14
4.13-2 6.3-1 6.6-6
2.2-1
* With These Pages Removed, the Report is Downgraded to Confidential
iii
@
,
O
,
@
'
O
,
,
0
,
-
w
0
'
_
L I
i
U
L
U
J
_
'
I
-
0
L u
J
Z
_
,
,
1 u
J
z 1 0 z u
J
.
r
_
0 0
= .
,
_
t
-
J
-
_
u
-
x
M
-
_
O
x
.
,
%
0
_
S
.
,
-
4
e
-
t
-
,
-
t
o
_
:
.
q _
.
.
)
p
o
o
,
1
0
o
o
O
.
,
a
*
,
%
l
:
:
l
0
_
_
o
_
,
-
i
_
_
.
0
u
-
x
.
_
,
_
u
'
x
r
-
-
t
m
r
'
l
I
_
_
o
o
_
_
-
I
(
3
"
,
.
.
_
_
o
_
_
=
o
_
_
.
a
<
_
_
-
_
_
_
_
o
_
b
_
o_
_
_
o
_
o
<
=
_
=
_
+
_
O
J
0
.
_
g
g
g
_
0
,
-
-
-
I
P
"
4
0
_
-
_
I
-
,
-
4
.
_
_
_
D
_
o
_
b
O
_
_
,
_
,
0
_
_
"
,
"
{
o
o
o
0
_
_
o
o
_
_
:
o
o
_
.
,
m
0
0
,
_
<
_
,
c
O
_
I
:
l
_
0
4
I
0
o
.
o
_
o
o
0
r
O
=
(
_
J
"
_
t
_
'
_
u
'
,
c
O
-
.
_
d
_
_
_
_
:
_
:
_
1
_
0
"
,
I
;
_
0
_
u
"
x
_
_
o
<
_
_
A
-
4
A
_
J
I
0
.
'
_
"
,
_
-
,
0
_
0
.
r
-
I
C
O
'
C
l
.
_
0
0
_
.
_
o
J
_
o
_
_
_
I'
t
I
1!
I
I
i i
!
,I
J
.
I FOLLOW ON EXPERIMENTS
...

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
j
.
,
REFERENCES
1. MAC Report 6272, "Manned Orbital Flight,"
as revised 10 October 1958.
2. MAC Report 6821, "Project Mercury Indoctri-
nation," revised 21 May 1959.
3. Lees, Lester, Hartwig, Frederic W. and
Cohen, Clare_l'e B., "The Use of Aerody-
namic Lift During Entry into the Earth's
Atmosphere," American Rocket Society Paper
785-59, 1 May 1959.
4. Salman, B. A. and Grady, D. F., "A Study of
the Parameters Which Contribute to the Dis-
persion of Non-Lifting Satellite Returning
from Near-Circular Orbits," General Electric
Report R58-SD-253, 7 August 1958.
8. Kivel, B. and Railey, K., "Tables of Radia-
tion from High 'Iemperature Air," Avco Research
Report 21, December, 1957.
9. Fay, J. A. and Riddell, F. R., "Theory of
Stagnation Point Heat Transfer in Dissocia-
ted Air," Journal of the Aeronautical SCiences,
February, 1958, pp. 73 - 85, 121.
10. Hinzner, R. A. and Ripley, W. S., "The ARDC
M:>del Atmosphere, 1956," AFCRC TN 56-204,
December, 1956.
11. Blick, E. and Wilson, J., "MAC Standard Atoos-
phere Based on Satellite Observations,"
HAC Hypersonic Aerodynamic Note 3, December,
1958.
5. Phillips, Richard L. and Cohen, Clarence n., 12. Minzner, R. A. and Champion, K. S. W., "Pro-
posed Modification of the ARDCMbdel Atm::>s-
phere (1956)," GRD-ARDC, November, 1958.
"Use of Drag Modulation to Reduce Deceleration
loads During Atmospheric Entry, l' American
Rocket Society Journal, Volume 29, Number 6,
June, 1959. 13.
6. Chicago Aerial Industries, Inc. Report
No. 3001-17, "Photographic Reconnaissance
from a Manned Sate lli te ," July, 1959.
7. Kemp, N. H. and Riddell, F. R., "Heat Trans-
fer to Satellite Vehicles Re-entering the 14.
Atroosphere," Jet Propulsion, February, 1957,
pp. 132 - 137, 147.
Eckert, E. R. G., "Engineering Relations for
Heat Transfer and Friction in High-Velocity
Laminar and Turbulent Poundary Layer Flow
Over Surfaces with Constant Pressure and Tem-
pera ture ," Transac tions of the AS?<1E, August,
1956, pp. 1273 - 1283.
Brown, W. B. and Donoughe, P. L., "Tables of
Exact Laminar - Poundary - Layer Solu"tions
When the Hall is Porous and i"luid Properties
are Variable," NACA TN 2479, Septerllber, 1951.
tv
J
i,
i"
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
v
15. Janitch, R. J., "Convective Heat Transfer to
Surface with a Compressible Laminar Boundary
Layer, Pressure Gradient, and Locally Con-
stant Surface Temperature," MAC EN 237,
15 April 1959.
16. Cohen, C. B. and Reshotko, "The Com-
pressible Boundary Layer with Heat Transfer
and Arbitrary Pressure Gradient "NACA
Report 1294, 1956.
17. Mangler, W., "Compressible Boundary Layer
on Bodies of Revolution," M.A.P. Volkenrode
Rep. VB 83, CGD-496, March 1946.
18. Stewartson, K., "Correlated Incompressible
and Compressible Boundary Layers," Proc.
Royal Soc. (of London) Series A, Vol. 200,
1949, pp. 84 - 100.
19. Rutowski, R. W., "Stagnation Point Heat
Transfer in a Partially Ionized Gas,"
1959 Heat Transfer and Fluid Mechanics
11, 12, and 13 June 1959.
20. MAC Report 6603, "Project Mercury Capsule -
Detail Specification," Revised 10 April 1959.
21. Edited by P. Kuiper - "'!he A troosphere of
the Earth and Planets," '!he University
of Chicago Press, 1957.
22. United States Air Force, Cambridge Research
Center, Geophysic Research Directorate,
"Handbook of Geophysics for Air Force
Designers;' First Edition Cambridge, Massa-
chusetts, 1957.
23. McDonnell Aircraft Corporation Report
6483, "Manned Sa telli te Capsule," Part II
Technical Proposal, 4 December 1958.
24. Whipple, Fred L., "The Meteorite Risk to
Space Vehicles," American Rocket Society
Paper 499-57, 6 October 1958.
25. Manring, E. and Dublin, M., "Satellite
Micrometeoride Measurements," AFCRC Report
58E01, 1 May 1959.
26. Department of Commerce Report PB131532-49
"Soviet Bloc IGY Information," 16 January 1959.
27. laGow, H., et. al., National Academy of
Science Paper 1957 - 58 - 26 "Micrometeorite
Impact on a 20" Diameter Sphere at 700 to
2500 Kilometer Attitude."
28. Huth, J. H., et. al, "Some New Data on High
Speed Impact Phenomena," Journal of Applied
Mechanics, March, 1957.
29. Research Institute Summary Report SRI-GU-1989.
30. Grimminger, G., "Probability That a Meteorite
Will Hit or Penetrate a Body Situated in the
Vicinity of the Earth," Rand Report P-18,
22 April 1958.
31. Van Allen, J. A., "On the Radiation Hazards
of Space Flight," State UniverSity of Iowa
Report, SUI-59-7, dated May, 1959.
32. Van Allen, J. A., "The Geomagnetically -
Trapped Corpuscular Radiation," SUI-59-l6,
dated June, 1959.
,
I
w
0
m
=
=
E
u
J
I
,
M
0
=
"
I
,
M
Z
m
=
'
-
-
M
J
U
l
z 0 z I
,
M
o
u
_
O
+
_
o
4
|
_
.
_
4
_
-
P
o
3
_
%
>
O
<
m
o
O
c
3
_
e
,
L
r
)
.
r
:
]
0
_
0
3
c
>
q
c
'_ i
O
k
i
I
A
T
M
,
C
"
,
4
_
0
0
C
_
p
q
_
_
t
3
,
0
r
-
-
t
,
-
-
-
I
-
O
_
.
_
u
'x
H
c
O
0
-
P
k
2
"
_
0
N
r
o
,
_
_
_
.
H
.
H
r
D
:
_
,
-
H
O
.
H
C
D
0
_
"
_
4
m
L
'_
_
.
H
_
o
_
_
F
_
+
_
,
,
-
I
0
o
_
3
_
o
_
_
_
0
4
`
)
_
.
H
O
J
_
9
.
H
.
+
_
_
c
o
_
:
_
_
r
O
_
_
L
_
_
0
b
=
4
_
c
_
0
_
"
_
+
_
0
q
m
_
-
o
o
r
.
.
I
L
9
O
_
,
_
,
-
-
_
o
_
.
o
.
,
_
,
c
d
O
,
-
t
.
_
.
,
'c
_
_
.
M
o
O
r
-
t
_
r
O
:
H
0
C
]
P
-
_
,
0
_
'
_
%
<
_
L
_
4
_
C
_
u
I
.
M
O
O
h
_
O
_
,
%
:
E
,
,
,
f
_
:
_
c
<
(
q
_
J
%
C
,
D
c
q
c
q
0
"
3
c
q
0
0
t
)
t
O
"
H
_
-
H
_
+
_
o
4
m
0
-
I
_
_
;
a
o
'_
o
F
&
_
_
,
m
O
:
E
D
.
,
-
I
,
_
_
"
K
_
_
4
_
C
,
.
I
O
H
C
_
(
D
O
h
_
-
_
0
.
c
i
_
.
<
,
1
u
-
',
0
%
,
-
{
b
_
o
o
c
{
_
t
,
&
r
d
-
J
J
J
I
A}
f
,I
1
Ii J.
1
1.
\
33. Vernov, 3. :L, et. a1., hadiation.
Data," Astronautics, July, 1959, p. 23.
3),. 3andel,l[cn, T. r., 'Cosmic Badia tion 8J1Cl Its
Possible Effects," Slxlce rlicht,
July, 1)58, p. 291.
35. I,a,."lGhru., ii.,:1., "Implications of Space
tions in i'lcti1l1Cd Space FliGhts,"
l\e1'ospacc Eedicine, Jtme, 1959, p. 410.
36. ICinSJ:Jal1, S., et. a1., "RadiolOGical ,Icalth
Handhook," U. ,3. Department of IIealt.'!
Education =d ilelfare, Jan,uary, 1957.
37. Hine, G. J. and 'rownell, G. L., "Ladio.-
tion Dosimetry," Academic Press, Inc.,
fIe,,, York, 1956.
38. Evans, n. D., "The Atonic ITucleus,"
McGrmT-lIill Dook Company, Inc., 1:12,.,
1955.
39. Shepherd, L. L., "The PossiHli ty of
Cosmic F,ay Hazards in High Altitude =d
Space ?li::;ht,' "r;eali tics of Space
Travel," :';ri tish Interplanary
1057, p. 231.
huff, G. "Isolation," Astronacttics,
February, 1759, p. 22.
41. Eybel, C. G. Gl'oher, D. T. =d 3hovs, J. C.,
"1\ PreliJ,unary .:J "udy of Co::tfineraent in the
r.1ercul'Y Capsule," Unpublished F:eport,
).lcDonnell Ail'craft Corporatior., cl:c:c.ed
16 JtUle 195'7.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1,2. ;lo.l1, i' L. =d r:artin, F.. S., "Pl'O-
lOilc;ed :':;xposure in the ::av:' ?till Pressure
Suit at Space Equivale:'lt. Altitudes,"
Navy :::ureau of Aeronautics :r;cport
TED ;ro:: AG5100, dated 1 iq)rjl 175").
H. H. and Hiltshire, L .:;.,
"Terminal Guidance System for Satellite
=d Rendezvous," Presented at the 1.,\.3.
national SW,U:ler geeting, Los AnGeles, Calif-
16 - 19 June 1959, LA.S. Paper No. 59-93
vi
O
,
O
,
,
,
-
-
u
_
O
,
O
,
u
4
0
"
L
U
L
U
W
,
I
Z
_
m Z m 0 Z
!
o
.
_
_
.
_
o
_
_
-
_
0
*
_
O
_
_
_
_
o
_
.
,
.
_
e
_
,
_
o
_
"
_
'
_
_
o
_
_
-
,
'4
1
-
,
-
t
.
r
-
I
I
f
I
1
1
1
1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
INTROWCTIOH
the initial manned exploration of space through Project Mercury, there are numerous investigations
to be conducted in preparation for more advanced space travel about the earth and eventuaLly travel to
other planets. Expanding the limited knowledge of space and the probleD18 of man in space is a pain-
fully slow and costly process. Effective tools :for the necessary experimentation are limited. The
Project Mercury Capsule is considered one of the best tools currently in existence.
This report is a collection of charts which illustrate some of the McDonnell Aircraft Study effort
related to showing the practicability of employing IlDdified Project Mercury Capsules for exploring the
probleDl8 of space traveL Of the many possible follow-on experiments, six are discussed. These are:
Touchdown Control - To develop a method of reducing the touchdown disperSion of the capsule in
order to eliminate much of the costly search and recovery complex.
Maneuver in Orbit - To explore and develop maneuvering techniques, applicable to assembling space
stations, serviCing existing satellites and returning to prescribed touchdown points.
Self-Contained Guidance - To test and develop guidance equipment which will be required for rend-
ezvous and intercept guidance and interplanetary navigation.
Fourteen Day - To investigate the problems of human adaptability and equipment performance
during extended space missions.
Manned Reconnaissance - To explore the potential application of photographic techniques to meteor-
ological, astronomical, geodetic and military observations from space.
Lunar Orbit Re-entry - To investigate experimentally the problems of re-entry stability and
heating from a lunar orbit in anticipation of future circumlunar travel.
No attempt is made to propose firm configurations at this time; aLl of the studies have not been
completed and defini ti ve work statements are not available to this contractor. It is shown, how-
ever, that the six follow-on experiments can be conducted 'With practical modifications of Project
Mercury Capsules.
vii
O , O ,
, - . u _
O , O ' ,
, , O , . - .
u _
0 m
a .
I , & l I , M
0 a .
I N M
Z
n "
I A I
u . i
z
0
z
I A I
C r _
C r , ,
r - d
J
0 3 A 0 _ d d Y
m _
>
_ 9 0 3 5 1 A 3
0 3 A O N 3 _
T T . T - A
0 ] O 0 V
0 3 S 1 ^ 3 _
0 3 1 _ 3 _ 3 V 8 3 9 V d
3 1 V _
G H O I $ 1 ^ 3 8 3 0 X 3 Q H I
DATE
lo/t,/59
<
10'
PAGES AFFECTED
REVISED
Title
iii
v
1.2-2
1.b-2
1.7-7
1.3-2
2.4-1
o
_. J. - _
_ '\.L-'1
-h
It .10-lL
:,.10-15
, .10-2L
, .10-25
" .12-l
J 1 r:. n
'.
,: , - L

,.ll)-6
1;.
ADDED
viii
INDEX OF REVISIONS
REMARKS REV I SED BY APP ROVED
1#4
m
Z
Q
Z
m
m
-
;:Ia
Con
Z
m
Q
."

-4 ;:Ia
m
m

."
(Il
0
M
."
tj
V1
m
,.,
;:Ia -4
8
-
0-
t-'3
-0
-0
@
U'I
-
M
-0
-0

.....
\D
V1
\D
O
"
O
_
,
0
)
=
=
.
0 0
.
.
w
d
l 0 z
m t
_
z m 0 z t
_
O
"
)
.
'
)
O
_
u
u
:
E
)
=
=
=
a
_
t
u
0 r
-
t
0 0 ,
=
4
=
-
I
I
-
I
i
I
f
illr'

I

I
I!
.1
I
I
I

I
I I
I
1

I
CoRFiS a
[TOUCHDOWN
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL
1.0 INTRODUCTION: The basic Mercury capsule, which will carry the first man into
space uses a ballistic trajectory for re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere.
This results in a possible dispersion of the touchdown point of such a magni-
tude as to require a large fleet of ships and extensive search facilities for
final recovery of the capsule. As space activity increases, such measures
become completely impractical. With only a moderate am:::mnt of lift, however,
sufficient control over the re-entry trajectory is available to reduce the
touchdown dispersion to an area which permits elimination.of most of the
costly search and recovery complex. This amount of control is available
wi th the Mercury capsUle. It is the objective of this study to show how
this vehicle may be utilized to explore and develop techniques for touchdown
contro'l. '
1.1 BASIC CONCEPT
An extensive study was made to investigate
methods of improving the touchdown accuracy of
the Mercury capsule. From this study it is
concluded that sufficient control of the re-
entry trajectory can be effected by utilizing
the aerodynamic lift available at moderate
angles of attack to effectively compensate for
the anticipated touchdown disperSion of the
capsule. Furthermore, such control can be ac-
complished with a simple trim flap installation
coupled with a relatively unsophisticated radar
guidance technique. A IOOre sophiE!ticated iner-
tial guidance system, which will make the
capsule less dependent upon ground facilities,
is also discussed.
CORP/Sa: 'I6lL
The touchdown control scheme incorporates a
simple two-position trim-control flap to pro-
vide lift in the positive direction only.
Flap actuation is in response to an error sig-
nal which 1s developed by mom toring the
actual trajectory during re-entry and comparing
it to a predetermined target trajectory. The
retrograde firing is timed such that the actual
trajectory always falls short of the target
trajectory unless positive lift is applied,
even with the "three sigma" predicted touch-
down errors in the direction to extend the
flight path. This procedure eliminates the
need for applying negative lift to the capsule.
1.1-1
!
I
X
)
o 0
o
o
o
_
o
_
o
_
m Z 0 m Z m m m Z
m .
.
_
0
m
m
e
_
0
m ,
0
_
0
_
0
,
,
0
r
_
/
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Simulated controlled re-entries using an analog
computer to represent the capsule and touchdown
control system parameters were made to investi-
gate the adequacy of the system. Results to
date indicate that the touchdown error can be
reduced from the presently predicted "three
sigma" value of 120 miles to less than ten
miles.
Essentially, this system is based upon the use
of aerodynamic forces to compensate for touch-
down errors which result from tolerances in the
retrograde thrust and alignment, in the aerody-
namic parameters during a normal and
in deviations in atmospheric denSity. It
that the target touchdown point is on
the orbit track and that the position of the
capsule is accurately known with respect to the
target touchdown point. It is not intended to
compensate for gross errors in retrograde im-
pulse, such as complete failure of one retro-
rocket, or firing time.
Among the considerations leading to this system
concept are:

't
' 'I . ,
,
[TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
A) GroBs errors in retrograde firing time or
impulse can result in touchdown errors on the
order of hundreds or even thousands of miles.
Fundamentally, the approach to these pr9blems
is to provide increased reliability in the
tracking and retrograde firing systems rather
than through changes in the re-entry flight
pattern. Therefore, the primary objective of
the re-entry flight path control is to correct
the normal tolerances which occur with properly
operating systems.
B) Comparisons of several techniques, including
the use of lift, drag, and rocket thrust to vary
the re-entry trajectory, indicate a definite ad-
vantage for the use of uni-directional lift con-
trol in terms of weight penalty for a given change
in touchdown position. Aside from the simpler
and lighter control system the de-
cision to use uni-directional lift, was based upon
the fact that positive lift has, for a given weight
penalty, a greater effect on touchdown range,
and also results in a reduction in the longitudi-
nal "g" loading on the Astronaut. Negative lift
on the other hand, increases the "g" loading.
1.1-2
COt'BRStIJl W
I,
"
\
\l
\
\ '
l
l
I
.
-
a
_
L
U
0 0
a
.
W
Z i w z D 0 z
0
,
/
r
-
-
I
-
r
-
I
o
_
_
o
o
_
_
o
o
o
_
_
_
0
I
_
I
:
I
,
'
,
0
_
r
.
-
I
0 0
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
o
0
_
>
_
.
_
0
.
_
0
0
0
I
I
1
w
o
_
1
t
o
o
i
_
.
o
o
o
e
.
_
_
_
_
i
-
_
_
_
o
o
_
:
_
_
g
_
c
l
.
r
-
I
o
!
o
0
0 o o
,
.
-
I
f
.
.
.
)
o
o
.
r
-
i
4
_
-
e
l
0
0
0
0
_
_
_
.
_
_
o
O
_
0
0
_
'
_
O
r
-
I
0
0
I
=
l
_
>
_
0
!
_
+
_
_
_
m
_
0
_
_
o
o
_
!
t
_
.r

';1
.,.
,t
'-
til
sm'f'PWTl
r
N CONTROL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.2 VEHICLE CONFIGURATION
Touchdown control is achieved by using external
flaps to develop lift and thus extend the
range after deliberately undershooting the touch-
down point. As shown in Figures 1.2-1 and 1.2-2,
two flaps are installed on the under side of the
capsule just aft of the heat shield, and are
symmetrically located so as to clear the capsule
umbilical connector and periscope which are on
the capsule centerline. These flaps are made of
ablative material with adequate allowance for
strength as well as heat protection.
The flaps are operated by direct piston-cylinder
actuators with two positions: fully closed, or
fully opened.
Actuator power is supplied by decomposing H
2
0
2
over a screen Design conditions for
fuel quantity and control considerations are a
total of sixty complete cycles at an average
rate of six cycles per minute, which requires
three pounds of H
2
0
2
0 The added fuel capacity
is accomplished by enlarging the existing
H
2
0
2
and helium tanks used in the automatic
stabilization system.
77'R
r
'T' A I
Total projected flap area for two flaps is 467
square inches. Each flap is 25 inches long with
a 9.35 inch average chord and is separately
powered. Flap travel is 77
0
, with the extended
posi tion at to capsu.' e centerline.
The flap, rechanism, and fairing are designed as
a package with hard points to mate existing
Mercury structure. 'lberefore, this system may
be readily installed on completed Mercury
capsules.
Control of the flaps is accomplished through
a command signal from ground based tracking and
computing equipment. This requires only minor
modifications and additions to the existing
Mercury capsule command guidance system as
discussed in Sections 1.7 and 1.8.
A weight and balance summary which reflects the
changes from the basic Mercury capsule neces-
sary to add the touchdown control capability is
given in Tables 1.2-1 and 1.2-2 and Figure
1.2-3
1.2-1
m
I
m
Z t
'
i
"
i
v
m
!
/
/
/
/
!
m
,
-
,
,
4
0
C -
'
r
0
Z
0 Z
.
,
-
'
4
0 r
'
-
'
=
r
l
i
,
=
=
,
=
_
Q I
"
1
"
1
Z
m
I
"
}
>
Z Q
r
r
l
m Z
,
-
4
m Z 0
a Z r
l'!
m m
w
Z
m
0
!
'!
'1
m
3
w
0
m
-
-
"
O
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
rn"U::IDCNT'. '
'TOUCHDOWN CONTROL
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
1.2-2
WITH TOUCHDOWN CONTROL FLAPS
: ,I' \
i
1// i <\'\
l/A " .. \
A --J'. flAP EXTENDED \.\/
20 o
SCALE IN INCHES
'QNfWfNTl'"
I --
/ ; - ~
I I - ~ - -
I / / , ~
I 1/ ,---..
/ I \
/ \. (--;
I \ , ~ , \ /
I I 0Y
I I c:;:;
I 1/--' ('
I I I )1
I I I I'
I I I I /:
I I I I /
II I i-f.
I I I -
I
"- I ........ -
-, - -- "
/ ~ - - - = - -,--","
'I \
\ _____ -4 I
\ \ I I
\ \ I
\
\ I I
\ I
\ \ I I
\ \ I I
\ \ I I
\ \
\ \
, ,
1---- -.-'"
\
\
\
\
PERISCOPE
1--- ------""'-.
I
\
\
I
I
\
I
I
~
I
I
I
/
1-----
[--
75
\' \. TOUCHDOWN CONTROL
\\,/'
40
~ F LA P PACKAGE
FLAP EXTENDED
-"
FIGURE 1.2-1
....,
F
-
U
'
_
O
'
O
'
_
0
,
_
u
0
m
=
-
=
E
I
,
M
M
I
,
,
I
Q
I
-
-
Z
_
m Z m 0 z
-
.
.
.
.
J
_
0
z
Z
_
z
<
0
z m
a
=
U
0 I
'
,
-
a
.
< _
J
u
_
/
/
/
/
/
Z
i
.
-
I
-
.
J
,
-
v
.
I
-
-
Z Z -
r
-
.
3
I
-
-
Z w X D
-
,
.
.
I
I
I
I
,
J
N
I
r
_
0
f
II {
I
i 1
[
[
: I
l
I
:. {
:1
I TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
EXISTING STRUCTURE AND INSULATION
"-
0-.- -.:. ........ .
,I---_,{ _" .

- ''-c,. ----/I,
----------......----- - //
INSULATION
PROTECTION COVER
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL FLAp
B - B
4 TIMES SCALE
FIG URE 1. 2-2
/
1-
222T7
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL
FLAP INSTALLATION
o 20
SCALE IN INCHES
AFTERBODY HEAT SHIELD
FAIRING
I
I
I
40
PRESSURE BULKHEAD
(
'PRESSURE SKIN
I '
VALVE ACTUAT
7
0R 670
/ \ /fl
"
FAIRING
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL FLAP ....
I. 77"
\ //
\ (REF.) ,"//
\X
ABLATION HEAT SHIELD-
FLAP EXTENDED
A-A
?S'QC"TIAI
1.2-3
Q
I
0 r
_
l,
.
i
o
q
C
'
)
_
"
-
'
"
_
0
(
"
3
_
Q
_
m
Q
> p
_
0
_
0 g
m Z m Z m m m
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
J
_
,
0
,
0
,
0
,
i
_
l
_
,
_
o
_ i
'
D
0
0
I
0 0
I
O
0
0
> t
_
0 0
t
_
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Structure
Flap and Actuator Packages
Flap Actuator Fuel and
Controls
Adapter
Escape System
Heat Shield
Automatic Control System and
Guidance
Reaction Controls
Posigrade
1.2-4
"'NflP? PI ' ; &
TABLE 1. 2-1
CAPSULE WEIGHT BREAKDOWN
Mercury Touchdown
(Ref. 20_) _ Control Remarks
485 485
52 Added Trim Device to Obtain LID
8 Added Flap Control System
142 142
932 932
347 347
63 63
132 137
Increased H202 Capacity for Longer Re-Entry
Period
21 21
l
r COtWQt' ,,,
O
_
O
,
I
-
-
n
,
,
n
e
_
.
u
0
m :
E
M
.
I
L
U
0
a
.
I
.
i
.
I
Z m n
e
'
-
-
L
U
1
.
1
.
1
Z m 0 Z u
J
.
.
I
_
J
v
I
.
J
0
0
/
'
,
c
_
'
_
0
0 0
r
.
.
)
_
_
0
i
.
o
o
,
1
c
_
L
_
!
0
,
1
,
-
4
;
>
_
0
0
0
0
'
_
"
_
0
'
"
_
_
.
_
_
b
_
o
_
m
_
J
_
0
(
[
I
')
Retrograde
I
Landing System
Instruments and Navigation
I Electrical Group
I
Communications
Environmental Control
Telemetry and Recording
Recovery Gear
Crew and Survival
Gross Launch Weight
I !
I I
231
155
91
274
109
134
92
57
229
3494
no' .r'OC"'TI A L
TABLE 1.2-1 (Continued)
231
155
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
111 Added Touchdown Error Display
274
109
136 Increased Cooling Water for Re-Entry
76 Removed Personnel Data Instrumentation
57
229
3565
1.2-5
CUi" S CL
Q
I
t
_
c
o
c
_
r
l
m Z 0 m Z m m m
_
n
Z
m -
a
0
m
m
m
0
m .
.
-
,
'
,
0
,
,
0
,
,
o
,
,
o
0
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.2-6
Gross Weight Launch
Less:
Escape Tower
Gross Weight in Orbit
Less:
Adapter
Posigrade Fue I
Orbit Weight
Less:
Water - Cooling
Hydrogen Peroxide
Retrograde Weight
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
Retro-Posigrade Installation
Re-Entry Weight
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
Wate r - Cooling
Ablated Material
,..,.,..'.'.
TABLE 1.2-2
MISSION WEIGHT SUMMARY
""."..
Mercury
(Ref. 20)
(3494)
-932
(2562)
-142
-7
(2413)
-27
-7
(2379)
-10
-245
(2124)
-5
-3
-146 (1)


J
. ,
,
Touchdown
Control
(3565)
-932
(2633)
-142
-7
(2484)
-27
-7
(2450)
-10
-245
(2195)
-9
-5
- 85 ( 2)
l
I
O
_
O
,
@
,
,
'
,
L
l
J
L
J
J
7 m I
,
I
,
I
z m @ z
!
I I
, {
I
1
I
(
I
I
I
I
II j
l
I '
i I
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
End of Re-Entry
Less:
Nose Cone
Equipment
Drogue Chute
Main Chute Design Weight
Less:
Main Chute
Impact Weight
Less:
Reserve Chute
Pilot Chute
Hydrogen Peroxide
Dye Markers
SOFAR Bombs
Flotation Weight
NOTES:
(1) Mercury Specification Value
(2) Actual Calculated Value
..... COli amO!
,
TABLE 1. 2-2 (Continued)
(1970)
-39
-12
-8
(1911)
-60
(1851)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1744)
o,r'nCUTIAI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
(2096)
-39
-12
-8
(2037)
-60
(1977)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1870)
1.2-7
I
-
'
_
o
!
C
O
I
-
4
I
-
'
6
I
_
o
W
E
I
G
H
T
-
P
O
U
N
D
S
o
,
0
4
_
c
o
I
,
o
0
_
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0
o 0 6 0 0 c
o
0 :
o
0 0 0
,
-
4
Q
m Z -
-
t
m 0 Q < m '
-
-
4
,
.
<
m Z < m
0
"
U
m
m Z 0 m Z m m
j
_ !
_
Z
m
-
4
_
m
m
m
0
m .
.
-
,
,
O
'
,
O
,
4
)
,
4
)
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 I TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1.2-8
VI
C
Z
::::I
o
11.
I
I-
:z:
C>
w

CENTER OF GRAVITY ENVELOPE
C. G.
4000r.-------r------.------.-------r------.------,,------.------.-------.------.
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL
3600 I ...... , "W
3200 1 ... "" .. 'f_i---+---_+--__!
28001 .. f-
2
1. GROSS WEIGHT -LAUNCH
2. GROSS WEIGHT IN ORBIT
2400 I 3. ORBIT WEIGHT
4. RETROGRADE WEIGHT
5. RE-ENTRY WEIGHT
6. END OF RE-ENTRY
7. MAIN CHUTE DESIGN WEIGHT
5
8
2000 I 9 _ 1'-- --+-------+--
8. IMPACT WEIGHT
9. FLOTATION WEIGHT

o .10 .20 .30 .40 .50
I/O

___ __ ... r'Ti"'I7I .. ..
.60 .70 .80 .90 1.00
FIGURE 1.2-3
l
0
,
O
,
O
,
0
'
,
,
.
u
0
m
=
.
:
E
I
,
I
J
I
,
I
J
0
:
"
I
,
I
J
Z m 1
,
1
,
1
I
,
,
1
1
,
1
Z 0 Z I
,
U
l
I
E
-
I
o
'
3
,
-
4
.
_
.
o
_
O
N
.
_
"
_
o
_
_
_
_
4
.
_
m
N
_
O o
,
_
,
_
.
_
o
o
_
,
_
_
_
:
.
_
4
.
_
o
_
o
a
=
0
%
f
l
o
o
_
'
_
,
.
o
_
_
_
o
I
_
_
m
m
m
m
m
m
_
m
m
_
m
m
m
_
m
w
m
m
_
m
m
m
_
'
_
w
!
I
1
I
f
I
I
I
[
CONfiDE =
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.3 LAUNCH, ABORT, AND ESCAPE CONSIDERATIONS
The Atlas liD:' booster which will be used to
launch the touchdown control vehicle and the
posigrade rockets used to separate it from the
booster, are the same as used with the Project
Mercury. A summary of the booster characteristics
along with the various stage and weight breakdowns
for the touchdown control version of the Mercury
capsule is given in Table 1.3-1.
\wUi.' IUCri.IMI.
Similarly, the abort and escape +.echniques will
be identical with the basic Mercury ".ehicle.
Since complete descriptions of these provisions
are given in References 2 and 20, they are not
repeated here.
1.3-1
T
I
-
-
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 1.3-1
ATLAS "D" BOOSTER SUMMARY
EllPty At las "D" (Booster Stage)
Trapped Propellants and Fluids
Usable Propellants
Total Booster Stage Weight
Empty Atlas flD" (Sustainer Stage)
Usable Propellants
Total Sustainer Stage Weight
Payload
Capsule
Tower
Adapter
Total Launch Vehicle Weight
TOTAL TAKE-OFF WEIGHT
PROPULSION SYSTEM
Atlas "D" (LOX/RP-1)
(Booster + Sustainer)
(Sustaine r)
1.3-2
6,547
390
202,730
6,754
391
43,500
2,491
932
142
THRUST
368,000 Lbs. at S. L.
84,724 Lbs. at Alt.
209,667 lbs.
50, 645 lbs.
3,565 lbs.
263,877 Lbs.
BURNING TIME AVERAGE SPECIFIC IMPULSE
134 Sec. (Booster Engine) 244.0 Sec.
294 Sec. (Sustainer Engine) 309.7 Sec.
po--- '.
,i
i
I
, III
I
l
I
r
{
[
[
(
[
I
.
. ""
. " \ ,
. \
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
CUI 'libEl' I IAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.4 TOUCHDOWN ACCURACY OF PF.ESENT MERCURY
In order to establish a reference point tor eval-
uating the effectiveness of the re-entry control
systems, a study ot the touchdown errors anti-
cipated for the basic Mercury capsule, without
touchdown control provisions is presented. The
results of this study, which are summarized in
Table 1.4-l indicate' a 3 error ot
+ 11.1. nautical miles due to the nominal toler-
ances in the retrograde and re-entry phases ot -
the mission.
Since the modified Mercury with flaps for touch-
down control will not be rotated during re-entry,"
the antiCipated error for a non-spinning re-entry
is also presented in Table 1..4-1.. The results
of this study indicate a 3 (5" down range error ot
-: l.2O nautical miles. The ability to compen-
sate for this 3 (j probable touchdown error is
considered to be the minimum criterion for a
satisfactory touchdown control system.
The analysis ot touchdown accuracy is based on
the assumption that the orbit of the satellite
prior to retrograde is known precisely fI'om the
World Wide Tracking System so that the only
touchdown errors are those associated with the
retrograde maneuver, configuration uncertainties,
and re-entry environment as discussed below:
Retrograde Errors
The errors associated with the retrograde man-
euver are the errors in velocity
thrust direction, thrust, T
R
, and the ret-
rograde time, t
R

The velocity change error is due to the varia-
tion in the total. impulse of the retro-rockets.
Thrust direction error is a result ot the stab-
iliza.tion system, alignment of the gyros in yaw,
horizon scanner, slaving of the vertical gyro to
the horizon scanner, and the alignment ot the
retro-rocket thrust axis. For a fixed total
impulse, variations in propellant burning rate
result in an error in mean impulse time which is
equi valent to an error in retrograde firing time.
The chronometer and the time delays in the rocket
firing circuit also produce errors in retrograde
tiring time (or position in orbit).
Configuration Uncertainties
Drag coefficient has a tolerance due to the
methods of estimation and to the scatter in
experimental data. Manufacturing tolerances
also influence the actual drag coefficient.
Weight - to - Area ratio varies due to manu-
facturing techniques and to the uncertainty in
the expendable weight retained in the vehicle on
re -:entry. Trim angles of attack and side slip
are due to the uncertainty in the C.G. location
in a direction normal to the capsule longitud-
inal 8JCis. The uncertainty in the C.G. location
along the longi tudinalaxis does not signi!i-
cantly affect the trim angJ..es. The C. G. lo-
cation errors are due to the uncertainty ot the
SArrn
1..4-1
o
I
r
O
c
_
I
I
c
+
@
_
m
0
o
0
o
t
_
,
.
C
I
"
_
'
_
_
_
_
,
3 5
_
o
_
#
_
_
0
@
0
o
_
o
_
1
-
i
_
I
_
1
-
@
_
m
0
I
_
I
_
0
_
_
0
_
H
-
_
.
O
@
@
I
:
I
@
I
_
_
+
_
"
0
m
m
_
m
m
_
@
4
r
l
_
M
_
+
_
i
g
w
,
@
o
_
o
,
.
_
_
_
'
0
_
_
c
+
_
I
_
_
c
+
_
+
@
_
H
_
0
0
_
I
-
_
I
_
.
0
_
l
:
f
0
i
_
f
f
@
0
_
_
'
0
_
0
I
_
i
_
i
_
w
,
m
_
_
"
O
l
m
N
0
N
s
_
,
,
1
1
t
-
_
0
0
_
r
O
_
I
:
:
:
_
.
_
.
I
-
_
:
I
-
_
_
I
I
=
I
_
o
o
_
_
o
=
_
_
-
.
,
o
_
o
_
o
I
'
_
I
_
@
1
3
m
'
_
f
f
I
I
I
(
I
)
_
,
_
,
o
_
,
_
o
o
_
F
-
'
f
f
N
_
-
,
c
l
-
I
-
_
0
_
.
m
i
-
_
.
_
-
_
_
,
_
_
_
0
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
o
c
_
I
_
-
0
e
l
-
@
@
_
0
o
@
c
+
I
_
_
_
+
0
I
_
i
_
0
0
@
@
o
d
-
_
,
0
0
0
_
0
f
f
_
@
0
0
0
c
_
0
m
o
I
m Z 0 u Z m n
u
_
Z
r
r
l
.
_
0
m
I
'
M
0
m
_
D
_
0
,
o
,
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.4-2
amount of expendable weight. jettisoned and to
manufacturing tolerances. These trim angles do
not contribute an error to the present Mercury
touchdown position because the capsule is ro-
tated about its longi tUdinaJ. axis during re-
entry, causing the error from these angles to
cancel out.
Re-Entry Environment ...,
Air density has a strong influence on touch-
down dispersion. This study used a variation
of air density ot fJ1, at sea level" increasing
roughly' ,exponentially &:Jip at 140,,000
feet. From 140,000 fe!i.t to 400,000 feet the
variation was held at _ 6<:J1,. Wind has an effect
on touchdown location particularly during the
time the drogue chute and main chutes are open.
Method ot Analysis
The statistical analysis ot the estimated
deviations is similar to that shown in Ref-
erence 1 where it was assumed that: (A) All
errors are independent; (B) Errors are small
enough to use linear slopes; (C) Inter-
action of errors can be neglected; (D) Errors
trom each cause are assUlled to have a normal
distribution; and (E) Value of 16' trom each
source is assumed trom study' ot existing data.
The net 1 (J touchdown error is given by
6:.

[ 1: ,
(): z
L
The p:robabillty th,'3.t a ca.psule will touch down
with an error ot l CSor less is .683;
with an error ot + 2 less is .954;
with an error ot : 3 (5 or less is .997.
Using the above analysis and the errors assumed,
a 3 down range error ot ! III nautical miles
is calculated for the present Mercury vehicle.
The calculated 3 (J down range error tor the mod-
ified Mercury with no control is ! 120 nautical
miles.
Theretore it is anticipated that 99. n, of the
present Mercury landings will lie wi thin :- III
nautical miles" ot the target touchdown point.
Section 1.7 discusses the iaprovement in the
antiCipated touchdown location error with the
use ot control.
Improvement of Touchdown Dispersion by Elimin-
ation ot Errors
It is shown in Table 1.4-1" that it a pertect
retrograde maneuver is pertormed, the 3 cr range
error is reduced to ! 81.1 nautical miles tor
the present Mercury and ! 92.8 nautical miles
tor the modified Mercury without control. Fur-
ther" it the air density is known
the 3 range error is reduced to _ 4.4 naut-
ical. miles tor the present Mercury and "! 45.6
nauticaL miles for the modified Mercury. It
all the errors are elill1nated except the wind"
the 3 tS range error is "! 2.7 nautical miles
tor both versions ot the Mercury capsule. Fr01ll
this it is seen that improvements in the retro-
grade maneuver" and in knowledge ot the air
density during re-entry lead to signiticant re-
ductions in the uncertainty ot the touchdown
point.
ee .. "oei4 tw.
I
l -
O
,
O
,
u
3
0
'
,
O
,
,
,
0
,
-
i
v
u
u
0
m
=
-
=
E
u
.
=
I
,
M
=
i
-
0
L
Z
_
u
,
I
u
.
l
z z
i
0
o
.
.
;
_
o
o
,
o
o
_
;
,
_
+
l
+
1
+
1
+
1
+
,
o
,
.
;
l
+
1
+
6
+
1
+
*
+
_
+
l
1
+
_
'
-
_
"
.
_
.
,
,
:
'
.,
.
;
,
.
.
;
,
.
;
g
o
o
-
-
o
a
_
g
d
_
1
>
-
-
-
_
g u
!
,
-
4
f
i
(
(,0,":'D,,'7'. L
I TOUCHDOWN C()f',ITROLJ 1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 1.4-1
TOUCHDOWN ERROR SUMMARY
BASIC MERCURY CAPSULE WITHOUT TOUCHDOWN CONTROL
DOWN RANGE CROSS RANGE
SOURCE OF ERROR LiRan!\!! lUErrors UI (JOtrror)
9nror
lUErrors O'I(I(1Error)
Unit Error N. Mile. N. Mile.
Orbital and Assumed LiR/unlt Error Orbital and Assumed LiR/unlt Error
Re-Entry XIO'Error He-Entry X U7Error
Calculations Calculations
RETROGRADE
V R - Speed Change -5 N.M./lps + 5.0 Ips + 25.0 0 0
Il R TbruJIt Dlrectlon 1.68 N. M.!deg. .; 1.1 deg. :; 1.85 1. 04 N.M./deg. 1. 23 deg ~ 1.28
t R - Time Due to Burning Time 4.22 N. M./sec. .; 0.29 see. .; 1.22
t - Time Due to clock. (Assumed 4.22 N. M./sec. ~ 0.5 sec. ! 2.11 0 0
R Up-dated one Rev.
Prior to Retrograde
t
R
- Time Due to 3 Time Delays 4.22 N.M./sec. ~ 0.21 BeC. ~ 0.87 0 0
ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES
~ i ~ ~ : i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ! ~ a Ratio
9.2N.M./Unlt Error + 0.05 (3.3") ! 0.46 0 0 0
2. ON.M./Unlt Error :; 0.50 (.66") ! 1.00 0 0
aT - Trim Angle 01 Attack (3) 18.05 N. M.I dog. ! 0.83 dog. t 15.10 0 0
(J T - Trim Side Slip Angle (3) 2.42 N. M.I dog. ! .83 dog. ~ 2.01
P - Air Density t 27.0 0 0
WIND
400,000 to 70,000 (I) +0.02 + 0.21
70,000 to 10,000 (I) .; 0.66 :;: 0.81
10,000 to S. L. (2) ! 0.60 ! 0.42
NET ERRORS - NAUT. MI_
Present Mercury (WIth Sp11l.) Baalc Mercury Without Spin
Downrange Crossrange llInnlrange Cr08Sr&Dge
10' t 37.0 ! 1.58 10' ! 40.0 t 2. 56
30' 111.0 ! 4.74 3(1 ! 120.0 ! 7.7
NOTES:
(1) Wind Velocity from M. A. C. Hypersonic Aerodynamic Note 7 (3) Basic Mercury Splu _lis UJJ.g1tndlnal AxIs Durblg He-Enlry to mecUnty
(2) Wind Velocity from I "ProbabiUty Data In AFCRC TN 154-22 El1m1Date this CoatribuUla. It .... t be lD.clud.ed, However, for Compar1Bcms
With the L1ftlag 'l'oIIchdowa Conrol Capaule.
-
---
4.4
111.0
BA8IC MERCURY WITH SPIN
Wind. 0 to 2.7
Deaalty ~ Nominal
Touchdcnm
PolDt
CD and W/A. 2.7 to 4.4
CDA. Trim, (3)
W/A
Deulty Retrocrada
Wind. 0 to 2.7
o
2.7
50
45.6
NOTE: NonUne&r Scale Empbaalse. Rltatln
Contributions to (3 go ) Total .,J E (30' I)'
BABIC MERCURY WITHOUT SPIN 81.8
100
30' lIrror IIbt1cai _ (!)
, 'RL
120
1.4-3
I
|
!
CONFIDENJI'I =
1 SEPTEMBER 1959


1.5-1

. ,
,
1. 5 METHODS OF VARYING RE-ENTRY RANGE
A study was initiated to determine if an
essentially non-lifting, re-entry vehicle such
as the present Mercury configuration can be
maneuvered in order to correct for range
deviation from a nominal re-entry. The methods
investigated for obtaining degree of
maneuverability during the re-entry are the:
(A) utilization of aerodynamic lift; (B) con-
trol of aerodynamic drag; and (C) utilization
of thrusting impulses.
A description of the methods with the results
obtained is presented in the following
sections.
Use of Aerodynamic Lift to Vary Re-Entry Range
A re-entry vehicle of the capsule type is de-
signed primarily as a high-drag vehicle and
not as a lifting vehicle. However, even
vehicles so designed possess lifting
capabilities. This section presents the
results of a study of the maneuverability
obtainable from the limited woount of lift
available.
All re-entries are initiated at an al ti tude of
400,000 feet at circular satellitic velocity
wi th aerodynamic and weight characteristics
closely approximating the present M!rcury
con1"iguration. Figure 1. 5-1 presents several
re-entry profiles for lifting
re-entotes at in! tial flight path angles of _1
0
and -3 compared with a pure ballistic re-entry.
The profiles are presented so as to indicate a
common touchdown point, thereby defining a per-
missable re-entry corridor for re-entry angles
of _1
0
and _3
0
A lift coefficient of .4 repre-
sents the approximate maximum. obtainable on the
Mercury capsule.
Figure 1.5-2 summarizes the range ob-
tainable from various values of liftas a fUnc-
tion of the altitude at which lift is initiated.
The incremental range represents the "width" of
the permissible corridor at the lift initiation
altitude, for trajectories with a common touch-
down point or, conversely, the distance between
touchdown points for lifting and ballistic
re-entries initiated at the same point. These
plots show that very little range is gained by
application of lift at altitudes above 300,000
feet since the dynamic pressure in this region is
small and consequently the lifting power negli-
gible. This same condition is true for lift
initiation altitudes below 100,000 feet. Con-
sequently, of the total maneuverability avail-
able is realized at altitudes between 300,000 and
100,000 feet.
Figure 1.5-3 presents the lateral displaceuent
from the plane of re-entry obtained by generating
lift in the side force direction. The character-
istics of this plot are very similar to those of
Figure 1. 5-2 and the SaDe conclusions JJBY be
drawn as to the al ti tude of lift application.
The magnitude of the incremental. range however
is much smaller.
J;iJL atilr(
I
l-
,
0
,
-
-
I
.
=
-
_
'
i
v
u
J
0
"
_
=
-
:
E
I
,
M
L
U
I
.
.
=
0
=
"
I
,
M
Z
u
,
m
=
'
-
-
I
,
M
u
_
n
z m 0 z I
,
&
,
l
I
,
M
,
7
=
o
,
=
,
,
I
-
-
.
m <
o
I
I
L
E
a
,
<
=
,
M
.
,
I
I
X
z
_
_
o
_
_
.
_
i
,
_
o
-
r
_
0
u
-
_
=
_
,
,
_
*
_
_
_
o _
'
v
k
L
0
_
o
_
<
o
0
L
u
_
0
,
o
-
,
i
0
_
,
v
z M
=
I
i
I
.
M
#
S
S
#
S
#
#
#
#
#
'
#
'
#
_
7
j
/
#
#
I
I
S
#
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
"
I
-
_
O
0
0
L
-
_
O
A
I
I
I
l
V
0
!
,
.
j
0
O
0
-
z_
o o o
_
=
=
z ,
v
(
N
0
3
I
,
.
j
r
_
l
t
~ t
'I
FIGURE 1.5-1
400 .',
300
....:
...
0
0
0
w 200
0
::l
t-
t-
.....
<t
100
CO'" II nIT! AI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ALTITUDE-RANGE PROFILES
ROTATING OBLATE EARTH
EQUATORIAL ORBIT, EAST HEADING
W / A = 69.3 lB/FT2, Vo = 24,105 FPS
lEGEND Cl CD liD
a
_._._._.- .2
1.50
1.45
------.4 1.12
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _10
a
.138
.357
- - - - - - , - - - ~ ~ , ,
"
" ,
""
"'"
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _3
0
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
a ~ ' - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - ~
32 24 16 8 a 16 8 a
RANGE FROM TOUCHDOWN -100 NA. MI.
1.5-2
SQt'f'RfNTlAl
i
n
n
.
o
i
'
i
'
1
I
N
C
R
E
M
E
N
T
A
L
R
A
N
G
E
-
N
A
.
M
I
.
O
O
I
T
I
,
0
0
0
0
_
I
I
i
l
_
_
O
m
O
0
,
_
_
o
_
o
_
1
_
0
0
0
.
-
t
"
_
=
I
_
-
h
r
3
_
'
-
I
,
-
-
-
-
i
f
f
l
I
I
I
I
o
o
(
:
)
O
b
b
O
0
-
b
0 0 -
=
,1
I
m
I
I
I
W
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1200
:E
800 I

Z,
I
w
C>
Z

a::
400 I
.....

I-
Z
w
:E
w
INCREMENTAL RANGE AVAILABLE
DUE TO AERODYNAMIC LIFT
hi = ALTITUDE OF LIFT INITIATION
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _10
1200 I RE-ENTRY ANGLE - _3
0
I
'If I 800
II
I h j = 400,000 FT. &
h j = 300,000 FT.
IN 400
I \/ I
h j = 200,000 FT.
aI
ILX h;= r 000 "0 I
a::
,h j = FT. u
Z
-400 IL-________ -L __________ ________ -400 IL-________ J-________ ________
-.2 o .2 .4 -.2 o .2 .4
LIFT COEFFICIENT -CL
1.5-3
FIGURE 1.5-2
#Z GWI"
j
l-
O
,
O
,
O
,
O
,
D
-
n
_
.
u
J
0
m
a
.
_
E
M
4
L
U
i
.
v
I
-
0
a
.
L
U
Z
_
n
i L
U
L
U
z I 0 z I
L
U
u
i
,
_
\
_
.
I
I
I
I
O
0
.
.
"
-
o
o
_
\
_
L
L
"
_
O
O
_
"
_
J
_
-
_
o
.
,
-
o
o
,
_
_
"
o
Z
_
_
_
>
.
,
.
,
_
"
_
.
_
,
,
\
_
_
J
_
_
_
I
I
I
I
_
"
-
-
_
z
_
_
,
.
\
_
-
_
-
_
,
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
W
"
V
N
-
X
_
I
J
.
N
:
I
-
:
I
_
I
4
0
_
N
V
'
I
d
W
O
_
-
I
:
_
O
N
V
_
I
"
1
V
_
I
:
I
I
V
'
1
I
,
.
4
o
_
I
r
=
l
r
3
i
=
=
i
{
I
t
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
INCREMENTAL LATERAL RANGE AVAILABLE
DUE TO AERODYNAMIC SIDE FORCE
hi = ALTITUDE OF SIDE FORCE INITIATION
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _3
0
:E RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _10
. 50. II

Z
I
hi=400,000FT.
>- N
c.::
40 1
Z
L&.I
I
L&.I hi = 300,000 FT.
c.:: I
>
I
o 30 I
L&.I
Z

.....
0..
:E 20 1 I
"1 #
o
c.::

L&.I
(!) .- I
Z 10 1 .,

c.::
.....

c.::
0
0
.....
.1 .2 .3 .4
401 /
hi = 400,000 FT. &
300,000 FT.
301
20 1 If
10 1 I., '
oiL I II J
o .1 .2 .3 .4
SIDE FORCE COEFFICIENT -C
y
FIGURE 1.5-3
<II'
1.5-4
I
,
j
n
_
O
_
o
f
J
I
J
J
J
J
f
J
J
J
CONFIDED;ZP PC
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
15-5
Use of Aerodynamic Drag to Vary Range
The LID of a lifting vehicle can usually be in-
creased by decreasing the basic drag. However,
for re-entry vehicles of the Mercury capsule
type, the lift is merely a component of the axial
force so that decreasing the drag also decreases
the lift, and the LID ratios remain nearly the
same. Changes in drag at zero lift will, however,
change the ballistic properties of the capsule and,
in turn affect the point of touchdown. Figure
1.5-4 presents the incremental range available for
various changes in drag coefficient. The variation
of incremental range with drag change initiation is
similar to the lifting case in that practically
all of' the incremental range is obtained between
300,000 and 100,000 feet.
N CONTROL
Increases in drag coefficient may be realized
on the present Mercury configuration by em-
ploying flaps located symnetrically around the
heat shield. Variation in drag is then ac-
complished by varying. the flap deflection angle.
Reductions in drag coefficient on a blunt body
such as Mercury may be obtained through the
use of an spike, the 8lOOunt of drag
reduction being a function of the spike length.
To vary the drag on Mercury, therefore, re-
quires varying the length of' the spike which,
with the present dimensions, would involve a
telescoping design. '!he complexities of' the
control coolant requirements for the
spike and design of the heat shield make this
method unattractive.
--
imps,s? "
I
l -
,
J
5
,
?
,
_
_
.
"
I
W
"
V
N
-
:
I
O
N
V
_
i
"
I
V
J
.
N
:
J
W
:
I
_
I
_
)
N
I
,
D I
I
,
.
-
t
)
-
-
4
{
I
t
(
?? TRam.'
I TOUCHDOWN CONTROL 1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
:E
c:(
z
,
LLI
C>
Z
c:(
e&::
-..I
c:(

Z
w

w
e&::
U
Z
FIG URE 1. 5-4
DUE TO CHANGE IN DRAG
BASIC DRAG = COB = 1.50 BASIC LIFT = C
L
= 0
hi = ALTITUDE OF DRAG CHANGE INITIATION
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = -P RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _3
300 Ii

,
hi = 400,000 FT.
200 200
& 300,000 FT.
lh; = 20)000 FT.
hi = 400,000 FT.

I
hi = 300,000 FT.
. n
100 100
h = 200,000 FT.
I I
hi = 100,000 FT.
0
-100 ! '''! -100 L..' ___ ---'-____ ..II...-___ ...L... ___ --I
-2.0 -1.0 0 1.0 2.0 -2.0 -1.0
o 1.0 2.0
INCR EMENTAL DRAG CHANGE - L1 C D
iDES OS 5 L
1.5-6
o
!
.
.
,
4
m
Z 0
Z
m
Z
m
0
"
0
m
0
,
0
_
0
,
0
_
0
1
r
-
_
_
_
_
-
_
_
.
m
"
_
_
_
"
_
I
_
t
.
_
o
t
_
o
_
m
_
o
_
_
'
_
_
,
_
E
i
.
i
_
_
_
_
c
-
s
-
i
_
'
_
,
_
,
.
-
-
-
_
_
.
.
i
_
_
.
_
_
+
_
.
_
_
-
o
_
'
_
_
_
.
_
_
_
,
_
o
0
5
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
& "allfliAL
1.5-7
Use of Thrust to Vary Re-Entry Range
This section presents the results of a study of
the use of vectored thrust to change the touch-
down location. Figure 1. 5-5 shows the increren-
tal range obtained by varying the direction of a
constant 100,000 pounds-second impulse between
the lift and the drag direction. It is apparent
that impulses applied normal to the flight path
are appreciably more efficient than impulses
applied parallel to the flight path.
The variation of incremental range with ruoount
of impulse in the lift direction is presented in
Figure 1. 5-6. Also shown is the change in
flight path angle induced during the five-second
burning period as a function of the impulse.
When it is considered that the weight of the
fuel alone for a rocket installation would
.

.
r..' c" .... ,
\
be approximately 40 pounds per 1000 pounds-second
of impulse, it is evident that use of thrust to
control the flight path within atmosphere is
very expensive weightwise.
Summary
Table 1.5-1 presents a swmnary of the results
obtained with the different methods of touch-
down control investigated, together with some
of their advantages and disadvantages. From
this table it is evident that sufficient
control of the touchdown point to eliminate
the dispersion errors discussed, in Section
1.4 can be obtained through aerodynamic lift.
The attendant advantages of simplicity,
minimum capsule zoodification, and mderate
weight penalty, compared to the o;ther methods
listed, fUrther recommend this system.
l
0
0
0
0
"
I
W
'
V
N
-
3
O
N
V
_
I
"
I
V
L
N
:
]
W
:
:
I
_
)
N
I
O
O
!
I
{
i
I
f
{
(
(
(
t
FIGURE 1. 5-5
W"" mOl
N CONTROL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
AIR
DUE TO VECTORED THRUST
NOTES:
1. BURNING TIME = 20 SEC.
2. THRU ST = 5000 LBS.
V ElOCITY...---
3. ALL TRAJECTORIES FOR CL = 0
hi = ALTITUDE OF THRUST INITIATION
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _1
200-- -
hi = 200,000 FT.

<
Z
I
1601 1,\
W ,
C> 1201 4<
z
<
0=:
.....
<

z
w

w
0=:
80 1
U ,
Z 40 I \ j \:
hi = 150,000 FT.
0' ) I ??:=!
o 30 60 90
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _3

hi = 200,000 FT.
120 1 '\;
801 '"
401 '"
0"
o 30 60 90
THRUST VECTOR ANGLE - /3 -DEG.
CONFlSZi '-..
1.5-8
I
_
J
I
I
N
C
R
E
M
E
N
T
A
L
R
A
N
G
E
-
N
A
.
M
I
.
i
!
0
0
0
0
,
,
_
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
I
C
_
I
>
I
_
_
"
_
,
-
o
.
_
o
I
0
0
1
_
I
z
"
-
'
'
_
o
/
o
/
o
/
_
c
I
o
I
b
l
_
,
I
-
<
u
'
_
"
,
I
0
0
-
,
,
o
I
"
_
I
-
.
-
_
,
-
_
,
I
o
.
_
_
o
I
i
O
.
o
.
o
I
I
I
-
_
_
_
o
o

o
o

o
o
o
,

o
.
i
-
f
-
-
4
.
-
I
0
0
0
0
C
.
_
"
o
o
o
o
o
,
.
,
,
_
"
"
_
"
I
o
_
I
I
"
"
_
"
'
-
-
Z
-
I
_
R
.
-
I
.
-
I
.
.
.
.
_
_
-
<
0
_
_
"
.
_
I
I
I
I
"
I
"
0
m
I
I
I
_
'
'
_
'
-
_
'
_
"
'
;
_
F
:
:
m
;
_
.
n
,
o
o
O
o
o
o
,
1
"
n
"
n
(
"
3
t
"
3
(
,
,
0
_
F
,
,
_
o
-
-
O
0
_
u
_
_
_
"
I
'
,
-
-
0
b
_
m
c
_
-
r
_
I
_
o
_
_
,
_
m -
=
I
m m m _
u
J ,
,
0
,
,
0
m Z 0 I Z m m m Z 0 m
0
=
=
I
,
,
0
nC, 4
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
..
1.5-9
400
DUE TO THRUST IN LIFT DIRECTION
h j=ALTITUDE OF THRUST INITIATION
RE-ENTRY ANGLE =-1 RE-ENTRY ANGLE =-3
i Ii iii II 400 S
I NOTE :
I 1. BURNING TIME = 5 SEC.
:_ .. 1. 5 2. ALL T RAJ E C TOR I E S FOR C L = 0
: 3 . .1 Y =FlT. PATH ANGLE CHANGE
300 I I III I II 300 IN 5 SEC. I I I
I
:E
<{
z 200 I I I IF I
I ..
2001 J
W
(!)
Z
<{
h j =260,000FT.
~ 100 I II ..... ..1..
<{
~
Z
w
:E
w
~
U
Z
01 ~ \ H ~
h j = 240,000 FT.
h j = 220,000FT.-
-100 I!""""" i V If! hj-200
r
OOOFT.
20 0 20
TOTAL IMPULSE-lOOO LB-SEC.
MINUS LIFT
/3 =180
PLUS LIFT
/3 =0
40
1001 A ~
o
h; =200,OOOFT.-~
-1.5
_200LI ______ ~ - - - - - - ~ L - - - - - - - ~ - - - - ~
40 20 0 20
TOTAL IMPULSE -1000 LB-SEC.
MINUS LIFT
/3 =180
PLUS LIFT
{3 =0
40
_ :w _ ..... ~
FIG URE 1. 5-6
l
I
0
,
O
,
_
0
,
-
-
I
=
-
I
.
i
.
I
0
w
=
-
=
E
I
L
l
U
.
J
=
I
"
0
=
"
I
J
i
.
I
Z ,
v
'
=
'
u
J
I
.
i
Z 0 z I
.
l
.
I
_
d
0
J
r
_
[
.
-
,
_
!
J
8
"
=
=
'
:
.
_
n
i
i
!
,
_
_
_
_
i =
t
o ,
-
-
!
I
0
"
_
d
E
_
as puall'''
N CONTROL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
{
(
A
TABLE 1. 5-1
f
COMPARISON OF METHODS OF VARYING RE-ENTRY RANGE
-- -- .. --
INCREMENTAL RANGE
NAUTICAL MILES
I
NO. METHOD
CONTROL
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
Yo = - 1
SYSTEM
INlTlA TION ALTITUDE
300,000 FT. 200,000 FT.
Aerodynamic Lift
CD Continuous and Variable Control I
C
L
=Oto.3 Chin Flaps CD Front Face Heating Increased 565 180
@ Simplicity of Control Design
and lnsta1latlon
CL=O to.4 Chin Flaps
Same as No. I CD Same as No . .!.
1,045 358
II
Re-entry Corridor Greatly Increased
@ Afte rbody Heating Inc reased
Over C
L
K.3
r
C
L
=-2to.4 Chin Flaps
Same as No. I Same as No.1" II
1180 404
ill 2' Re-entry Corridor Slightly _2 Increase In Control Complexity,
+ Opposing Flaps
Increased OVer C L =.4,
@ Increased Re-Entry Load Factor
Aerodynamic Drag Aerodynamic Spike S) No Trimming Capability Required Spike Design Complex 427 122
IV
CD = 0 to - 1.35
(2) Reduction In Heat Shield Protection @ Spike Lengths for Large Drag
Reductions Excessive
(
V
LlC
D
= 0 to 1. 5
Cowl Type CD No Trimming Capabilltles Required CD Weight Increase Associated with -126 -42
Frontal Area Increase
Thrust - 1=40,000 Lb-Sec. Solid or Liquid OC CorrectlClllB Can be Made at
Weight Excessive 1920 62
Positive Lift Rockets HIgh Altitudes Volume Requirements Excessive
VI Direction Number of Corrections LImited by
Type and Numbe r of Rockets
:Il Accelerations on Pilot Undesirable
VII Negative Lift Direction Same as No. VI Same as No. VI Same as No. VI - 362 - 38
-
t
1.5-10
-- 'At
t
m
Q
"
_
m
0
.
.
.
4
.
_
0
_
,
0
,
.
0
/
f
J
.
f
I
i
I
t
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

), r!' .... -
.
,
I TOUCHDOWN CONTROL 1
1.6 APPLICATION OF LIFT TO CAPSULE
1.6-1
In view' of the results presented in Section 1.5,
the IOOthod of touchdown control emp10ying
aerodynamic lift was selected for further study.
Based upon theory and a very brief am:>unt of
experimental data, it appears that a simple
nap arrangement located at the bottom edge
of the heat shield will be capable of trimming
the capsule to its maximum lift coefficient.
The incorporation of a control flap, of course,
presents an additional aerodynamic heating problem.
Also, the use of lift during re-entry increases
the total heat load. However, as noted in
Section 1.2, the weight of the capsule with
these design changes still is wi thin the capa-
bill ties of the Atlas Rooster. Peak decelera-
tions encountered during re-entry present no
problem if the need for the use of negative
lift is eliminated. The above items are dis-
cussed in IOOre detail in following sections.
Based on interpolation of data presented in
Section 1. 5, the re-entry corridor available
in the down-range direction is illustrated in
Figure 1. 6-1. For this chart, a re-entry angle
of -2 degrees vas asswred, since this is
approximately the nominal re-entry for the
present Mercury Capsule, and a lift
range of 0 to .3 vas selected as being a
reasonable 1I8.x1l1DllD without having to make major
mdifications to the vehicle. Smaller re-entry
angles and larger lift coefficient ranges would,
of course, widen the l1m1ts of the re-entry
corridor. It will be noted that a total range
control of 4()(' nautical miles is available and,
that a corridor width of approx::tmately 240
nautical miles is available based on the 3 6"
variation of atm:>spheric density discussed in
Section 1.4.
Aerodynamic Data
The aerodynamic coefficients for the re-entry
configuration of the basic Jercury capsule are
presented in Figures 1.6-2 through 1.6-5. The
curves are based on data from the MAC low-speed
wind tunnel, the NASA langley :free-flight tunnel,
and the NASA langley ll-inch hypersonic tunnel.
Transonic and supersonic data also are available.
'Dle trim angles of attack resulting from
control flap deflection, and the lift coe:ff1cient
and lift-drag ratio obtained at these angles are
shown in Figure 1.6-6. ']he loss in flap
effectiveness due to the vertical displacement
of the C .G. when the flap is opened is account-
ed for.
The curves are based on wind tunnel data
(M 9.6) for the basic Mercury capsule plua
an estimate of the flap effectiveness. 1!Ie
design flap deflection of 6rf' shown on Figure
1.6-6 vas chosen to limit the trim angle of
attack to 14
0
(corresponding to approximately
.3 lift coefficient) in order to avoid excessive
afterbody temperatures, as discussed in Section
1.9
.s :==:. I1ML
I
l
$
0
,
o
0
_
0
i
,
i
,
i
Z D i
.
l
.
i
u
i
Z
m
0
Z
I
4
0
_
t
,
,
}
,
.
.
C
l
0
,
"
t
0
_
4
_
r
-
I
4
_
_
0
_
I
_
-
_
0
o
_
e
_
.
4
_
i
o
.
,
4
t
_
-
_
-
0
4
-
}
_
0
0
4
_
_
-
o
.
,
_
0
_
_
_
o
_
-
t
o
4
-
_
4
-
_
,
_
,
_ f
f
l
!
8
o
_
,
_
-
t
,
_
-
I
i
1
)
_
o
o
4
-
}
0
_
o
r
-
i
4
"
}
.
_
n
:
J
0
_
o
_
.
.
o
{
_
.
-
i
_
_
o
_
_
,
.
_
0
_
_
4
"
}
O
-
r
-
t
-
o
_
,
o
Y
0
_
!
_
_
o
_
_
4
-
}
0
_
E
t
_
r
_
_
O
_
r
-
I
_
0
_
'
_
_
,
,
_
_
"
o
o
.
r
.
t
_
0
,
'
_
,
.
_
1
-
1
0
I 8
o
0
.
1
_
0
,
{
:
1
o
{
0
.
_
_
0
_
4
-
-
}
_
_
O
d I
'
,
,
0
r
.
-
I
"
4'
,
i
,
t
,
I
\
'\
"'\
,
'.
- COIL SUl'O!
Deceleration Considerations
Peak decelerations encountered during re-entries
in which lift is varied are shown in Figure 1.6-7.
It will be noted that the decelerations en-
countered when applying negative lift are ex-
cessi ve, especially in view of the small am::>unts
of range control available by the use of nega-
tive lift coefficients as compared to equal
values of positive lift coefficient (see Figure
1. 5-2). The proposed control system discussed
in Section 1. 7, therefore makes use only of
positive lift coefficients.
Flap Control System
A simple hot-gas, closed-loop, two-position
system as shown in Figure 1. 6-8, is provided for
operation of the touchdown control flaps. The
system produces super-heated steam and oxygen
through decomposition of hydrogen peroxide in a
silver screen catalyst bed. A flap position
selector valve allows the hot gases to IIDve the
actuator piston to both the extended and re-
tracted positions. A simple positive lock
mechanism wi thin the actuator holds the flap
in the retracted position during periods of
non-use, such as launch and orbit.
A manual shut-off valve is placed between the
hydrogen peroxide supply tanks and the flap
actuator system to provide positive control in
case the pressure operated hydrogen peroxide
shut-off valve fails to function when the
system reaches operating pressure. A pressure
relief valve is located downstream
a
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
IlliVISJ:.:D 5
of the catalyst bed to vent the to the
atmosphere in the event of severe system over-
pressurization.
The command signal to the flap position
will be furnished from the touchdown control
system as discussed in Sections 1.7 and 1.8.
Reaction Control System
The reaction control system for this vehicle is
the same as the installation for the Mercury
capsule. The system is composed of two com-
pletely independent sub-systems. The automatic
subsystem is controlled electrically by an
autopilot or by an electrical input from the
control stick.
The basic 8.!ltc,;:.:atic sta111lzatlon and control
systen. (:S:::::::) :OJ'ces arc by an intee;rated
group cf pero;:ide roct""t cr:ar;;bers
'I{hlCh are tlcnC'c. on the vehlcle to provide
t':"que r:.o1..eot'-" ref'Lll tlnt.,; fror.. the jet t'Lr:...st
:C\.)rccs.
A sketch the reaction control instal-
shmrn in Fi;:"ure 1.'5-;:.
']u,-in::; th," :/2,\.' c:l.fH:n<?ls of' the
2.c"tor:8 control in the ra,te
=.:\lde) '.:h roll ::'3 :1(,,1(' the attl-
tl,_()_e r.,)lC: 1;.):2. ;:21:-,)'3 2.] .. 1.S a1i:l_"_1-
o.bl:: tc. c'm.:! pitcl: -end
by flBf
1.6-2
i
-
d
I
1
,
0
0
.
,
_
0
0 0
0 0
0
T
O
U
C
H
D
O
W
N
E
R
R
O
R
-
N
A
.
M
I
.
o
o
b
i
D
C L
-
z
'
J
O O
4
_
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
F
O
V
E
R
S
H
O
O
T
j
.
J
_
s
s
! |
s
"
|
s
"
i
_
,
_
_
'
_
_
I
I
I
I
o
o
_
+
U
N
D
E
R
S
H
O
O
T
d
#
,
,
g
'
S
S
S
S
J
J
#
O
_
j
S
,
J
,
J
Z Q m 0
Z
m Z 0 i Z m m m
_
Z
m
_
0
m
m
m
0
m
_
J
_
rnt''
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

. TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I

1.6-3
::E
cS:
Z

o

w
z

o
o
:J:
U
::::I
o

)0.
. '\',
\
RANGE CONTROL AVAILABLE WITH AERODYNAMIC L
IDEAL CONTROL SYSTEM
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = -2 DEGREES
AVAILABLE CL = a TO + .3
STD. DENSITY
------ 3a HIGH DENSITY
.-.-.-.-. 3a LOW DENSITY
200 I T
II
100
I

o
o
:J: ..
-V)
,
w "
> "
o ,
"'" I I I
, I .
----.,.,.,. FOR 1---
", RE-ENTRY LOCATION 1 I
' i
I
I
. ,
.... -'-'-r, .... ----;
a I t j""
,
" '.
, '.
, '.
100
I I I ".. '.
I I . - 1""",,<
OVERSHOOT ---1----- UNDERSHOOT
200 L... I
300 200 100 0 100 200 300 400 500
ERROR IN RE-ENTRY RANGE - NA. MI.
FIGURE 1.6-1
,
,
I
I
,
-
-
L
_
0
m
M
M
I
,
M
0
M
_
Z I
,
M
I
,
M
Z m @ z I
,
M
0 ,
T
U
c
o
I
I
m
I
D
'
I
N
3
1
D
I
-
1
_
3
O
D
l
:
J
l
l
G
O i
O c
o
O ,
O
O
i1
1
t
v
'
O L
u
r
_
O
U i
,
-
-
O
O L
U
0 Z
o
'
,
_
,
,
0
0 0 0
I
I
r
a
I {
1
I
t
t
I
I
!
I
I
1
1
i 1
! [
, I
I
I
N CONTROL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
MERCURY CAPSULE LIFT COEFFICIENT
RE-ENTRY CONFIGURATION
REF. AREA = 30.3 SO.FT.
.4.-------.-------,-------,--------.-------.-------.-------.--------.-------.
"" I HIGH SPEED (M=9.6)
o I Ii " ...... " ,- r' 'i ~
..... '" ,101" ,
U ,
~
I-
Z
W
u
u...
u...
w
LOW SPEED (M=0.3)
\
\
\
\
~
8 -.41 ~ 1"'= "v
I-
u...
.....
-.8 L! ________ -L ________ -L ________ -L ________ ~ ________ ~ ________ ~ __________ L_ ________ L_ ______ ~
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
ANGLE OF ATTACK, a., DEGREES
FIGURE 1.6-2
SCh'5'9S> ~
1.6-4
I
.
n
c
_
L
_
I
,
=
=
1
I
0
0 0
/
I
%
%
t
I I
I
I
I
/
I
/
I
" . to'" :02""A[
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.6-5
MERCURY CAPSULE DRAG COEFFICIENT
RE-ENTRY CONFIGURATION
REF. AREA=30.3

o 1.2
u

Z
w
u
u..
u..
w
.8
0
u
(!)
<t
.I
-- i J 1 '
... - --- ,
a::
7 ...... r ............. __ "",
0

o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
ANGLE OF ATTACK. u .DEGREES
FIG URE 1.6-3
7?? 'S'l:NTIAL .
- L - @il!ps;
l -
O
,
O
,
i
-
-
a
_
0
I
I
.
L
L
i
0 Z i a
_
I
.
I
.
I
Z
m
0
Z L
I
i
0
'
,
L
/
'
l
O
"
L
.
n
L
,
I
i
I
-
-
a
.
U
.
I
I
.
-
-
z W m U m U
L
U
_
I
J
J
0 U z 0 Q
z I
-
-
-
I
J
J
U
I
.
I
J
Z o I
-
-
< t
.
v
Z 0
\
I
I
I
I
'
-
@
a
Q
m
o
,
I
.
i
.
i
I
.
L
i
_
p
t
_
S
S
'
"
s
_
s
S
A
_
S
s
_
i
S
S
j
s
/
'
/
U
I
I
i
I
'
_
I
i
t
0
|
"
.
t
0
I
i
i
t
I
g
_
,
t
,
Z
0
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
i
_
,
I
I
i
#
I
l
,
0
l
I
l
l
I
S
S
l
I
!
,
_
,
_
o
%
%
1
I
I
I
#
I
i
0
0
!
W
D
"
I
N
:
1
1
D
I
-
i
:
I
:
I
O
D
I
I
:
E
I
N
]
W
O
W
I
c
D
i
I
0
r
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
i 1

TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
FIGURE 1.6-4
MERCURY CAPSULE PITCHING MOMENT COEFFICIENT
RE-ENTRY CONFIGURATION-LOW SPEED
0 20
-1% D
n
D

40
REF. AREA= 30.3
REF. DIAM. = 6.21 ft.
ANGLE OF ATTACK, a,DEGREES
60 80 100 120 140 160 180
or"
:E
u
...:
z
w
,,-----/--...... J 7
" 1_'
I ------ -- "
I,' ...... '
/' 1------ __ __ III
," -" '"
, ' , _, ' II,
,,',' , , ' C. G. @
,', ' 33% D /"

..
U
u..
u..
w
o -.1
u
....
Z
w

0

-.2
'.' ' - ,"
',' 29%D '//
, ' "
" ' ' ,
' , 26 %D ' L
,,' " '.
M
",' "
0.3 'r ...... -, " ,
, , " " , , ,"
',', ' I
ft'F1n i !AL
, ...... ' "
" "
-...... '
1.6-6
I
,
,
-
.
1
M
O
M
E
N
T
I
1
C
O
E
F
F
I
C
I
E
N
T
.
C
M
I
0
/
I
C
.
<
P
,
m Z 0 u Z m m
j
_ m
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
_
J
_
_
J ENGINEERING REPORT 6919
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
cotn.nOrt'Z''
MERCURY CAPSULE PITCHING MOMENT COEFFICIENT
RE-ENTRY CONFIGURATION-HIGH SPEED
--loz D
T7
o
ANGLE OF ATTACK. IX. DEGREES
:E
u
.... :
0
0 20 40
Z -.1 I ""'"
w
u
-
LL.
LL.
W
o
U
60 80 100 120
M = 9.6
Z -.21
i ~ I'
o t-
~ ~
-.3
REF. AREA =30.3 ft.2
REF. DIAM = 6.21 ft.
140 160 180
WN CONTROL
1.6-7
FIGURE 1.6-5
_ .............. I'JIIIIIIII""
J
J
\
l -
O
_
O
,
,
O
I
-
,
-
=
O
1
.
M
,
I
=
O z m
L
U
I
,
M
z I O z I
,
M
O
_
U
'
)
O
_
I
v
L
U
=
E
u
J
1
.
L
U
U
'
)
im
m
i
i
i
[
c
o
i
_
o
,
-
I
S
:
1
3
_
1
9
3
0
'
J
S
'
3
1
9
N
V
N
O
I
1
3
3
1
-
1
3
0
d
V
l
:
l
q
I
i
i
0
/
1
'
O
I
I
V
_
I
O
V
_
1
0
-
1
-
1
1
1
O
N
Y
W
l
a
l
1
3
'
I
N
3
D
I
:
I
:
I
:
I
O
_
)
1
-
1
1
1
k
D
,
-
4
S
_
o
i
-
_
1
0
-
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:
_
.
>
_
.
_
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1
{
A
[
I
{
I
{
1
1
,

! TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

........
..........
......
,
u
0
...: ....
zoo

0<,

0

w
0
0 ,
u ....

....
......
......
FIGURE 1.6-6
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL CONFIGURATION
FLAP DEFLECTION, LIFT-DRAG RATIO
AND TRIM LIFT COEFFICIENT
VS.
-
TRIM ANGLE OF ATTACK
100rr----------.----------.,----------.----------.-----------,----------.----------,
II'l
W
w

.4
<'
801 i I
w
0
CONTROL DESIGN POINT
- 00
w'
.3 ......
601 /' :rl
<'
Z
0 LIFT DRAG RATIO
z
2
0
401 ,,/....,.......-r I
....
u
w
......

W
0
.1 20 I / / I:J""""
Dr
0
......

0 .. '---
or I ! I
o ,5 -10 -15 -20 -2
1
5 -30 -35
TRIM ANGLE OF ATTACK,a T' DEGREES
t SQ'm'RENIIAL
1.6-8
I
c
o
i
I
=
,
I
A
X
I
A
L
L
O
A
D
F
A
C
T
O
R
-
(
D
/
W
_
M
a
x
m Z D Z m
m
j
_ m
_
Z
m
m
m
_
0
m
-
.
@
,
,
0
,
0
q
_
n
,
0
,
0
l"tu.IC'DSt 2'
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

.. - - .
. ,
/;>-.,
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1.6-9
l\ , __
. fJ..'''\' ,
,
MAXIMUM AXIAL LOAD FACTOR ENCOUNTERED
DU RING LIFTING RE-ENTRIES
hi = ALTITUDE OF LIFT INITIATION
RE-ENTRY ANGLE =_1
0
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _3
0
16r
o
---------r---------.---------.
)(
c
::?! 12
3' \:
-------
'-'
CI::
hi =136,000 FT. & BELOW
o
ti 8 I <t ,.
L&.
C
<t
o
-I
-I
<t
><
<t
hi=200,000 FT.
4 1 /
hi =400,000
& 300,000 FT.
0' ,
-.2 0 .2 .4 -.2
LIFT COEFFICIENT -CL
hi =136,000 FT. & BELOW
'---hi =200,000 FT.
hi =400,000
& 300,000 FT.
.2 .4
FIGURE 1.6-7
I
l
e
_
w
0
m
M
.
I
1
4
4
0
a
.
Z 1
4
4
u
_
z 0 z u
_
_
E
I
-
-
U
_
U
_
e
_
0 I
-
-
,
U a
.
_
.
J
M
.
> >
0
0
,
_
i
u
u
Z
m
Z 0 U z 0 -
r
-
U 0 I
"
-
> > l
u
m u
l
i
1
1
O
.
w > =
.
,
.
I
> 0 U ,
.
.
.
.
1
z 0 k
-
-
0
t
u
z m l
,
.
,
-
z u
l
> o
0 _
v
> 0
\
0 I
,
.
.
-
I
,
-
-
g
_
\
-
r
_
0
I
,
=
-
U
=
=
.
I
i
-
I
- I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
, {
FLAP ACTUATOR SYSTEM
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL VEHICLE
H202 SUPPLY
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
MANUAL SHUT -OFF VALVE
PRESSURE OPERATED SHUT -OFF VALVE
BED
PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE
FLAP POSITION SELECTOR VALVE _________
FLAP ACTUATOR
FIGURE 1.6-8
CONFIDEI
/ OVERBOARD VENT LINE
FLAP ACTUATOR
1.6-10
1
!
t
-
-
o m
0
C
<
_
< m
_
0 C
Z
O
_
m
_
z
Z
;
_
.
.
_
m
m
q
_
_
o
m
Z 0 5
<
z
_
_
<
_
<
_
'_
r
-
O
<
Z
m
Z
Z
.
1
_
,
i
,
,
._
I
_ _
m
m
_
_
_
z
"
1
"
m C )
>
Z
z
m
'_
0 -
I
s
,
.
-
I
-
4
o < f
-
<
0 <
"
e
m <
<
m '-
,
n
<
m
0 e
-
<
.
-
<
o
-
r
-
"
_
_
h
-
-
4
m m O Z
0 Z O m
_
0
>
0
_
m
-
_
Z
0
-
_
m
_
_
o
Z
m X 0
B
Z m m
j
_ m
_
Z
m
-
o
0
m
m
_
0
m
_
_
-
,
,
4
,
0
,
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.-. .......,.H! i
REACTION CONTROL SYSTEM
1.6-11
EMERGENCY DUMP VALVE
THRUST CHAMBERS (1-6)LBS.
THRUST
CHAMBER (J LB.)
THRUST CHAMBER(l LB')
THRUST CHAMBER
'4-24 LBS)
THRUST CHAMBER
(24 LBS')
PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES
HYDROGEN PEROXIDE (H20
2
) TANK
(AUTOMATIC SYSTEM)
UP PITCH
RIGHT YAW.
\>

CW. ROLL

ROLL
LEFT YAW

DOWN PITCH
MASTER SHUT OFF VALVE
HELIUM (HE )TANK
HELIUM (H,J PRESSURE REGULATOR
PITCH SHUT OFF VALVE
ROLL SHUT OFF
VALVE
FILL DRAIN
DISCONNECT
EMERGENCY DUMP
VALVE
PRESSURE RELIEF
VALVE
SOLENOID VALVES (6 LBS)
SOLENOID VALVES(l LBS)
HYDROGEN PEROXIDE (H 202)
TANK (MANUAL SYSTEM)
, TO VENT. RELIEf VALVE AND Fill DISCONNECT
PRESSURE RELIEF VALVES TO PRESSURE RELIEf AND VENT VALVE
FIGURE 1.6-9
0
l
0
,
0
.
,
,
0
,
-
-
I
-
-
n
,
,
I
_
,
.
u
i
.
i
J
Z
,
.
n
D O
g
'
-
-
z D z
D
-
4
.
_
o
c
)
.
,
-
4
_
o
,
_
_
m
O
_
_
o
+
_
0
=
0
o
I
1
)
_
1
]
)
8
I
D
.
_
.
.
_
.
o
I
_
,
_
_
.
.
.
_
_
!
0
_
+
_
t
o
_
-
_
"
"
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
4
-
:
'
,
-
-
I
_
m
4
-
_
.
o
5
_
q
o
,
-
_
_
_
0
_
_
o
r
_
_
C
D
o
.
e
l
0
@
o o
4
-
*
t
]
)
@
I
t
-
,
-
-
4
[
t
I
I
I
I
I
~ I
I 1
: I
so. 'FlnJONTIAI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1. 7 RE-ENTRY CONTROL TECHNIQUE
Basic Concept
nle block diagram (Figure 1.7-1) illustrates an
on-off lift variation scheme for closed loop
control of the touchdown point of the Mercury
capsule. This diagram and the following dis-
cussion pertain to down range control. A similar
system could be adapted for cross range control.
Basically, control of the touchdown point is
obtained by utilization of aerodynamic lift ob-
tained by operation of a twocposition trim flap.
Actuation of the trim flap is based on simple
logic decision as to whether a linear prediction
indicates that the desired touchdown point will
be overshot or undershot. The variables measured
to n ~ c the prediction are altitude, deceleration,
and range to the desired touchdown point. Other
required quantities are derived from these by
computation.
The portions of the system which make the com-
putations and convert them to trim flap signals
are the reference trajectory unit, the error
rate computer, the selector logiC, and the de-
celeration decision unit. These are discussed
individually in the following paragraphs.
Reference Trajectory Unit This unit stores two
precomputed reference trajectories of altitude
versus range to touchdown. As illustrated in
Figure 1.7-2 one of these, termed the high ref-
erence, is a zero lift trajectory, terminating
at the desired touchdown point, based on the
$-- PFt'I1il
asswnption that no re-entry errors exist. The
other, termed the low reference, is computed
using air density, retrograde velocity, and
trim angle-of-attack values that have equal
probability of occurrence, such that the sum
of the individual errors is equal to the no-
control 3 CS'" touchdown error of 120 nautical
miles calculated in Section 1.4.
The re-entry reference altitude for the touch-
down control system is 300,000 feet. (See
Figure 1.7-2). A target re-entry point is se-
lected short (i.e., at a greater range from
tOUChdown) of the intersection of the low ref-
erence trajectory and 300,000 feet by 45 nauti-
cal miles, which is the predicted 3 6' error in
re-entry position. In other words, the target
re-entry point is biased essentially by the
amount necessary to insure (within 3 6 proba-
bility) that negative lift is never required.
For any re-entry, regardless of conditions, the
low reference is selected at first and is used
in all cases until the capsule altitude decreases
to 250,000 feet.
By this time the deceleration decision unit will
have determined whether re-entry conditions,
primarily air density, are such that the control
loop should continue to use the low reference or
that a shift to the high reference should be made.
The high reference is selected in cases where the
deceleration indicates standard or greater-than-
1.7-1
-
4
I
I
X
)
c
t
t
I
-
-
'
.
t
_
0
.
_
1
3
H
_
I
_
_
_
c
l
'
O
O
0
_
0
H
'
_
t
_
o
I
-
.
.
u
o
.
.
,
H
o
E
2
_
f
_
O
_
4
-
0
_
o
"
.
4
o c
+
o
I
=
'
_
_
o
_
_
.
_
_
.
,
.
.
_
o
_
_
_
-
r
_
_
_
_
_
o
_
c
_
O
D
_
H
o
_
.
_
c
_
O
I
_
c
l
_
_
0
_
c
'
_
-
I
.
-
-
,
_
1
3
.
.
,
-
_
1
3
.
,
_
t
"
_
c
+
"
_
,
_
o
_
o
_
5
q
m
>
,
Z 0
c
+
_
0
_
Z
o
_
,
-
.
_
"
_
_
_
Z
m
m
_
,
_
m
0
N
_
N
_
N
N
h
_
M
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
A
1. 7-2
sta.rl(L;.rd. air ty. If the decElErat.ion
corre:!Pt;uds to air density
the 1m, is retained.
Error Ra+/:' Computer The error rate computer
takes a1 ti tude erro:r
j
hp obtainE'd by subtra.c.ting
thE me'3.Bured altitude from the reference alti-
tude. and II1Eoasured range, S, an1. perf'ormE a
crude. diffErentiation to obt9.in ahe/dSo This
c.an 00 done by dividing the outputs of high pass
fi . .lters a(:ting on and S by dividing
fini.te inc.:reIIlE'!nts of' he and S obtained over some
suitable sampling time, or by some other
mat.E- technique 0 Requirements for precision and
ra.pid. response are not stringent the
error rate is used only to 9. fir'st order in=
di(oation of whether or not the error is decreas=
ing rapidly enougho
LJgic Unit Tl:.e purpose of the
tor unit is t.o attenuate the range exten=
sion capability of the lifting capsule just enough
so th1:it touchiown occ,urs at the d.esired location.
This is accomplished by calling for either full
or zero flap deflection depending upon whether or
not lift is required to a.rive the intersection of
the a0tual trajectQry with the reference trajec=
tory in the proper direction. Figure 10
illustrates tne basic principles of the logic
used in selecting the flap position. Altitude error
h is dividtd by dbe/dS to get Do S, a prediction
or the change of range over which the altitude
error will, at the present be brought to
zero. This Do S is compared to a fUnction of
the present range, where S is
the present range and SIOOK loS the range at
an altitude of 100,000 feet. The factor K
N CONTROL
i5 varied a('.'..!0rding t.:.> an output of the decel'STG.-
tion decision unit from 1.0 at low CiEc(derution
(minimum air density) to .10 at high deceleration
(maximum air density). The value SIOOK is sub-
tracted to allow for the fact that below 100,000
feet altitude very little touchdown control is
possible with capsule type vehicles.
If, when Do S is compared to K(S-Sl00IO, 6 S
fs the sma.ller value, the error is being reduced
faster than necessary. Tn this case the selector
calls for zero lift if the altitude ia below
reference altitude or maximum lift if it is above.
When 6s is greater thrul
error is not being reduced fa.st enough, and in
this case the selector calls for maximum lift if
the altitude is below the reference and zero lift
if it is above. The remaining possibility is that
the sign of dhe/dS may indicate that the error
in increaSing, in which case the selector gives
the same trim signals as when 6 S is too great.
Deceleration Decision Unit This unit supplies
outputs which select the reference trajectory
and the K factor of the selector 1ogic. Air
density variation is the primary variable which
influences this selection and hence the
tion unit may be considered as a form of air
sity sensor. Actually the decision outputs are
functions of the altitude at which a predetermined.
value of deceleration is reached. Essentially,
by changing the logic in the direction to keep
lift applied a greater percent of the time, this
unit tends to compensate for factors such as
above average air denSity which cause the tra-
jectory to fall abnormally short.
..... -CONfmnfilM1
C 2
l
O
,
O
,
O
,
O
,
_
O
,
-
-
n
,
,
w
O
'
_
Z m h
h
l
z m O z
_
_
o
_
.
_
.
_
l
0
_
"
_
_
_
o
_
0
0
_
_
N
_
_
_
O
_
_
I
.
.
_
o
0
N
N
1
_
0
o
_
o
_
o
o
_
_
_
.
_
_
a
_
_
o
o
,
_
_
_
_
o
_
-
_
_
;
_
_
_
_
.
(
,
f
. l
t
_
O o
0
_
o
_
0
_
o
_
_
_
_
_
o
4
.
)
_
0
t
-
,
o
o
_
O
_
_
O
_
_
_
0
_
-
_
_
_
_
t
_
_
.
.
o
o
g
g
2
_
.
.
_
I {
[
(
(
I
I
Necessary to Mercury Automatic
Reaction Controls
The components described are independent the
present Mercury autopilot. However, the re-
entry mode of the present automatic stabiliza-
tion and cO,ntrol system requires slight
cation to be compatible with the lift-variation
technique. The automatic initiation of a slow
spin upon re-entry must be replaced by auto-
matic ro11-attitude hold. Pitch-and-yawatti-
tude hold are disengaged during a re-entry in the
same manner as for the present Mercury system.
Rate damping during re-entry is also the same
as at present, although slightly IOC>re reaction
control fue 1 is required to provide for damping
the pitchtng osci11ations caused by trim flap
actuation.
System Performance
The objective the touchdown control system
described is to reduce the 3 Ci probable errors
in touchdown location to flo nautical miles with
a reasonable simple control loop. Although
analysis is not complete and has been hindered
somewhat by analogue computer accuracy limita-
tions, the indications to date are that the
system described does accomplish the objective.
Figure 1.7-4 shows controlled trajectories
through a standard atmosphere beginning at
either extreme of the 3 (j probable dis,persion
of re-entry location from the target re-entry
pOint, and Figure 1.7-5 shows similar trajec-
ca" IDL"iiAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
tories, beginning at the target point, through
atIIOspheres with extrene 3 C5' density variation.
Touchdown for all of these is wi thin ten nauti-
cal miles the desired point. This shows
that the system works we11 for at least two
the important extremes on the probability
"ellipsoid." Computer data for 3 () probable
conditions involving combinations of variables
have not yet been obtained. It is found, how-
ever, that conditions appreciably outside
the probability range, the system as de-
scribed does not consistently reduce the touch-
down error to ten nautical miles, even in cases
where the range extension required is sti11
wi thin the aerodynamic capability. This means
that although the desired objective is accom-
plished, the system efficiency may be further
refined either by inserting IOC>re information
into the selector-logic unit, by IOC>difying the
logic process, or by improving the shape of the
trajectory. Investigations into
possible ways of realizing such improvements wi th-
out excessive complication of the baSically
simple system are presently being conducted.
Figure 1.7-6 shows a system performance summary
based on analogue computer runs obtained to
date. Also shown are the performance boun-
daries based on zero lift and on fu11 utiliza-
tion of the aerodynamic range extension capa-
bility for CL = .3. Note that for IOC>st of the
points the touchdown error is sma11 compared to
the range error, or in other words the system
provides the proper aIOOunt of range extension
wi th a small percent error. However, there are
some shortCOmings, as mentioned in the previous
1.
I
m Z 0 I Z m m m
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
J
_
_
_
.
_
o
o
_
_
o
I
-
_
I
n
,
0
o
_
o
_
.
i
.
.
_
.
.
_
_
o
o
_
.
_
,
_
.
_
.
_
_
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
s ' " IDLI'I IAt
1.7-4
paragraph, and these show up on Figure 1.7-6
in two respects: (A) The system operates too
near the zero-lift boundary in the low-density
case, i.e., a small re-entry position error in
the overshoot direction (for a low air density
re-entry) causes the system to command zero lift
practically throughout the trajectory, and any
addi tional re-entry overshoot error shows up
one-to-one as a touchdown error. Biasing the
target re-entry position farther would alleviate
this; (B) Undershoot begins to build up, al-
N CONTROL
though at considerably less than.one-to-one
rate, for range errors which are well below
the aerodynamic range extension capability.
This means that the logic used to derive the
lift command signal is imperfect in that it
fails to call for lift in some situations
which actually do require lift. It is be-
lieved that this defect can be alleviated by
reasonably simple modification. Analyses are
underway to confirm this.
I
J
J
I
l
j
I
-
=
o
L
U
I
X
I
-
-
L
U
E
-
u
J
z L
u
o
s
$
1
8
,
5 O I
-
-
I
,
.
-
.
B
I
m
m
B
n
m
m
m
m
_
!
[
'.
.
-
-
,
-
4 I
[
-
.
.
.
,
4
(
r
(
I
I
,
I
I
I
l

. ..
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
BLOCK DIAGRAM
OF
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL SYSTEM
I
ASCS
DAMPINGH REACTION
LOOP CONTROLS

DAMPING
TRIM SIGNAL COMPUTATION :
I
I
TRIM
SELECTOR ISIGNAL
..
REFERENCE ALI. ALI. ERROR
TRAJECTORY
UNIT
S
LOGIC
he
h
S
r---...I.---, d h e
ERROR ITs
RATE
TRIM
FLAP
TORQUE
DAMPED TRANSITION
TO NEW LIFT
COMPUTER
SWITCHING
DECELERATION
r+--
SIGNAL
DECISION UNIT.
l' '
S
"
h, ALTITUDE
POSITION
S, RANGE
SENSING
L _______________________________________________
FIGURE l.7-l
a somAL
VEHICLE
PITCH
RATE
VEHICLE
POSITION
VEHICLE
DECELERA TlON
1. 7-5
-
-
q
I
o
_
z Q r
n
1
',
-
4
I
I
o o o o o
0 z
,
-
=
1
0 C C
)
-
r
_
3
0 Z 0 Z -
-
4
:
m
m _
0
m z
m
-
-
4
_
0
L
_
m o
m Z m Z m m m
m m
m "
,
=
m
0
m
;
_
-
-
'
O
_
,
0
,
,
0
,
0
'
,
0
co,ePIDE'. IML
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
17-6
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL REFERENCE TRAJECTORIES
TO /
,.,. SPREAD IN "-ENTRY POSITION ERR07
90 N.M. , ":
............
,-:.:::
,-- ....
HIGH REFERENCE TRAJECTORY ,'
.,. I.-
ZERO-LIFT, "NO ERROR" RE-ENTRY \ RE-ENTRY ALT. = 300000 FT .
THROUGH DESIRED TOUCHDOWN POINT " ... :,
,,-"" ........... .
"" '- TARGET RE-ENTRY POINT
r I
,."" ....... .
DESIRED
TOUCHDOWN
POINT
...
o
:;)
....
....
e:(
#/1'.':,....",.'_ ........
,,,,;",,; ....... '
"'fIII" , ....
,",' .... '.
.",' ........ ,.
"',' .......
,.,' .....
,,' ...
,,', ....
. ., . "
" l
i'
l
t (
N.M1

LOW REFERENCE TRAJECTORY APPROXIMATES
3ooMAX. RANGE RE-ENTRY THROUGH DESIRED
TOUCHDOWN POINT
ZERO LIFT "NO ERROR" RE-ENTRY THROUGH
TARGET RE-ENTRY POINT
APPROXIMATE 3ooMIN. RANGE RE-ENTRY
RANGE_
300 SPREAD IN TOUCHDOWN RANGE ERROR
FIGURE 1.7-2
(SEE SECTION 1.4)

l
0
'
,
O
_
,
-
-
u
"
l
,
,
0
,
-
.
_
,
,
u
a
0
m
_
.
:
E
L
u
u
J
,
v
I
.
-
0
o
.
m
.
u
u ,
v
'
-
-
L
B
m
.
u
Z
m
0 z c
u
A r
_
I
-
.
4
Z 0 m I
-
-
0 a
.
.
:
,
.
J
u
_
=
E
i ,
,
y
I
,
-
,
Z m I
,
,
,
-
U I
J
,J
I
,
J
l
.
I
I
v
0 C
t
m 0 .
.
I
I
i
I
.
o Z 0 m I
.
,
-
I
-
,
-
.
,
i
,
I
m
0 0 0
I
(
I
N
I
I
I
'
I
V
0 0 0 0 0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
T
x z
z
,
.
u
,
v
.
Z
o
.
_
0 _
-
0
_
z
_
z
.
,
r
.
z
>
0 _
>
0
_
u
.
,
<
7
! !
r
_
.'
I I
...
c
:::>
....
....
.....
c(
CONFib i5' ' ,
N CONTROL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ILLUSTRA liON OF LOGIC FOR SELECTING TRIM FLAP POSITION
I. LlS=( he) .. I
dhe/dS
REF. ALl.. STORED IN
REF. TRAJECTORY UNIT
DIFFERENCE IN SLOPES OF
TRAJECTORIES IS dhe/dS,
COMPUTED IN ERROR RATE UNIT.
REF. TRAJECTORY
ALT. ERROR
............................. ::::;::.,-.-
............................ ,.,., "- h, MEASURED ALT.
............................... ,.,.,.,
""",,----------------
" ,
"
J 100000 FT.
.............. ,." "- he IS INCREASING:
................................... ~ ' / ' . ' " . SELECTOR CALLS FOR LIFT
, ,
.' he IS DECREASING, BUT dhe/dS is LOW, GIVING LlS
GREATER THAN K(S-SIOOK); SELECTOR CALLS FOR LIFT
I
he IS DECREASING SO FAST THAT L l ~ IS LESS THAN K( S-SIOOK);
SELECTOR CALLS FOR NO LIFT
.. I
(S-SJOOK)
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
S lOOK
S, MEASURED RANGE
RANGE ..
NOTE: FOR ILLUSTRATION; K IS ASSUMED EQUAL TO 1.0.
ACTUAL VALUE VARIES BETWEEN .1 AND 1.0 AS NOTED IN TEXT.
FIGURE 1.7-3
1.7-7
,..1"It..Ut=.1n.1:"ITI AL-
5
I
C
o
I
-
-
4
Q
!
A
L
T
I
T
U
D
E
-
I
O
0
0
F
T
.
O
0
C
C
Z
r
_
0
"
1
"
c
O
-
n
]
>
Z
o o
r
n
0 .
,
=
t
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
n
t
om
e
m
e
m
e
-
-
_
Z
_
O
U
n
U
I
I
n
n
|
o
I
I
|
I
U
O
I
I
U
|
I
t
|
a
U
O
lla
lle
la
lU
.
O
U
llm
B
r
[
_
,
,
_
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
_
_
_
o
'
_
_
o
-
0
O
_
_
r
n
o
_
'
_
-
"
_
\
'
l
\
}
>
.
-
4
m
-
\
\
_
"
_
V
r
n
_
Z
-
r
1
>
T
_
n
_
r
-
0
_
-
m
0
m
-
K
u
_
r
_
Z
o
_
_
_
0 m
,
,
,
,
4
_
m
_
,
o
J
_
o
O
_
_
!
m Z -
<
m
m Z i Z m m m
Z
m m
m
m
0
m ,
,
,
0
_
0
I
. rsuS."
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

TOUCHDOWN CONTROL]

1.7-8

LL.
o
o
o
.--
I
W
C
:>

-I

!I. (1)>-'
.
\
TYPICAL RE-ENTRY TRAJECTORIES
STANDARD AIR DENSITY
-j r90 N.M.
300 /[1" I
HIGH REFERENCE "'''',,, :
TRAJECTORY" ,',' RE-ENTRY POINT
" 250 ,
" ..-
--'
, __ filii' :::, ..
, :'1"" "",,"" """
CLOSED LOOP
CONTROLLED TRAJECTORIES
:"'t ... ", , , J'i """
2 00 I ' ,,'
'ill" " "", "",
., 'I"''''''' "" .. , ..
..... ' ,,, .. ,,
." .. , , ......,
......
.----- ... -.... .. ..
..... .. ..
...... ..
.... .. ..
1001!f
E : I
j ;
5] Ii:
o 200 400 600 800 1000
DISTANCE FROM DESIRED TOUCHDOWN POINT, NAUTICAL MILES
MEASURED AROUND SURFACE OF EARTH
..
CO"
FIGURE 1. 7-4
O
_
O
,
,
,
0
I
-
-
0 a
.
L
L
I
0
z m I
L
l
L
L
I
z m 0 z l
U
L
l
O
,
u
'
l
O
_
I
,
M
=
B
=
E
I
L
l
I
-
n
_
U
.
I
L
/
1
0
0
0
0
-
-
0
0
0
C
O
i
'
_
,
-
-
"
I
_
O
0
0
L
-
3
O
n
l
l
l
]
Y
3
"
X
!
u
-
x
i
,
-
I
0 H
I
t
I
i
f
I
1
J I
co,,, 'I P IJ'0'
I TOUCHDO-WN CONTROL I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
I-
u..
0
0
0
-
,
w
0
::::>
I-
-
I-
.....

FIGURE 1. 7-5
RE-ENTRY TRAJECTORIES THROUGH
NON-STANDARD ATMOSPHERE
TARGET RE-ENTRY POINT
300. ~
200
CLOSED LOOP CONTROLLED
TRAJECTORY EXTREME HIGH
DENSITY 3a PROBABILITY
_ ZERO LIFT TRAJECTORY EXTREME
HIGH DENSITY 3a PROBABILITY
I I I
CLOSED LOOP CONTROLLED TRAJECTORY
EXTREME LOW DENSITY 3 a PROBABILITY
...., II NOTE: ZERO LIFT LOW DENSITY---
TRAJECTORY PRACTICALLY IDENTICAL
0' , , , , , ,
o 200 400 600 800 1000
DISTANCE FROM DESIRED TOUCHDOWN POINT, NAUTICAL MILES
MEASURED AROUND SURFACE OF EARTH
CONFibE '0,
1 . 7 - ~
I H Q
-
:
4
I
i
I
--

-
1. 7-10
1 5 E PTE M B E R 195 9 ...... TOUCHDOWN CONTROL
PERFORMANCE SUMMARY OF TOUCHDOWN CONTROL SYSTEM
ANALOG COMPUTER RUNS
fj. STANDARD DENSITY
o 30' HIGH DENSITY
o 30' LOW DENSITY
PREDICTED BOUNDARY WITH
ZERO-LIFT RE-ENTRY
100-----
::E <: i I .
.c: I , I
<i. PREDICTED RANGE THROUGH WHICH TOUCHDOWN-
Z ERROR CAN BE eliMINATED BY USE OF LIFT
I V') 5 0
CII:: .....
00
CII::CII::
Cll::1-
wZ
zO

Ou-
e::::;
:I::I:
ul-
::1-

I-
V')
CII::
w
>

_.
50 LV') /
I WITH-7--
100 L?OVERS,HOOT __ ---, __ RE-ENTRY
100 50 0 50 100 150 200 250
RANGE ERROR-NA. MI.

EQUAL TO THE TOUCHDOWN ERROR WHICH
WOULD OCCUR IF NO LIFT WERE APPLIED.
u_,,-,C--- Eli II OJ I&EA1IAt-'
FIGURE 1.7-6
I I '
l '
\'
I I
\
t
)
}
l!
1
I
I
O
_
O
_
O
,
O
,
,
0
,
-
)
.
.
_
,
0
"
*
t
i
m
t
_
)
.
=
,
0
L
i
.
w
m
i
t
,
t
_
z
m
0
z
c
o
,
.
4
o
o
_
o
.
_
_
.
,
_
o
"
-
'
@
_
g
_
o
"
_
0
_
0
o
_
o
_
_
_
o
_
,
.
4
t
0
_
,
_
0
,
4
_
0
_
_
)
.
,
-
)
8
)
o
m
_
4
o
,
=
4
I
_
0
,
=
4
'.'
"
,::\
'"
'1
d
.1
.!

J
. ,\'- ,
. ,
","", c.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.8 HE-ENTRY GUIDANCE SYSTEM
Two general approaches considered for guidance
of a space vehicle during the latter phases of
re-entry to touchdown are: (A) radio guidance
from ground tracking radar; and (B) self-con-
tained inertial guidance. Self-contained guid-
ance is subdivided into two phases: (A) a
quasi-inertial system for use with present Mer-
cury vehicles; and (B) a conventional. inertial.
system for use with fUture Mercury vehicles.
Some of the salient features of the aforemen-
tioned systems are summarized in Figure 1.8-1.
The following section discusses in more detail
some ideas in regard to system mechanization and
the limitations and expected performance accur-
acy for each.
Radio Guidance
Some of the limitations of radio guidance
through ground tracking radar are presented as
Figure 1.8-2. First, the line of sight limit
wi th unlimited radar capability is about 750
nautical miles, considering the general charac-
teristics of the space vehicle re-entry traj-
ectory. Including the effect of ground clutter
this is reduced to 600 nautical miles. Then,
recognizing that the vehicle radar beacon is in
the shadow of the heat shield and only skin
trackill8 can be employed for up range tracking,
it is readily seen from Figure 1.8-2 that single
site tracking is extremely restrictive. The
indicated 150 nautical mile radar range provides
little time for control with a correspondingly
small amount of range correction through lift
cnb'e,cp m 7 '
utilization. Referring again to Figure 1.8-2,
the advantages of dual radar tracking s1 tes are
seen. In this application, the radar beacon is
qui te effective in down range tracking and
greatly extends the continuous coverage which
can be provided. Figure 1.8-3 presents a func-
tional block diagram of the type of dual site
radar tracking scheme being considered. Since
the amount of range correction which can be made
during re-entry is heavily dependent on how
early in the trajectory it is known what lift
should be applied
l
radar contact and vehicle
lifting capability dove-tail to define the ef-
fectiveness of the system in correcting touch-
down dispersion. This relationship is shown
for lift coefficients of .4 and .2 and for re-
entry angles of -1 degrees and -3 degrees in
Figures 1.8-4 and 1.8-5 respect1 vely . As can
be seen, the relationship between up range radar
site (a dual site system) and the maximum amount
of touchdown dispersion which can be corrected
is shown for practical radar capability. In
addition curves are presented for the theoretical
upper limit of radar range capability, i. e.,
line of sight. Each curve approaches asymptot-
ically the upper limit of range correction for
the fUll lift coefficient applied throughout the
re-entry. Also indicated on the curves which
correspond to the rational estimate of radar
capability, is the limit to the separation of
the sites beyond which continuous coverage cannot
be provided. This is considered to be a prac-
tical upper limit to site separation. Like
any guidance tecbnique
l
there
1.8-1
I
j_
I
.
-
-
'
_
o
I
O
f
f
I
O
f
f
i
i
"
;
I
\
I
\
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
exist limitations to accuracy with which radar
can track a re-entry vehicle. The root mean
square Flant range accuracy ot present radars
such as FPs..J.6 is about 5 yards. The corres-
ponding elevation angle error is about one mil-
liradian. For the toll owing anal.ysis ot the
effects of these errors in altitude and range
determination of the re-entry vehicle, the one
milliradian is used but 50 yards slant range
error is employed to al.lo'W' tor inaccuracies in
data handling and transmission. These are con-
sidered 1 fT errors and, when applied to the fol-
lowing expressions,detine the associated errors
in Tehicle altitude and range.
2 2 2 [2 2 , ..... J2
(r
o
Coso) o-R + (ro R Sin Q + R
(J"s ... ij (a)
(ro + R Sin Q)
2 2 222 2
(R + ro Sin Q) O"":a + (ro R Cos Q)(TQ
(fh =, (b)
. r 0
2
+ 2r 0 R sin2Q +
where
ro - radius of earth
R .. radar slant range
Q - radar angle
Expressions (a) and (b) aboTe vere deriTed by
ditterentiation and recOllbin1n.g the tollowing
range and altitude expressions.
1.8-2
rnNlOlOlONTI A I
S
ro R Cos 0
ro + R Sin 0
h - r 2 + 2r R Sin 0 I - ro
o 0
TOUCHDOWN CONTlioL]
The computed results tor the 1 tS al ti tude and
range errors are presented tor various conditions
in Figures 1.8-6 and 1.8-1. Additional computa-
tions were .ade showing the influence of the
assumed error in radar slant range and elevation
angle. These results presented as Figures
1.8-8 and 1.8-9 show an insensitivity to slant
range error with a Tarying and sometimes con-
siderable sensitivity to elevation angle errors
In general. dual. radar sites tor tracldng appear
to otfer an accurate technique for providing
guidance information tor touchdown control. The
.ain shortcoJling is the infieJdbility ot tixed
sites.
Self-Contained Inertial Guidance
As previously mentioned two ael.:f'-contained
guidance techniques are considered, the so
cal.led "quasi" iner:t1al and the "conventional."-
inertial. S)"Btems. The term quasi is employed
since only the gimbal angles of the stable
plattorm are utilized tor information purposes
i.e., there is no integration ot accelerometer
outputs in this soheme. Both ot these systems_
as presented, generate the Tehicle position in
earth coordinates:latitude, lOngitude and &1-
ti tude. A brief description ot each follows.
For more detail see section 3.0, "Self Con-
tained Guid8Dce".

.-
I,
O
'
O
'
p
,
.
u
,
l
O
"
O
,
,
0
,
-
_
.
u
a
0
_
I
_
i
,
u
0
u
J
Z
u
_
i
,
i
,
I
1
,
1
,
1
Z
I
J
B
0
Z
!
c
o
.
)
n (
J
;.
t
!
, "'
I I
I
II
.,
:it
j l
: 1
--
OWN CONTROL
Quasi -Inertial System - The primary components
of this guidance system are star sight, stable
table, horizon scanner, radio altimeter and
computer. The stable platform is slaved to the
star sight to provide a space stabilized ref-
erence coordinate system fixed in inertial
space. From the horizon scanner, the direction
of the local vertical is obtained. This in-
formation in combination "With the platform
coordinate system provides the basis f'or deter-
mining the vehicle latitude. In addition the
vehicle rotation about the earth spin axis can
be defined from the information supplied by
the horizon scanner and the inertial platform.
This data along with the longitude at time
which might be at launch, and the pro-
duct of' ellapsed time and earth rotation rate,
provldesthe basis for longitude determination.
The computer, of course, performs the necessary
data trans f'ormati on The purpose of' the radio
altimeter is to supply the third coordinate
needed to define the vehicle's position.
One limitation to the so-called "quasi" iner-
tial system may arise at the lower al ti tudes
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
during re-entry if' the horizon scanner be-
comes inef'f'ective. 'rhis leads to the consid-
eration of' a slightly different concept.
Conventional Inertial System - This self'-con-
tained is essentially the
same as the previous system discussed except
for the addition of' accelerometers on the
stable table. Prior to entering the earth's
sensible atmosphere both "quasi" and "conven-
tional" inertial systems fUnction in the same
manner. Once the external forces from aero-
dynamic drag begin to have an effect on the
vehicle, the platform mounted accelerometers
measure this effect and through the computer
define the vehicle longitude and latitude.
Referring back to Figure 1.8-1, it should be
pointed out that the improved guidance ac-
curacy presented for the "conventional"
versus the "quasi" inertial system does not
reflect a superior technique, but merely an
estimate of the improvement to be derived
:from the better components which will be
aVailable for this more advanced system.
1.8-3
2 SP'flQFNIIAL

I
-
-
'4
o
_
! c
o
I
z
_
_
n
_
:
f
_
o
o
o
_
,
"
u
-
,
0
_
z
Z "
'4
_
o
m o
_
,
o
_
_
z
_
o
_
z
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
<
o
:
.
Q
_
_
_
0
o
._
z
i
@
:
o
_
_
-
_
o
_
,
z
_
_
c
0
_
"
g
_
r
.
0
i
i
2
o
x
_
;
z
<
i
i
:
i
_
r
'
_
_
_
z
.
0
z
_
o z
<
n c
-
_
_
_
_
o
_
_
z
o z
z 2
o z
0
_
_
_
_
,
_
r
-
r
-
z
o
n z
z
_
_
o
o
m
z c
z m
u
'
l
m
"
"
4
m m m '
,
0
m Z 0 i Z m m m Z
m 0 ,
,
0
rnNCIDQ'T' "
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 . ...

:0..
t,.ls, ,
\
TOUCHDOWN GUIDANCE SYSTEMS
1.8-4
ITEMS
CONSIDERED
COMPONENT
STATUS
ADDED
PILOT
DISPLAY
INDICATORS
MISSION
PROFILE
B GUIOANCE' ZONE
PRESENT MERCURY
ADVANTAGB
LOW COMPLEXITY
lOW POWU CONSUMPTION
DISADVANTAGES.
LARGE TOUCHDOWN
DISPERSION
LOW O.BITAl FLEXIIllITY
RADIO & RADAR
ADVANTAGB
ACCURAlE TOUCHDOWN
LOW POWER CO"'lSUMPTION
lOW COMPLEXITY
DISADVANU.GfS
GUIDANCE LINKS SUBJECT TO
ATMOSPHERIC AND MAN
MADE JAMMING
lOW ORBITAL flEXIBILITY
EXTENSIVE GROUND
INSTAllATION
AVA'LAllE AND FUllY DEVELOPED
WITH LONG OPERATIONAL
HISTORY
8
0
' .. '"00T
V UND"'HOOT
RANGE ERROl
CONFJDENJI AI
----
QUASI-INERTIAL
ADVANTAGES
ACCUIATE TOUCHDOWN
lOW SUSCEPTllllITY TO
JAMMING
ORBITAL HEXllllITY
INERTIAL
ADVANTAGES'
... CCU .... Yf TOUCHDOWN
INDEPENDENT Of fAIHH ... ND
MAN M ... DE DISTU.B ... NCES
O.BITAL flEXIBILITY
NO GROUND INSTALLATIONS I NO GROUND INSTAllATIONS
REOUIIED REQUIRED
DISADVANTAGES
COMPLEX
LARGE POWER CONSUMPTI
"'V"'ll"'BLE NOW OR WITHIN
NE .... FUTURE, LIMITED
OPU ... TlON"'L HISTO.Y
8
0
''''HOOT
V UND"'HOOT
.... NGE ER.OR
P.BENT
POSITION
TOUCH DOWN ON ANY Pl4NEl
DISADVANT ... GES:
COMPLEX
LA.GE PO WE. CONSUMPTION
"'VAILABLE NOW OR NEA. FUTURE
LIMITED OPER ... TlONAl HISTORY
8
0 ''''HOOT
--- UNDERSHOOT
RANGE ERROR
TOUCHDOWN
POSITION

FIGURE 1.8-1
l
0
m
L 0
a
.
i '
7
'
i
0 z
U
_
e
v
a
z
0
v
I
O
0
W
!
O
0
,
J
[
, I
, (
l
! !
! !
;11
,
.. -. B I ? T'QENTIAL
,
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
RADAR RANGE CAPABILITIES
TRACK
iilll!I:111111111 BEACON TRACK
REDUCTION DUE
TO GROUND CLUTTER
LINE OF SIGHT

FIGURE 1. 8-2
BEACON ----I
TRACKING
LIMIT
TARGET AREA ___________ l.OM
2
PEAK POWER ___________ 3 MEGAWATTS
PRF ___________________ 400 PPS
PULSE WIDTH ___________ 2 MICROSECONDS
WAVE LENGTH __________ .06 METERS
ANTENNA GAIN _________ 45 DECIBElS
NOISE FIGURE __________ 11 DECIBElS
LOSSES ________________ 7.8 DECIBElS
TRACKING DEGRADATION _ 6.0 DECIBElS
SKIN TRACK
LIMIT
150 NA. MI.
I .
\
', ,I , \ 1 \ II rnrl
. Ilil \1.\1 IIII!IIII a
l
I.J '" .ll'lll:II'
l .'.,d. !.' li .. L "---_c::---- ' -
CON FIDEI , 4l
1.8-5
o
C
O
I
C
_
_
0
O
0
!
C Z
0 m 0 t
_
m
i
-
0
=
=
_
m
o
o
I
_
_
I
N
I
_
'
I
/
f
_
i
l
_
I
0 o Z m
I I
o Z o
0 m 0 Z
'
3
m
o
_
-
-
I
z
=
=
q
m
o
_
:
Z o Z o
J m =
-
!
m m
m z 0 i z m m m Z 0 m 0 =
-
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
~
N CONTROL
DUAL RADAR GUIDANCE SYSTEM
POSITION OF INITIAL CONTROL
-------------------
POSITION
TRIM SIGNAL
COM P UTE R I-I-C-O-R-R-E - C - T l - O - N ~
,
UP-RANGE RADAR SITE
1.8-6
UIDLI.ITM'Io
POSITION OF FINAL CONTROL
- - - - - - - - - - - --I
TRIM FLAPi :
1-------0 .. 0-11 CON T R 0 L
POSITION
COMPUTER
UNIT
PREDICTED
POSITION
DATA TO
PICK-UP STATION
TERMINAL RADAR SITE
FIGURE 1.8-3
l -
I
_
"
U
3
O
,
O
,
I
-
e
v
I
x
u
a
O
m
L
U
L
U
e
w
i
-
0
L
Z
_
m U
J
z m
0
z I
,
M
I
U < e
_
k
-
Q Z O <
c
Z O U
_
e
v
,
I
.
M
o
,
.
L
U
e
n
,
<
O .
.
.
I
< L
U
Z O Z O I
-
-
,

-
r
v
I
,
=
z E
L
I !
L
U
r
,
,
,
/
.
.
.
+
"
/
/
.
+
.
:
J
/
/
/
/
!
r
Z
I
! I I I I
L
"
,
-
I
c
O
,
-
4
,
,
=
,
=
1
.
-
a
l
-
l
c
o
1
-
4
I
1
{
i l
FIGURE 1.8-4
CONFiDEi d'
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
RADAR LIMITATIONS ON THE ALLOWABLE DISPERSION ALONGTRACK
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _1
TRACKING IS CONTINUOUS
TRACKING IS NOT CONTINUOUS
(MAXIMUM NUMBER OF
RADAR SITES IS TWO)
RM - MAXIMUM RADAR RANGE
LIFT COEFFICIENT PRIOR TO RADAR CONTACT= 0.0
VI
...
co: .....
i 2000
: R
M
=150 NA. MI.
. I
,4 'g !
,. 0 '
, ::::I ;, I I TRACKING
Z::::I 1500 R
M
=400 NA. MI. BEACON " ,
: I TRACKINGJ ,/ :,'
, to Z
,---++-_-1
I
' ,,, 0
" ,# U
Z / ,
0 1000 ' , .
......
::Z
:::
1lC0

ZU
",::::I
0-0

Cc 0'. ,.([
0
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
1500
1000
500
o
o 200
VI
::::I
0
::::I
Z
RM =150 NA. MI. SKIN
i I I TRACKING
RM =400 NA. MI. BEACON
I
,- I I
TRACKING
\...-- RM=LlNE OF SIGHT
I I
I
400 600 800 1000 1200
ALLOWABLE ZERO LIFT DISPERSION S" (NAUTICAL MILES)
a ,if(L
l.8-7
F
-
'
b
I
CQ"PSE ,.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.8-8
RADAR LIMITATIONS ON THE ALLOWABLE DISPERSION ALONGTRACK
V'I
....
........
RE-ENTRY ANGLE = _3
- TRACKING IS CONTINUOUS
----- TRACKING IS NOT CONTINUOUS
RM - MAXIMUM RADAR RANGE
(MAXIMUM NUMBER OF
RADAR SITES IS TWO)
LIFT COEFFICIENT PRIOR TO RADAR CONTACT=O.O
,
)
R
M
=150 NA. MI. SKIN "
I TRACKING
0
:I
Z
<-
0::E
< .....
... <
.... ~
C) ....
z:l
< ~ 1000
... -
.......
:lZ
z(5
~ ...
R
M
=400 N. MI. BEACON i:
I TRACKING
....
~ -----l1000
~ Z
~ ~
alO
.... 0
u::t
Zu
<:I
.... 0
~ ....
00
Z
<
I
u I
"':
0
II
.....
u
5001 !.,..' 500
IN
10
II
.....
U
RM = LINE OF SIGHT
I I,l- I . - t I ~ - - - - - - 1
R
M
=150 NA. MI. SKIN TRACKING
I I
R
M
=400 NA. MI. BEACON
0' < ' 0' < 'I ITRACKINGI
o 200 400 600 800 0 200 400 600 800
AllOWABLE ZERO LIFT DISPERSION S" (NAUTICAL MILES)
-. 'QaIBfNlAL
CONTROL
l
FIGURE 1.8-5
o
0
o
0
0
o
(
1
3
3
-
1
)
,
s
_
'
_
1
0
_
1
_
1
3
3
O
N
V
_
I
O
N
n
O
U
O
S
W
U
o
_ !
c
o
t
.
o !
o
o
0 I
-
,
,
,
I
CONFiS PAL
TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
600
....
LLI
LLI
u..
~
b
~
I
0
400
I
I
LLI
RADAR GROUND RANGE ACCURACY
RADAR ACCURACY:
RMS SLANT RANGE - 50 YARDS
RMS ELEVATION ANGLE -lmr
8=45 8=30
7 > n ~ RADAR
M
TO EARTH CENTER
ro= 3440 NAUTICAL MILES
-"- h = 400,000 FT"
;, -- "I
~
200
1 L <:?t
8=0
z
:::::>
o
I
C>
V)
~
I
FIGURE 1.8-6
OKK ____________ ~ ____________ ~ ____________ ~ ____________ ~
o 100 200 300 400
SLANT RANGE, R, (NAUTICAL MILES)
....- CONfiDe", iRE
1.8-9
o
o
--
(7 SENTIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
'"
LoU
LoU
CI::
(!)
LoU
C

LoU
.....
(!)
Z

z
0
I-

>
LoU
.....
LoU
1.8-10
RADAR ALTITUDE ACCURACY
90 I I
RADAR ACCURACY:
RMS SLANT RANGE - 50 YARDS
RMS ELEVATION ANGL - Imr
60
30
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Uh=300 FT.
=::,.> RADAR
Uh=SOOFT.
\7
TO EARTH CENTER
ro = 3440 NAUTICAL MILES
... ...
"' ... , ""... uh=lS00 FT.
, ...... 1
" .......
... ...
....... ... ...
.... .......... ............... h = 400,000 FT.
....- .......
---
... - -1----
h = 300,000 FT.
a' , I I I ,
o 100 200 300 400
SLANT RANGE, R, (NAUTICAL MILES)
FIGURE 1.8-7

l-
I
u
u
0
m
I
_
1
u
J
0
_
"
u
u
Z
_
n
D
I
,
M
U
J
z
m
0
z M
J
A
M
J
_
\
o
O
o
i
0
<
I
_
_
_
.
,
,
M
J
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
1
]
]
:
1
)
s
.
0
'
_
l
O
_
l
a
]
_
I
O
N
V
_
I
(
]
N
n
O
_
s
w
_
o
O
o
=
_
_
_
o
z
,
,
o
o
o
_
.
.
_
,
'
)
O
_
"
=
=
_
_
=
z
_
'
'
_
.
-
-
I
I
I
I
-
_
(
N
(
_
7
_
u
_
"
-
'
t
o
-
_
:
Z
m
,
o
Z
,
v
I
.
-
J
:
a
_
_
<
I
:
=
=
_
n
_
-
_
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(
1
:
]
]
:
1
)
s
.
0
'
_
1
0
_
!
_
!
_
]
]
O
N
V
_
I
(
]
N
n
o
a
o
s
w
a
;
:
t
I
(
:
O o
O
I
c
O
p
:
;
1
"
4
{
I
II
I' \
: I
, i
CONFIDEN liAS
I TOUCHDOWN
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
800
....
w
w
u..
70
III
b

c.::
0
60
c.::
c.::
w
w
<!)
50
z
<a::
c.::
0
Z
40
::>
0
c.::
<!)
VI
30
:E
c.::
FIG URE 1. 8-8
RADAR GROUND RANGE ACCURACY
EFFECT OF
SLANT RANGE ERROR
ae=lmr
\
\....e=80
R=130 NA.MILES

R=130 NA.MILES

V'

-------
RADAR-
I--j
SKIN
I
TRACK
I
:
I
I
7
I
I
:
....
w
w
u..
III
b
EFFECT OF
ELEVATION ANGLE ERROR
aR=50YARDS

1 1/
R=130 NA.MILES
c.::
2000 r
l

c.::
w
w
<!)
z
<a::
c.::
o
Z 1000 I I
::> r"
o
c.::
<!)
VI
:E
c.::
I e=30
R=130 NA.MILES

o 100 200 300 400 o 2 3 4
RMS SLANT RANGE ERROR, aR (FEET) RMS ELEVATION ANGLE ERROR, ae,(mr)
me '''.LA. I
1. 8-11
C
o
I
I
,
-
-
I
i
i
O
O
I
COttPI!EI QUal
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.
,.
# .......

TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1.8-12

w
w
u..
..r:.
1500
o 1000
Cii:
o
Cii:
Cii:
w
w
C
;:)

500
<t
VI

Cii:
o
RADAR ALTITUDE ACCURACY
EFFECT OF
SLANT RANGE ERROR
O'o=lmr
0=30
R=130 NA.MILES
8=80
R=130 NA.MILES
I

EFFECT OF
ELEVATION ANGLE ERROR
0' R=50 YARDS
2500 ,
2000 1 I
u..
...c:
o
,
o 1500 1 J
Cii:
Cii:
w
w
C
;:)10001 "

......
<t
VI
500 I ..< I
Cii:
8=30
R=130 NA.MILES

o 100 200 300 400 o 2 3 4
RMS SLANT RANGE ERROR, O'R ,(FEET) RMS ELEVATION ANGLE ERROR, 0'8, (m r)
FIGURE 1.8-9
-
I
l -
I
U
0
m
0
_
"
Z
m Z m 0 Z I
,
L
I
r
_
)
g 5
o
O
_
_
_
,
,
0
0
I
)
_
.
-
_
_
_
_
-
4
_
0
_
_
0
_
.
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
!
_
O
O
O
5
0
1
_
[
-
_
_
_
O
,
-
c
l
_
_
,
-
_
o
0
_
_
_
o
_
_
o
r
4
o
_
q
_
o
_
_
.
o
_
_
o
_
_
,
_
o
_
_
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
g
_
_
o
0
d
,
'
_
O
-
g
_
,
S
o
_
_
_
_
_
"
_
o 0
!
0
"
,

I
Ii I
!i
i
r
IlL
COt I_ell! U.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.9 THERMAL AND JRAL CONSIDERATIONS
Conversion of a Mercury vehicle to use
for test of touchdown location control is accomp-
lished by addition of movable flaps located at
the periphery of the beat sink. of
t.he flaps achieves Tuoderate lift co-effiC'ients
to extend the range t,,,,yond the normal ballistic
trajectory. The rr18 in st.ructural effectE: com-
pa.red. to the basic Mercury are increased
afterbody temperature, an increase in the
front face heat input and. of course .. t.he
addition of the lift.ing flaps.
TIe-Entry Design Conditions
The orbit and initlal of the touchdown
control vehicle are essentially the same as for
the Mercury caps\..ue. Use of minimum retrograde
of 333 feet per second (two of three retro-
rocket.s firing) applied aft an:i 40 degrees below
the flight path at the 105 nautical mile perigee
producr;,; 3. !j.JO yOGO foot re-entry an&le ( 0' 0)
of _.>9. Use of all three of the retro=
rockets gives a re-entry angle of -1.44
0
at
400,000 feet. For conservatism it is assumed
that under most unfavorable conditions the
re-entry angle may be as steep as -3
0
, The
effects of application of lift on the total
re-entry heat load for the abOVe range of re-
entry are shown in Fi.gure 1. 9-1.
Figure 1.9-2 presents load factors and heat
inputs as a function of lift co-efficient for
re-entries USing minimUDl and nominal retrogra.de.
The effect of lift coefficient on time
_ 'ONE'?P I"
of load factor and heating for
minimum retrograde re .. entries are shown in
Figure 1.9-3.
From these studies it is _uncluded that the most
shallow angle and lift (.0-
efficient produce the total frontal face
heat load while steepest re-entry
and lea.st lift produce thE' highest maximum load
factor and heating rate.
Maximum design temperatures on the
shingles are produced by re-entry at an initial
angle of -3
0
maintaining zero lift down to
180,000 feet, at which point the chin flaps are
deflected to produce a waximum angle of attack.
Figure 1.9-4 shows allowable angle of attack
for a temperature of 1800
0
F the ILaXimum
allowable temperature for the shingles
used on the present t.lercury vehicle and for a
of 2200
0
F) an approximate maxi-
mum value for niobium alloy shingles. Fran this
figure the allCYwable angle of attack can be
read as -13.6
0
for L-605 shingles and -17
0
for
niobiulI! alloy shingles> or, in te:nr:s of lift
coefficient., and .34 respectivel y as shown
in 1.6-6. }Prom Aectlon.'J 1..6 and 1..7 it
appears that a lift 01' .j is suf'-
ficient to reduce the 3 t5 probable touchdown
error to less than ten nautical ILi1es. There-
fore, a maximum a.ttack angle of -13.6
0
1s
selected to provide adequate correction vhi1e
permitting the present Mercury shingles to be
without change.
1.9-1
_
o
!
f
O
_
o
_
o
g
g
_
a
g
@
0
o
I
-
'
_
0
o
@
P
_
N
o
_
-
_
_
_
o
.
.
_
-
_
_
@
_
_
0
i
-
-
'
_
I
b
-
f
f
I
_
I
=
_
i
t
0
0
0
_
'
_
o
_
0
_
_
_
0
_
_
'
_
_
0
_
0
0
I
_
_
m
_
o_
o
@
0
0
_
e
_
_
e
@
o
g
I
.
a
.
_
.
t
_
_
.
_
_
.
_
0
N
_
_
0
_
_
,
1
)
_
-
_
_
:
_
_
.
_
,
g
o
_
_
I
:
:
r
_
o
_
_
.
_
_
"
o
_
.
'
_
o
o
_
f
_
O
_
r
r
l
Z O m Z m r
l
'
l
.
_
.
_
0
i
r
t
r
l
-
o
O
-
4
p
_
m
m
_
o
0
m
P
O
-
-
,
0
,
,
0
,
0
,
0
_
0
I
"
i iSlldlGL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
A
1.9-2
Shield Design
Heat shield requirements were studied for bot.h
a beryllium heat sink and an ablati ve
silane flbergl.ass shield. Figure shows
the total. beryllium heat, sink thickness re'lulred
at the stagnation point and Figure 1.9=6 shows
the same data for the ablative and insula.tion
portions of an ablative shield. The beryllium
sink thickness is the total thickness required
for both structural and heat absorption but the
ablative shield requires an additional 146
pounds of structural ma.terial. and edging 0
For both the beryllium and the ablative heat
shields fo the average thicknesses are about
higher than, that sho-wn at the stagnation point 0
Using the critical design condition of C
L
,3;
the beryllium heat sLnk has an average thick=
ness of of 1,13 inches or 1.24 inches for
a total. weight of 382 pounds. For the same con=
dition the ablation shield thermal protection
thickness; required at the stagnation point
i
is
0505 inches. This corresponds to an average
thickness of ,56 inches
J
which gives a. weight
of 188 lbs. for ablation plus insulation materi=
al. To this must be added 146 pounds of struc-
tural material for a total ablation shield weight
of 334 pounds. Thus the ablation shield is
Significantly lighter than the beryllium sink.
Inasmuch as the ablation material required is
only .04 inches less than that provided for the
present Mercury capsule, it is concluded that
the 347 pound Mercury shield be used without
change 0 For the Mercury mission this shield,
.. capable of absorbing about 16,000 BTU/fi.
2
, has
about a margin the design average heat
load of 11,160 BTU/fi. , while in this application,
\l,,;Unr'UL'C'S
I T()iJCHDOWNCONTROL I
with a design heat input, of near
the margin is 7%, This margin i5 felt t.o
be adequate inasmuch the design condition is
extremely unlikely iI combining.. Mit the
most shallow re=entry angl'9.., givi.n.g the longest
b'3.l1ist1c trajectory j wi t.h the ma.nmum lift whi,ch
further stretches the flight path.
Touchdown Control Flap ,DeSign Summary
Loads = Maximum design load conell tionl3 occur at
the maximum dynamic pressure which is shown in
Figure L9=7.
It is assUllled the capsule has an angle of attack
equal to zero following a re=entry at an angle of
three degrees ('( 0 = =3
0
) and the lifting flaps
are suddenly opened at feet. Thi8 con=
servative approach dictates a dynamic pressure of
420 lb. per square ft 0 This dynamic pressure de=
velops the loads shown in Figure 1.9-8 of 6.8 psi
ultimate on the surface with an actuator load of
3210 lbs. ultimate. At this altitude the wind
shear and gusts effects sre negligible.
Temperatures = The extended flaps encounter essen=
tially the same heat input and heating rates per
unit area as the re-entry heat shield.
DeSign - The all phenyl=silane fiberglass flap
design shown in Figure 1.9=9 was chosen after
design studies showed it to be lighter, simpler
and more reliable than alternates such as
ablative shields supported by metallic structureo
l
_
.
0
'
,
_
,
I
.
I
1
0
'
,
O
,
,
,
0
,
-
-
Q
_
L
U
0
m
=
-
=
E
u
,
.
i
I
J
L
I
=
D
-
O
=
"
I
,
M
Z =
m
=
0
"
-
-
l
u
u
=
I
,
M
z i 0 z L
M
C
O
I
I
_
z
o o
o
=
:
)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
-
-
0
"
l
_
/
A
l
g
-
l
n
d
N
I
I
V
_
H
I
1
1
(
{
I
I
('01
t-
I
..
......

t-
ea
I
{
t-

Q.
Z
-
t-
e:(
w
:I:
" I
'I
I
Ii I
I [
Figure 1.9-1
ll.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TOTAL STAGNATION POINT HEAT INPUT
RE-ENTRY FROM EQUATORIAL ORBIT - EAST HEADING
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, "0=-1, VO= 24,096 FT./SEC.
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, "0=-3, VO= 24,081 FT./SEC.
W/A=69,
18,000
-
h 0= 376, 444 FT.
- r-
LIFT IN ITIA TlON
ALTITUDE- FT.
300,000 & UP
16,000 f-I --
LID
CL
I
.0 0
I
1
1
1

C
L
-. ! 1 ,
I
,-
,
,
.145 .2
.22 .3
14,000 If------+-----+--
12,000 f-I ---t----
.,'
.'
.'
- t- I .'
, ,
.'
1 .'
I.'
'I
l
' 1
.' 1
.' I 1
.' 1
.. ; ... , ... '
200,000
,': 300,000 & UP
10,000 f-I ---+--
.. I I
. I _I / / 200,000
-, .... '
._,_1.
8,000 1-------+----
6,000 I I I
-.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4
LIFT / DRAG
'PNFIRfNIl*
1.9-3
c
.
C
)
I
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
T
O
T
A
L
H
E
A
T
,
Q
-
1
0
0
0
B
T
U
/
F
T
.
2
O
'
,
O
J
m
.
G
O
I
r
I
T
i
I
M
A
X
I
M
U
M
L
O
N
G
I
T
U
D
I
N
A
L
L
O
A
D
F
A
C
T
O
R
D
U
R
I
N
G
R
E
-
E
N
T
R
Y
,
N
z
=
G
'
s
o
1
.
o
4
:
,
.
@
,
o
_
Z
o
o
i
o
*
=
4
(
'
_
F
=
_
0 5 Z
0 I
-
-
"
-
r
r
r
l
.
-
I
m -
.
_
.
-
I
m W f
f
l
m
Z
0 i Z
m
m E Z 0 m 0 ,
-
I
)
,
,
_
I
\.u"" a
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.9-4
('oj
I-
...
"-
~
I-
co
o
o
o
o
I-
<
w
:I:
.....
<
I-
o
I-
w
(!)
<
0<:
w
>
<
LONGITUDINAL LOAD FACTOR AND TOTAL HEAT
RETROGRADE VELOCITY ADDED AT 105 NA. MI. PERIGEE
IN A DIRECTION AFT AND 40 BELOW FLIGHT PATH
NOMINAL RETROGRADE VELOCITY, L1 V = 500 fT. /SEC. (YO=-1.44 )(VO=24057 FT /SEC.)
MINIMUM RETROGRADE VELOCITY L1v = 333 fT./SEC. {YO= -.99){VO=24181 fT/SEC.)
LIFT IS INITIATED AT PERIGEE
8 -----
22 ,- 6
0<:
o
l-
v
18 J- < VI 4
"'c,
011
<
W/A=75
I
"z, L1V = 500 FT.jSEC.
----t-t- -
"z, L1V = 333 FT./SEC.
14
o ...
..... z
~ >-- I Q, L1 V = 333 FT. / SEC.
Z ~ 2 .
oZ
: : : > ~
I-w
(;0<:
Z(!)
OZ
10
~ ~ 0t=- I ~ / I
~
><
<
~
6---
o
Q, L1 V = 500 fT.jSEC.
.1 .2 .3
LIfT COEFFICIENT, CL
""vt .. rtul:t .. n,,L
.4
Figure 1. 9-2
I
l
O
,
O
,
,
,
O
n
,
,
O n
_
L
u
a
O Z I n
_
L
i
d
I
d
d
m Z u
J
O
,
u
'
l
O
"
i,.m
.
n
,
,
c
u
:
E
u
J
I
-
.
G
,
.
L
L
I
ir
a
.
!
0
0
0
"
_
)
3
S
g
l
:
:
I
/
l
'
1
1
_
]
-
b
'
3
1
V
_
!
9
N
I
L
V
3
H
3
0
V
_
I
3
A
V
5
,
9
-
z
u
'
_
l
O
.
l
.
2
)
V
d
(
]
V
O
l
1
V
N
I
G
n
I
I
g
N
O
1
0
0
o o
c
.
o !
c
_
r
a
,
.
4
_
,,-
t
, 1
I
1
(
r
r
1
I
I
II
1
: 1
"
"
P
\
CONAL a
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
8
VI
-
(!)
U
I W
N
'"
c 6 N
60
~ ....
a: u..
0 ........
I-
::::>
u
....
< a:l
u.. I
C
0"
~
< 4
~ 40
0
<
.....
.....
er::
<
C)
Z
Z
C ....
::::>
<
I-
2 ~ 20
(!)
w
Z
(!)
0
< .....
er::
w
>
<
0 0
700
Figure 1.9-3
LONGITUDINAL LOAD FACTOR
AND AVERAGE HEATING RATE
DESIGN MINIMUM RETROGRADE VELOCITY = 333 FT /SEC
IN A DIRECTION AFT AND 40 BELOW FLIGHT PATH
LIFT IS INITIATED AT PERIGEE
I
W/A=75
LIFT COEFFICIENT, CL = 0 ---
I
900
q
n
z
,,,.,.--- .... ,
,
\
\
\
CL =.4 -------
q
I 1 I ,\ 1 ,-;-t---- 1\
\."",,,,..---'" I
'\ , ~ , ~ - - - - - - - - -
"
1100 1300
"
"
"
,;'
1500
TIME FROM RETROGRADE - SECONDS
CU, IULI.SiAL
\
\
\
\
\
n
z
' ~
\
,
,
"
1700 1900
1. 9-5
p
,,a
.
e
_ i
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
SWiQ Fi DENT I Afj
EFFECT OF ANGLE OF ATTACK
ON AFTERBODY TEMPERATURE
Vo = 24,081 FPS
h 0 = 376,444 FT.
W ICDA = 51
C L = 0
SID = 0.95
300. = 0.9

D
t
250 1 I ..
....
LL.
o
o
200 11-------+-------+------..'
o 150 1--1
w
c
::::> 1001
....
....
....

5 0 1--1 -11'----------1------+
S
SID =0.95
EQUILIBRIUM TEMPERATURE = 2200F
I I I
EQUILIBRIUM TEMPERATURE = 1800 F

o 5 10 15 20 25 30
VelOCITY - 1000 FPS
1.9-6
Figure 1. 9-4
I
l
O
,
O
,
_
-
e
w
u
u
O
m
u
J
u
J
N
I
-
-
O
" L
U
Z ,
w
"
L
U
L
U
z O z u
J
Z 0
_
L
_
-
_
-
_
,
_
o
o
o
o
_
n
Z
:
:
:
)
0
O
0
0
_
-
_
o
o
o
o
_
o
,
-
-
-
-
J
O
O
0
0
-
I
1
_
_
i
i
l
i
.
-
1
u
_
0
2
"
7
"
5
_
_
_
o
o
u
_
u
l
Z
Z
_
0
c
_
=
,
,
,
.
y
.
I
.
L
I
I
_
u
J
u
u
i
I i
_
e
_
o
c
_
I
'
-
L
L
,
-
-
I
I
.
.
I
!
I
I
S
:
I
H
D
N
I
-
S
S
3
N
N
D
I
H
.
I
.
N
N
I
S
I
V
]
H
!
I
u
a
i
e
v
I
C
_
a
[
I
c
_
:i
r
1
I
(
(
I
[
I
I
Ii "[
11"1
t
I
: 1
1
1

TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Figure 1.9-5
BERYLLIUM HEAT SINK THICKNESS
REQUIRED AT STAGNATION POINT
RE-ENTRY FROM EQUATORIAL TYPE ORBIT - EAST HEADING
---IN ITiAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, YO =-1 h
O
=376,444 FT., V 0=24,096 FT I SEC
--INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, YO=-3 h
O
=376,444 FT., VO=24,081 FT/SEC
VI
w
:I:
u
Z
I
VI
VI
W
Z
::.::
u
-
:I:

::.::
Z
VI

w
:I:
1.6
1.4 f-
1.2
1.0
.8
.6
.4
-.4
I
C
L
LID
0 0
.2 .138
.3 .222
I
I
I
I
-.3 -.2
i
,
I

_,_I
._, I
I
-
1
i
T" ".. i

I
I
I
,/1
I
I
,
i"
,1'
,
i .
.i
.'
-'
LI FT INITIATION
TITU DE-FT.
0,000 & UP
I :
I ". I I 20
:.' I
0,000
0,000 & UP . ..t.... i I I ....... 30
,.-" , I I ,_1-':'
.
i i: /
V
20

- I "
I i
0,000
! :
: I
I :
i
,
i
-.1 0 .1 .2 .3 .4
LIFT IDRAG
1.9-7
i
.
.
i
o
I
c
o
-
n
-
-
I
i
(
_
O
O
A
B
L
A
T
I
V
E
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
A
N
D
I
N
S
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
C C
u
I
'nr,'TIA.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.9-8
FIBERGLASS PHENYL-SILANE HEAT SHIELD
THICKNESS AT STAGNATION POINT
RE-ENTRY FROM EQUATORIAL TYPE ORBIT - EAST HEADING
-'-'-'-INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, YO=-l, h
O
= 376,444 FT., Vo = 24,096 FT/SEC.
---INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, 'YO =_3, h
O
= 376,444 FT., Vo = 24,081 FT/SEC.
V)
w
::I:
U
Z
z
o

<t
.....
::::>
V)
Z
C
z

.....
<t
a::
w

:IE
w
>

......
c:o

W/A = 69
.71 1 I - r I - i-I'
2
I ' I II
. , .138 I -l,.,
.3 I : LIFT INITIATION
.6 =--+-- I -- 1_ -1 ALTITUDE-FT .

'. ", ABLATION MATERIAL :" 300000 & UP
AND INSULATION I ' I : ,"- I'
-- _ ,.. .2 ", BACKUP STRUCTURE : ,/
I I I k
;, HONEYCOMB I 1.:/
.5 II 1-STRUCTURE I "1'r---,,- 300,000 & UP
I I ' I' I
I ,/ I 1"-' 200,000
, .... '
, -' I
I
I
.4 I .... , ... , ... - "1/
I C'
V IL =.3
I
I
I
I
I
---'-
.3
-.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0 .1 .2 .3
LIFT /DRAG
CPNE'DutJIW
.4
N CONTROL
Figure 1. 9-6
I
1
I
l -
O
,
o
_
,
o
I
-
=
I
X
O m
,
.
u
J
o Z
! u
J
u
J
Z
i
O
Z L
U
o
_
O
_
e
_
L
U
_
m
u
J
Q
.
u
J
u
"
l
_
_
1

L
L
U
'
I
E
L
m
O
.
:
v _
,
P
<
I
:
l
-
l
,
-
L
L
O
o
I
I
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i
_
"
l
:
l
/
'
_
l
-
b
-
3
_
l
n
s
s
3
a
d
_
)
I
W
V
N
A
0
O O u
'
_
0 0 0 0
o
o
0 0 0
0
z 0 t
)
E
L
m I
L
M
L
M
M
.
0 ,
v
M
.
I
O
_ D
-
!
I
I
(

I
I
(
(
I
I
I
i I

'-ViC
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
N
....
u..
"-
al
.....
I
0'
I
U,I
a::
::>
V)
V)
U,I
a::
0..
U
-
:E

z
>-
c
1. 9-7
DYNAMIC PRESSURE FOR VARIOUS ANGLES
OF ATTACK DURING RE-ENTRY
500. YO=-3
400 I I \J
Yo = _1
300 I I I' A 4 = 0
200 I I / l\. \
ANGLE OF ATTACK, 4 = 0
4 = 15
I
4 = 8.5
0
100 I I '
, " /
I
0' ""....... I I I I
o 100 200 300 400 500
TIME FROM 376,444 FEET - SECONDS
_ CQNFlpENTlAL
1.9-9
I
0
I
-
I
I
C
O
$
0
_
-
_
'
0
-
e
Z
m
u
l
m
C
Q Z
m
m m
0
m Q m
m
I
,
-
-
I
,
O
m "
I
-
r
a
u
l
m "
1
"
m Z Z I
'
M
n m Q
v
Z
m m
0
Z
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
....... ,"', .. ' ... -
CRITICAL LOADS FOR LIFTING FLAP

!\ (,"--

\
[TOUCHDOWN CONTROL I
------ RELATIVE WIND
a=O
FLAP CONSTRUCTED OF SAME MATERIAL AS HEAT SHIELD (PHENYL SILANE FIBERGLASS).
FOR HAP DESIGN SEE FIGURE 1.9-9
19-10
FIGURE
1
I
o L
L
0
0 0
,
,
J
w
Z
C
_ O
_
I
O
_
,
,
-
I
H p
_
I
1
{
!I
FIGURE 1.9-9
$ a 'PoL
N CONTROL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
NOTES:
DESIGN OF TOUCHDOWN CONTROL CHIN FLAP
25.00
8.75
K
STRUCTURAL SUPPORT
.20 REQUIRED FOR INSULATION 4\1.00 l r
TO KEEP SUBSTRUCTURE BELOW
500
0
F. _ ~
.36 REQUIRED FOR ABLATION T .50
.06 REQUIRED TO TRANSFER
AIRLOAD TO SUBSTRUCTURE
SECTION A - A
1. FLAPS LAID UP FROM ABLATIVE MATERIAL SAME AS RE-ENTRY HEAT SHIELD.
(PHENYL SILANE-FIBERGLASS)
2. LUGS LAID UP FROM PHENYL SILANE-FIBERGLASS
3. STRUCTURAL DESIGN BASED ON FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF 55,000 PSI @ 500
0
F.
6ft !FIR? '" e ,
19-11
o
a
O
'
O
"
0
_
u
J
u
_
0
.
,
Z
u
z
z
0
Z
u
J
0
J
J
J
.... .---.-. -
MANEUVERING IN ORBITI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
MANEUVER IN ORBIT
2.0 INTRODUCTION: Many of the future missions in space will require the vehicle
to maneuver in orbit. Assembling space station, servicing existing satel-
lite vehicles, and returning to prescribed touchdown points all involve this
capability. A modest modification of the Project Mercury vehicle to incor-
porate thrust chambers, propellant, and tankage in the adapter makes this
craft sui table for exploring and developing maneuvering techniques. It is
the objective of this study to determine how these changes may be accomplished
and to outline applicable techniques for their utilization.
2.1 BASIC CONCEPT
The design approach to providing the Mercury
capsule with maneuvering-in-orbit capability
is to install a relatively simple
rocket system. With small expenditure of fuel,
this system allows moderate changes in the
basic orbit and permits the accomplishment
of a rendezvous maneuver with another vehicle
in an arbitrarily displaced, but relatively
close, orbit.
One particular application is to utilize the
maneuver fuel to raise the basic orbit alti-
tuc1e. Reducing the basic Atlas liD" injection
altitude from 105 to 90 nautical miles in-
creases the weight it can carry into orbit
by several hundred pounds. This is sufficient
to provide maneuvering thrust motors and fuel
to transfer the basic capsule to a 150 nautical
mile orbit and still have fuel for additional
maneuvering.
In order to avoid extensive redevelopment of
the abort, re-entry, and recovery systems, the
weight of the capsule is kept essentially the
same as the basic Mercury.. This is accomplished
by storing the maneuver fuel and two of the four
maneuver rocket chambers in the adapter which
normally is carried into orbit but is jettisoned
prior to abort or retrograde.
Two alternate guidance and control systems are
included in the study: a modified basic Mer-
cury system and an inertial system. The latter
allows more precise orbit changes but is not
necessary for early experiments.
iML
2.1-1
I
x
)
b
|
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
I -cow,nfRSP IS
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
2.2-1
Capability to maneuver in orbit can be added to
the existing Mercury vehicle without any signif-
icant structural changes to the basic capsule.
The configuration shown in Figures 2.2-1 and
2.2-2 illustrates how the adapter is revised to
house two thrust chambers and the :fuel for man-
euvering. The Mercury posigrade rockets are
removed since the liquid chambers can
accomplish the same function in conjunction with
the maneuvering function. The adapter is twelve
inches longer than the Mercury adapter and is
made in two parts: a fixed section bolted to
the booster, and an equipment section which
remains attached to the capsule in orbit. Clamp
rings similar to the one on the present Mercury
are used to hold these sections together.
The additional hydrogen peroxide required
for stabilization during maneuveriIll is combined
with the maneuvering fuel located in the adapter
torus tank (See Figure 2.2-2, Section A-A).
During maneuvers the capsule stabilization sys-
tem automatically' draws its fuel from this
adapter torus tank. In this way the existing
Mercury stabilization fuel is always available
for normal orbiting and re-entry and cannot be
inadvertently exhausted while maneuvering. The
helium tank shown is used to pressurize both the
JP4 and tanks in the adapter.
As show in Figure 2.2-1, two addi tionaJ. liquid
fuel thrust chambers are instaJ.led in the tor-
ward. conicaJ_ section of the capsule. are
proTided. for maneuvering in the final of
rendezvous when rapid reversals in may be
required and time does not permit a 180
0
re-
orientatinn of the vehicle to use the ad"lpter
thrusters.
Figure 2.2-3 illustrates the additional i-lquip-
ment needed to provid.e for an inertial. guid-
ance system. This represents a more ref:tned
Version of the maneuver-in-orbit vehicle Which
might be utilized for more precise mancU\rera.
A description of the equipment is given in
Section 3 of this report. In order to px-ovide
more room for the inertial. guidance eqUipment,
the three 3000 watt-hour batteries in basic
Mercury are relocated in the adapter together
with a fourth battery of the same size
Figure 2.2-2). This extra battery provides a
margin of power which is more than enough to
compensate for the increase in reqUirements due
to the added guidance equipment.
Although not absolutely necessary I the batter-
ies also are moved to the adapter and. one added
in the Version without inertial guidance.
This compensates for the increase in retrograde
and re -entry weight due to adding the two
thrust chambers to the capsule and provides
increased redundancy in the electrical system.
epcm TT, e I

I
1
O
,
O
,
O
,
O
,
w
0
m
L
M
,
I
1
,
1
,
1
0
a
.
I
J
J
i M
,
I
M
,
I
z i 0 Z I
,
U
i
f
_
o
+
_
o 0
-
o
o
'
d
o
_
o
'
_
_
o
%
+
.
_
_
_
o
t
D
r
/
l
_
0
t
D
.
r
'
t
O
O
.
_
O
o
4
_
r
l
.
r
-
I
_
-
I
+
_
4
_
o
.
_
_
o
t
o
o
_
.
_
_
o
_
0
o
.
_
-
_
_
-
0
t
_
)
O
_
l
o
.
_
_
t
D
;
!
;
r
-
I
I
=
l
.
H
0
.
M
.
r
'
t
.
a
i

o
_
0
r
-
I
e
+
_
e
a
o
o
_
o
_
)
g
o
r
_
.
n
l
c
u
,
.
.
_
I
-
t
'
_
o
_
_
o
r
'
l
_
_
:
t
_
[
_
.
1
1
1
0
)
I
)
f
f
l
o
e
.
-
t
.
t
-
_
-
O
o
_
.
_
#
.
_
.
-
_
1
-
O
_
1
_
.
,
-
i
_
,
_
_
_
O
-
_
_
b
2
t
D
I
0
_
.
_
,
_
o
l
_
l
_
.
r
'
t
"
0
o
+
_
r
-
l
+
_
,
-
.
-
-
I
.
,
-
I
(
D
4
.
_
}
O
-
r
'
l
:
_
I
_
_
_
I
I
_
I
I
_
_
:
_
.
M
_
I
_
o
.
,
-
4
I
I
)
I
D
r
l
_
'
0
O
H
r
'
l
-
I
_
o
r
4
_
,
-
I
I
_
,
-
i
0
(
P
+
_
0
I
I
D
O
I
D
.
H
e
_
t
l
)
c
A
$ _:'liAl
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 MANEUVERING IN ORBIT I
Weight and Balance
Tables 202-1 and 202-2 and Figure 202-5 compare
the weight and balance data for the modified
capsule with that of the basic Mercury vehicleo
A definition of the terms used in the mission
breakdown (Table 2.2-2) is given below for
clarificationo These definitions apply to
corresponding data for other missions&
Ao Gross Launch Weight - The total weight
which is added to the booster at launch and is
chargeable to the satellitic vehicle. This
includes such items as the escape tower,
booster to vehicle adapters, and attachments o
Bo Gross Weight in Orbit - The total weight
chargeable to the satellite, which is propelled
to the orbit injection point, but measured prior
to separation of the final booster stageo This
is equal to the gross launch weight minus items
jettisoned during launch.
Co Injection Weight - The weight of all items
retained with the satellitic vehicle after
separation of the final booster stage. Items
which are jettisoned with the booster such as
the portion of the adapter fixed to booster
and the clamp-ring are not includedo
Do Weight in Orbit - Weight of satellitic
vehicle after transfer into the orbito
Eo Retrograde Weight = Weight of satellitic
vehicle at ignition of retrograde rocketso
F. Re-Ent;r Weight - Weight of satellitic
vehicle at beginning of re-entry into the
atmosphere.
Go End of the Re-Entry Weight - Weight of satel=
litic vehicle at deployment of the drogue chuteo
Ho Main Chute Design Weight - Weight of satel=
litic vehicle at deployment of main chuteo
I. Impact Weight = Weight at impact with Eartho
Jo Flotation Weight - Weight of satellitic
vehicle after jettisoning expendable items and
deploying recovery aidso
g?t'5!Plit 111
_0 ...'c-.
I
L
_
I L
'
_
I
m
o
B
0
o
/
/
i
/
I I i
\
W P 0
a
o "
0
i
l
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

[MANEUVERING IN ORBIT[
INTERIOR ARRANGEMENT
2.2-3
WITH MODIFIED MERCURY GUIDANCE
SIDE VIEW
11 ,HEliUM
__ !J.=-= 3, ....
I
, I
'--1
I.
'1.'.J.i7:
y,,--
Ii ,-(4 /A=r=r-r\,
, ! ' \
, L_._'-. i ',' i --': \
___ ", t!/ '1 I _ I L __ -I ,,_ -- - I
I! ' I
, ' I
",: _ '-=/)rJ \' ..... t-
" fpfI,J I .
II, 1- I
1-((1 II; l
,.\ - \ "I \
\; I' " I
',1", "c' .. ,,,,' i /,/' "
.1 -- ,-"L,
'. ;/ / .\;.<...-' .... ... -..-. -
__ c--=' \"- - ,-:f.
---=:. - , \ >- --
/ A \- -- -
L \
I
H,O, '-JP4
- AFT MANEUVERING THRUST CHAMBERS
r,'TtAI
BLOW-OFF CAP
Ii
,
I
"--, ----
, un:.
=
I
.J
FORWARD MANEUVERING THRUST CHAMBERS
o 20 40
\lIldlllll I I
SCALE IN INCHES
Figure 2.2-1
1
I
I
O
,
O
,
.
-
-
u
'
)
O
,
O
,
I
.
.
-
_
,
_
,
,
.
u
0
w
L
U
L
U
m
,
i
-
-
0
a
.
Z
_
n
,
_
'
-
-
Z 0 Z
_
/
/
/
< _
_
J
_
_
_
J

Z
Z
Z
m
i
m
.
.
=
J
Z Z
o
_
m
|
!
_
4
,
,
r
z z
I
o
r
=
_
I
(
i (
II
I'
I.
II I
" I
II
eo PM?'!'"
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
MANEUVERING THRUST INSTALLATION
HELlUM- FOR PRESSURIZATION OF JP4 AND H,02
/
JP4 MANEUVERING FUEL
A-A
Figure 2.2-2
i H20, MANEUVERING AND ATTITUDE CONTROL
/
MANEUVERING
THRUST CHAMBERS

3000 W. H. BATTERIES B - B
- AFT MANEUVERING THRUST CHAMBERS
o 20 40

I
SCALE IN INCHES
fONE'?,),!" , 4
2.2-4
i"
*
D
O
!
G
O
b
_ I
.
n
1
>
F
.
m (
/
I
)
,
. t
2
)
Z
_
,
r
.
n
r
-
-
"
"
0
r
r
l
r
'-
_
0
-
I
"
I
G
'_
_
:
_
-
,
-
_
0
f
.
-
t
,
n
-
-
.
I
-
.
j
"
-
r
-
Z C
_
1
"
1
1
1
t
.
n
,
+
j_
j
t
l
T
f
_ Z
Z
-
-
_
,
Z
_
:
-
-
,
I
Z
m
X
"
_
Z
_
m
_
Z
m -
-
.
4
,
,
-
I
"
1
"
m
z m E
C
:
:
Z
-
-
G
_
m
]
>
]
=
Z
r
n
Z
r
r
l
.
-
I
m Z n Z m 1
1
1
_
,
;
a
m
v
,
Z
m -
.
0
-
-
i
#
0
1
1
"
I
m 0
r
n
;
0
;
o
-
-
I
-
-
*
O
,
,
0
_
0
I
.
n
-
-
,
,
o
_
o
-
-
_
_
_
_
L
I
7 c;QNF'9U-"
..
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
IMANEUVERING IN ORBITI
, --
2.2-5
WITH INERTIAL GUIDANCE
SIDE VIEW
HELIUM
-ob ,'- 4:)1 ;rpoo..
i
I,
'-",
\
\
--r-- I
' I
;
I
I,
Ii,
, ,
i
/
:)\ r.,..
\
\-H,O, \-JP4
L MANEUVERING THRUST
NAVIGATION & TRACKING COMPUTER
INEK fiAt PLATFORM ELECTRONICS
r BLOW-OFF CAP
/
STAR TRACKER
-,,-=-:,
\ LMANEUVERING THRUST CHAMBERS
INERTIAL PLATFORM
o 20 40
"
I
SCALE IN INCHES
l
J
Msn;wmsi F
Figure 2. 2-3
-....
l -
)
,
-
-
L
#
_
0
m
I
L
U
U
J
O
a
.
.
L
U
Z
u
_
,
v
'
-
-
L
U
L
U
Z 0
z I
L
U
I
1
1
U Z <
l
m I
,
L
l
Z m
!
z
-
-
Z
-
-
< U
.
-
-
,
_
_
!
C
_
r
[
(

{
I
(
I I
;1 I
,
CO"I IUDlT' AI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
INTERIOR ARRANGEMENT WITH INERTIAL GUIDANCE
BULKHEAD VIEW
NAVIGATiON & TRACKING COMPUTER
INERTIAL PLATFORM ElECTRONICS-
---------,
// ':'"
, / I frl, r - ); '-
1 Pc f' " r-: -Il(- ! _ r '\
\, 0 J, ,'f- lei '\
a
.. .. \.
h c1 /
'I) \
'-', . >( \" - _ j J
- \ I -
, \-'11 ,0), Q>'
l - r '\ )' 'I' I ; .... 11
--=--- - 0 0 '., ,"\ _,.-<c , " c c: (]) J
tril
'1' ,/. , ',-"'- -:-: ( '" ! v' !', - - ':-, ,I
- !. J, h 1; I -' A ",: / i I: I 1>-_'_ ---< /
,
i [j ,,'-, "I ':,':',," ,--'- i
\ i j -11 \ i :, ,I,"'!-, ,=/
' 1 - \ 1 t'<-""" 1- l ;' --=--1
\, ,Il \ ., -, /
-, "':, T ,):r:,: 1
1
,- :'\:
" r J--
o 20 40

SCALE IN INCHES
I
A - A
Figure 2.2-4
2.2-6
CONPlDl!!hl" ......
i
i !
o
l
O _
g
q
D
O O O
e
-
i,
-
i.
-
_
O O
C
.
n
"
_ c
/
3
l
'
g
_
_
.
,
.
.
.
,
1
I
,
.
-
I
i.
,
.
_
I
,
,
_
o
O
g
_
O
.
1
_
o
o
i,
.
_
o
1
.
6
_
O
r
_
i
'
I
P
i
Z i Z I
T
I
I
T
I
n Z
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
O
m
.
,
O
,
_
,
,
O
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
sot'n? r'i
TABLE 2.2-1
Structure
Adapter
Escape System
Heat Shield
Automatic Control System
Reaction Controls
Posigrade
Maneuvering Thrusters
And Tankage
Maneuver Fuel
2.2-7
Mercury
(Ref. 20)
485
142
932
347
63
132
21
Maneuver in Orbit
Mercury Inertial
Guidance Guidance
485 485
205 205
932 932
347 347
63 199
239 221
306 273
531
441
;1.

Remarks
Added Separation Joint Between
Two Adapters.
Added Inertial Platform, Computer and
Star Tracker
Increased Capacity for Maneuvering
Removed
Added
Added
I
l
A I
O
_
O
_
O
_
O
_
I
-
-
i
v
e
e
u
J
0
'
_
L
u
J
L
U
0
L I
.
M
Z
u
_
m u
J
L
U
Z m 0 Z L
u
0
v
I
.
,
.
4
b
,
O
0
_
I
I I
_
_
_
_
,
,
_
_
o
'
_
_
,
_
c
_
l
I
o
'
_
!
c
t
l
[
t
AI Retrograde 231
Landing System 155
I Instruments and Navigation 91
1
Electrical Group 274
Communications 109
[
Environmental Control 134
I
Telemetry and Recording 92
57 Recovery Gear
I
Crew and Survival 229
Gross Launch Weight 3494
psn:r:?'#
231
155
101
332
109
134
76
57
229
4532
SC'!5'RP "'L
A.
231
155
96
332
109
144
76
57
229
4532
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Added Display
Increased Electrical Requirements
Increased Cooling Water
Removed Personnel Data Instrumentation
2.2-8
I
t
_
0
i-
-
.
o
l
=
d
0
_
u
g
_
"
0
C
_
0
_
o
t
'
l
)
r
J
)
r
_
_
_
_
.
o
_
.
.
_
_
-
_
o
'
0
0
m Z #
)
i Z I
'
1
'
1
m Z
m m
m 0
m ,
0
,
0
0
0
p
_
_
D
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Gross Launch Weight
Less:
Escape Tower
Less:
Adapte r Fixed to Booste r
Injection Weight
Less:
Orbit Transfer Propellant
Hydrogen Peroxide
Posigrade Propellant
Weight in Orbit
Less:
Water - Cooling
Hydrogen Peroxide
Maneuver Propellant
Batteries
,."
516
1
TABLE 2.2-2
Mercury
(Ref. 20)
(3494)
-932
(2562)
-142
(2420)
-7
(2413)
-27
-7
Maneuvering Thrusters and Tanks
Adapter Fixed to Capsule
Retrograde Weight (2379)
2.2-9
_. 3 L
Maneuve r in Orbit
Mercury Inertial
Guidance Guidance
(4532) (4532)
-932 -932
(3600) (3600)
-97 -97
(3503) (3503)
-88 -88
-17 -17
(3398) ( 3398)
-27 -37
-90 -72
-443 -353
-193 -193
-285 -252
-108 -108
1
-
(2252)
(2383)
0 L _
J
Z u U
L
I
i
,
U
z D z
m a
_
u
.
i
c
)
,
-
i !
o
J
o
v
!
v
(6""3 ...
I
~ (
Less:
I
Hydrogen Peroxide -10
Retrograde Installation -245
Re-Entry Weight (2124)
(
Less:
Water - Cooling -3
Ablated Material -146 (1)
End of Re-Entry (1970)
Less:
Nose Cone -39
I
Equipment -12
Drogue Chute -8
Main Chute DeSign Weight (1911)
I
Less:
Main Chute -60
Impact Weight (1851)
I
Less:
Reserve Chute -60
Pilot Chute -2
Dye Markers -1
SaFAR Bombs -7
Flotation Weight (1744)
NOTES: (1) Mercury Specification Value
lSI IPPFNTIAl
-10
-231
(2011)
-5
-3
-50 (2)
(1953)
-39
-12
-8
(1894)
-60
(1834)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1727)
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
-10
-231
(2142)
-5
-3
-50 (2)
(2084)
-39
-12.
-8
(2025)
-60
(1965)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1858)
2.2-10
_
0
H
0
P
O
r
_ !
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.. pn;:C

2.2-11
C. G.

MANEUVER IN ORBIT
I I
MODIFIED MERCURY GUIDANCE
4400 I 1'<
4000 1 . .:::....----\----+----+-----+-----l-- .----1----
INERTIAL GUIDANCE
'" I t
Z 1 .......
o 3600 ....... _-_._- [ [
3200 3 +=:M1ERCURY ......................... .... -..... -.... -.. ---+1----1
:I: ........... 1"' ..... .
2800 ,"' "''''"'1''""''""" .. "''"' -"""""" 1. G R 0 S S \\( E I G H T -LA UN C H ---+------1
........... 2. GROSS WEIGHT IN ORBIT
3. INJECTION WEIGHT
4. WEIGHT IN ORBIT
24001
6. RE-ENTRY WEIGHT
7. END OF RE-ENTRY
20001 8. MAIN CHUTE DESIGN WEIGHT ---I
9
7
8
9. IMPACT WEIGHT
10. flOTATION WEIGHT

o .10 .20 .30 .40 .50 .60 .70 .80 .90 1.00
l/D FIGURE 2.2-5

l
I
O
,
O
,
_
,
-
u
'
t
0
'
,
O
,
,
,
0
,
-
-
I
-
-
=
'
_
I
X
u
u
0
m
=
-
:
E
I
.
M
I
.
M
=
I
-
"
0
=
"
I
.
M
=
'
-
-
I
,
M
I
,
M
Z 0 Z I
.
M
i
,
!
e
-
i
!
o
J
1
1
1
(
(
I
(
1
(
i !
e5:c: II it II! AI
ING IN ORBIT
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
2.3 MISSI<lI PBOifIB
ngure 2.3-1 illustrates a t1Pical. a1ssion pro-
file 'tor a lIIaneuver in orbit Up to
the time o't separation :troll the Atlas the se-
quence is identical to that o't the basic Mer-
cury except that due to the larger p8.71oad,
this separation occurs at a lower altitude.
The Atlas puts the lD8Deu'Yerab1e capsule into a
nominal 1 y circular orb1 t at 90 nautical lIi.les.
'!'he capsule and adapter are separated as a un1 t
and then accelerated by use o't the l18DeUTeriDg
rockets to su'tficient ",eloci t,. to coast up to
150 nautical JI:1les. At 150 nautical 1II1les a
second posigrade firing accelerates the cap-
sule to circular orbital. speed at that altitude.
S' 'PDENTIAL
this DtwlnaJ al.titude other 'a8DeuTerS can
be pert'ol'lled to change the orbit plane angle,
rotate the line spsides and do a "catch up"
.aneuYer. See Section 2.5 'tor a detailed dis-
cussioa techniques.
Prior to retrograde the capsule 1s rotated to
the proper attitude by the automatic attitude
ccmtrol S1Bte.. Ifhe adapter release Btecb.aniSlll
is t.beD actuated, and the retro-rockets are
fired to calp1ete the separation, and 101 tiate
re-entr,-. After retro-rocket firing, the
re-entr;r 8Dd recOYery is sequent1a1.l7 the same
as MercW'1-
2.3-1
I
r
o
i
J
J
l
.
,
o
m
J
z
o m
_
o
_
m
m
7
_
z
_
<
_
m
-
R
0
0 G m E Z
m
0
Z
z
_
o
o
>
_
-
o
Z
_
:
,
o
_
0
_
z
c
Z
0
m
z
_
_
_
.
.
o
.
>
c
c
;
.
m
m
6
5
"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
o
_
'
m
I
J m ,
-
!
m m
m ,
0
m Z 0 I Z m m
m
Z 0 m 0
,
,
,
4
'
0
"
!
5 z
0
w
m
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
POS IGRADE
ISON.M .. . Q:::n>
CHANGE
ORBIT
ALTITUDE
.,,., .om'""
90 N. M. c:::::([:_
\ .. POSIGRADE
"
,- ESCAPE TOWER
tJ;;-- --- ATlAS BOOSTER
-
__
23-2
'gNE'9
FD
'f'7Q
MISSION PROFILE
MANEUVERING EXPERIMENTS
.-ADAPTER
l
c 1. CHANGE ORBIT PLANE ANGLE l
2. ROTATE LINE OF APSIDES
3. "CATCH-UP" MANEUVER
p
RETROGRADE
I
\\
RETRO-ROCKET PACKAGE
CON EmuIT' *\
co::}
RE-ENTRY

.'00"' ,""n .'"'0'.'"' I
DROGUE CHUTE AND ANTENNA FAIRING
MAIN CHUTE DEPLOYMENT
BALLOON ANTENNA

FIGURE 2.3-1
1
-

II,
'II
II
r .J
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Revised 5 October
2.4 BOOST MD MAlEUVERnG THRUST SYSTEMS
Booster Capability
In order to successfully investigate maneuvering
techniques, an orbit altitude must be
1ished whose natural perturbatioIl8 are not of
sufficient magQitude to obscure or to interfere
wi th the interpretation of the results. Based
on the maneuvers outlined in Section 2.5 and
the orbit decay data in Section 4.3, an orbit
aJ.titude of 150 nautical miles is selected.
Figure 2.4 -1 shows that the Atlas tiD" booster
is not capable of boosting the capsule to the
required al ti tude. However, by employing the
maneuvering rockets in the adapter to accelerate
the capsule into a minimum energy, Hobmann
transfer ellipse, and to accelerate again at
apogee to establish a nearly circular orbit,
large gains in altitude can be for
relatively small reductions in injection weight.
Figure 2.4-1 shows the injection weight versus
orbit altitude for transfer ellipses
ating at 90 nautical miles. In all of these
cases the reduction in injection weight is the
fuel expended during the transfer maneuver.
A typical launch trajectory to the transfer
orbit injection point is shown in Figure 2. 4-2.
A summary of the booster performance character=
istics, and a weight breakdown of the various
stages for the subject mission is presented in
Table 2.4-1.
6gNflPfNT!' L

I
EI ,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 ,MANEUVERING IN ORBiT]
Vl
C
Z
:::>
0
Q..
I--
::E:
C)
w

Z
0
I--
U
w
-,
Z
2.4-2
BOOSTER CAPABILITY
---- ATLAS '0'
ATLAS '0' PLUS POSIGRADE
NOTE: Llw, REDUCTION IN INJECTION WEIGHT, REPRESENTS
POSIGRADE FUEL EXPENDED TO REACH A GIVEN ALTITUDE

I
3503 LB.
3500
3000

o 100 200 300 400
CIRCULAR ORBIT ALTITUDE-NAUTICAL MILES
FIGURE 2.4-1

o
,
o
,
_
,
-
u
_
O
'
,
O
'
,
,
o
,
-
I
-
-
=
1
_
,
u
,
O
m
=
.
_
.
u
=
_
=
I
.
-
O
=
"
I
,
M
Z m
=
,
-
-
I
,
M
L
U
Z g O Z I
,
M
t
>
-
,
v
O I
-
=
U I
,
M
,
.
v
i
-
-
r
U Z <
C
_
_
J
.
.
I
<
[
U o
.
>
-
e
v
I
,
M
I
-
-
O O e
n
u
'
t
I
-
-
L
U
.
.
I
m
3
Z
"
-
J
o
u
_
O
.
I
-
-
o
Z
u
3
I
-
-
Z
-
J
0 _
_
z
u
0
Z
u z
\
t
t
m
t
-
-
Z
-
-
-
-
u
.
;
_
r
-
I
.
_
=
I
0
.
_
"
,
.
l
_
j
"
%
I
J
J
"
%
=
.
/
O
Z
Z
- :
_
"
r
Z
'
a
.
_
.
/
0
_
/
f
%
\
>
-
t
,
.
.
.
.
.
g 0 ,=
,,I
o
l
>
,
=
.
1
Z
O
O
0
O
0
0
O
O
u
J
0
Z
\
;
0 0 0 o 0 o
0 0
,
,
!
l
,
!
t
I
"
I
"
I
J
0
t
"
i
I
I
]
'
o
0
0
1
3
3
:
1
0
0
0
'
0
0
[
-
4
-
3
0
n
l
l
l
l
V
u
3
,
_
t
O
N
I
S
_
]
_
O
_
O
-
Z
-
]
I
O
N
V
H
I
V
d
/
H
O
I
l
J
I I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
:
O
,
_
O
,
O
_
C
O
,
_
O
N
t
N
f
l
_
"
3
]
S
/
'
i
d
,
_
0
0
0
[
'
A
'
X
J
'
I
3
O
l
:
I
^
I
,
l
l
V
l
1
_
3
N
l
l
I
_
D
_
_
t
O
_
*
-
"
0
,
I
S
]
]
I
W
1
V
_
I
i
R
V
N
O
O
l
"
3
O
N
V
a
I
-
t
"
O
J
I
t
)
f
-
,
,
Z O U L
U I I
L
U
I
'
-
-
O
J !
O
,
I
"
H
it
f
,
,
III
I'
I

I!I
II
t'
!'I'r
,
I sUPit
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
TYPICAL LAUNCH TRAJECTORY
90
80
V)
w
w
28 .-
1:11:
70
e>
w
c
U
I
w 24
;-.
60
V) I
......
W
.....
V)
5
w
.....
l-
e>
5
u.
20 z
50
I-
w 0
<
w 0
u.
0 ::I:

4
.....

0
I
Q..
0
>- l-
I-
::I:
0
....
3
u
12 e>
30
I
0
..s:
.....
, ..... u.
w
w
0
2
0
c
2
>
81- 20
:::l .....
I-
<
w
e>
Z
l-
I-
.....
<
c.::
4 I- 10
w
z
<
c.::
0 0' 0
Figure 2.4-2
ATLASlrO" BOOSTER
INJECTION WEIGHT - 3503 POUNDS
INJECTION ALTITUDE - 90 NAUTICAL MILES
LONGITUDINAL LOAD FACTOR -n
z
=8.30
I
FLIGHT PATH ANGLE
,
ALTITUDE
.. ,-,

,. ,
.,." "
.' " ,
.........................

INERTIAL VELOCITY ..........
: ---+----------l
.......... '- RANGE
"
,filii" \,' " .....
.. ."".' ",; ......... .
---------1.. .... ."".... .t ....
_.-' 111111 .... 111111 .. " .......... .
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
TlME-t-SECON OS
2.4-3
r
_
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 2.4-1
,.-
.. liCREJ_
ATLAS ltD" BOOSTER SUMMARY
Empty Atlas nD" (Booster stage)
Usable Propellants
Empty Atlas "D" (Sustainer Stage)
Usable Propellants
Payload
Capsule
Tower
Adapter
6,547
390
202,730
6,754
391
43,500
...1. 2
2,428 2,279
932 932
1,172 1,321
209,667 Lbs.
50,645 Ibs.
4,532 Lbs.
264, 844 ll:Js.
PROPULSION SYSTEM THRUST BURNING TIME
Atlas "D" (LOX/RP-l)
Atlas ltD" (LOX/RP-l)
(Sustaine r)
1. Self-Contained Guidance System
2. Mercury Guidance System
2.4-4
368, 000 Lbs. at S. L. 134 Sec.
84,724 Lbs. at Alt. 294 Sec.
---
SPECIFIC IMPULSE
244.0 Sec.
309.7 Sec.
, \
II I
{
{
I
1
1 I'
1
II
II
A
Maneuvering Thrust System
Four maneuvering rockets are provided in this
vehicle 0 Two of the rockets are mounted in the
adapter and two are mounted in the sma.ll end of
the conical section of the capsule as shown in
Figure 202=10 The rockets use liquid propel=
lants (Hydrogen Peroxide and and
have a thrust of 250 pounds per chamber. The
H
2
02 decomposition products and JP=4 are
golic; thereforep the rockets are re=ign1table
as often as required.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
The posigrade boost to a 150 nautical mile aJ. ti =
tude consumes 88 pounds of propellant plus 17
pounds of stabilization fuel. This represents
only 1910 of the total. propellant available in
the inertial guidance vehicle and only of
that in the vehicle with so called modified
Mercury guidance. The remaining propellant which
is available for maneuvering after orbiial alti=
tude is reached,P is sufficient to add approxi =
mately 800 feet per second to the vehicle velocity 0
QW'f'RU!T! A L
2 0
0
m
L M
J
I
,
M
0
a
.
u
u
Z
_
Z m Z
I
o
.
_
5
'
_
_
O
r
-
I
_
.
4
0
0
_
_
"
_
_
_
o
'
.
_
_
_
o
_
'
o
_
4
o
0
.
H
.
,
-
t
o
_
_
o
.
_
c
_
o
E
_
h o
0
o
i
n
,
-
4
I
L
r
_
I
"
II
If
{
,I
I
t
1
:1
1
I
I
Ii 1
"'"--.
IN
'r,'TIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
2.5 ORBIT TRANSFER EXPERIMENTS WITH MERCURY
Orbit Transfer Techniques
Orbital transfer experiments for the
version of the Mercury Capsule consist of arbi-
trary changes of the orbit characteristics. The
objective is to make these changes as accurately
as possib+e, and the measure of success is a
comparison of the actual orbit change achieved
with the orbit change intended. Maneuvering
techniques are such that the desired orbital
element change is obtained without changing the
other elements. Four such maneuvers which can
be done in the same mission are: orbit altitude
increase; orbit plane angle change; rotation of
line of apsides; and change of angular position
in orbit. These are discussed separately in the
following paragraphs.
Orbit Altitude Increase
This maneuver is perlo:rm=d first in order to
avoid excessive atmospheric perturbations. It
represents a technique for getting higher pay-
loads into orbits well above the atmosphere
than would otherwise be possible with the Atlas
booster. Two equal speed-up impulses are ap-
plied, one at perigee and the other at apogee,
giving as a net result an orbit with essentially
unchanged eccentricity but a longer major axis.
To raise the orbit altitude from 90 nautical
miles, the Atlas burnout altitude, to 150 nauti-
cal miles, the selected altitude for performing
the other maneuvers, requires a total velocity
change of 210 feet per second as shown in
Figure 2.5-1. Half of the total impulse is
applied just after Atlas burnout and the other
half at apogee of the resulting elliptical trans-
fer orbit. After this maneuver the fuel remain-
ing is sufficient for a velocity change of about
800 feet per second, which is adequate to do all
of the maneuvers described in the next three
paragraphs.
Orbi t Plane Angle Change
Figure 2.5-2 shows that changing the orbit plane
is qui te expensive in terms of maneuvering fuel.
A one degree change requires about 440 feet per
second velocity change. The maneuver is accom-
plished by orienting the capsule so that the
rockets are fired perpendicular to the existing
orbi t plane. The resulting orbit plane rota-
tion is about the radius vector from the Earth
center to the capsule. If the impulse is ap-
plied at one of the nodes (points where orbit
passes through Earth I s equatorial plane) the
result is a change of orbit plane inclination
to the equator with no change of node location.
Application of the impulse near maximum lati-
tude can change node location without affecting
inclination. Other application points change
both node location and inclination.
Rotation of Line of Apsides
This maneuver has, of course, no meaning when
the orbit is exactly circular. However, even
for cases of small deviation from a circle,
so,'SRS 1-'
2.5-1
r
o
I
T
I
Z m Z m i
,
,
1
1
m Z
I
T
I
m
1
1
'i
m
0
m
'
,
0
,
_
'
,
0
'
,
0
! ENGINEERING REPORT 6919
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
2.5-2
significant velocity changes are required to ro-
tate the line of apsides through large angles.
If at the time it is desired to perform this
maneuver the orbit eccentricity is not large
enough to make a fair test of the maneuver, a
speed up of say 75 feet per second would increase
the eccentricity about .006. With this eccentri-
city the line of apsides can be rotated 90 degrees
by applying a radial impulse of slightly over
200 feet per second as shown by the curves in
Figure 2.5-3. The point for application of this
impulse is 45 degrees (in general half the
angle through which the line of apsides is to be
rotated) from either apogee or perigee. If done
at 45
0
past apogee the impulse changes the dive
angle into an equal climb angle so that after the
maneHver the vehicle is 45
0
before apogee, giving
a 90 total forward shift of the line of' apsides.
The saJOO rotation can be obtained wi th the same
velocity impulse at 45
0
past perigee except that
in this case the change is from climb to dive
rather than from dive to climb.
Change of Angular Position in Orbit
The minimum fuel method of making a catch-up
maneuver is, paradoxically, to slow down. This
shortens the orbit period and thus makes the
vehicle move forward in angular position relative
to where it would have been in the original
orbi t. After the desired angular advance has
been achieved a speed-up impulse is applied at
the same point thus restoring the vehicle to
.. _-_ ....
[MANEUVERING IN ORBITI
its original orbit. The amount of advance
revolution is limited by the requileillCL,"" the
transfer orbit not descend too far into
atmosphere. From Figure .2.5-4 it can be seen
that for three degree advrnce per revolution the
perigee of the transfer orbit would be about
40 nautical miles below the apogee (assuming
circular orbit starting conditions). For the
maneuvering vehicle at 150 nautical miles
initial altitude this 40 mile reduction is
probably near the practical limit. The three-
degree-advance-per-revolution maneuver requires
about 150 feet per second total velocity im-
pulse as shown by the same chart.
Attitude Control for Maneuver in Orbit
The present Project Mercury attitude control
system is adequate, at least in basic principle,
for the orbital maneuvers previously discussed.
Thrust eccentricity torques due to the maneu-
vering jets are less than those due to retro-
rocket firing and hence are well within the
torque capability of the present system. How-
ever, the amount of reaction control fuel re-
quired is greater than for the present Mercury
since attitude control for maneuvering in orbit
must be assumed to require continuous thrust
from one of the high torque jets for each axis
for the time the maneuver rockets are burning.
Figure 2.5-6 shows the amount of extra fuel
required as a function of the characteristic
velocity increment applied during the maneuver.

1
r
'
-
I
I
L
f
_
I
-
-
I
I
, i
{

t
II
II
I
I
II
I
I I
I
rQ)'f'Rftll! At
[MANEUVERING IN ORBITI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TOTAL VELOCITY CHANGE AND FUEL MASS REQUIRED
TO CHANGE LENGTH OF MAJOR AXIS OF ORBIT
FIGURE 2.5-1
IMPULSES APPLIED AT BOTH PERIGEE AND APOGEE
SUCH THAT NET ECCENTRICITY CHANGE IS ZERO
NOTE: INITIAL ORBIT ASSUMED CIRCULAR AT 150 NA. MI. ALT.,
EFFECTS OF ECCENTRICITY UP TO e =.02 AND OF INITIAL ALTITUDES
BETWEEN 90 AND 300 NAUTICAL MILES ARE NEGLIGIBLE.

V)
Q.
"'-
--
I ,.
(!)...I-
ZQ.w
V)
w...I
::I:V)=>
U...lQ.
I "
=:E:
u-
w
OW(!)
...IWO
W(!)
>_Q. I .-

...Iw
Q.
.... -
o
....
-100 +100 +200 +300 +400
CHANGE OF LENGTH OF MAJOR AXIS, NA. MI.
;ie, TRW;: "
8
,
.V)
CV)
6 0 0-
w:E-o

V)II
V) _ Q.
= V) 4 <: _
<ZZ
.... "'- 0
C
...I .... w
2 ...IZV)
wW
Q.
ucg

Q. Q.
25-3
Q
L
_
O
1
I
Z O
N
O
R
M
A
L
V
E
L
O
C
I
T
Y
F
P
S
0
0
0
0
0
O
r
_
_
o
o
>
>
\
\
i
.
,
,
I
!
P
R
O
P
E
L
L
A
N
T
M
A
S
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
,
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
O
F
I
N
I
T
I
A
L
M
A
S
S
(
B
A
S
E
D
O
N
I
s
p
=
2
6
0
)
m
m Z O i
Z m m I Z
m
m
m
m
O
m _
o
,
o
_
n
.
_
T
-
-
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
___ IRL
2.5-4
NORMAL VELOCITY CHANGE AND FUEL MASS REQUIRED
TO CHANGE ORBIT PLANE ANGLE
1600 . ~ - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ - - - - ~
V) 1200
Q.
.....
>-
....
u
0
.....
LLI
>
.....
c::(
:E
0:::
0
z
800
400
hp = 105 NA. MI.; e = .01
IMPULSE AT PERIGEE
hp = 200 NA. MI.; e = .01
IMPU LSE AT APOGEE
o .wr ________ ~ ________________ ~ ______ ~ ________ ~ ________ ~ ______ ~
o .5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
CHANGE OF ORBIT PLANE ANGLE, DEG.
V)
V)
c::(
:E
.....
16 c::(
....
z
14 .....
0_
.... 0
12 z -0
LLlN
U II
0:::
LLI Q.
10 Q.
V)
~
oz
LLlO
8
0:::
-0
:::lLLl
OV)
6
LLlc::(
O:::cn
V)-
V)
4
c::(
:E
....
2
z
c::(
.....
.....
LLI
Q.
0
0:::
Q.
FIGURE 2.5-2
1
O
_
O
_
_
-
u
"
l
O
,
O
,
e
_
u
.
,
0
_
L
i
U
J
U
J
Z u
J
z 0 z u
_
l
I
[
I [
'I f
" ,
I. :,i
!
II
i {
{
(
{
1
,t
I I
I
!
- S2,'f'PfNTI AI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
RADI AL VELOCITY IMPULSE AND FUEL MASS REQUIRED
TO ROTATE LI NE OF APSIDES OF ORBIT
U')
IMPULSE APPLIED AT POINT SUCH THAT ha AND hp DO NOT CHANGE

NOTE: CURVES ARE FOR hp = 105 NA. MI.
MAX. DIFFERENCE FOR hpUP TO
200 NA. MI. IS 17 FPS. LESS.
e=.02s
U')
U')

:E
.....

.....
_--t1r-14 z
1200
LL._
,
w
U')
.....
::J
Q.
:E
>- 800 e=.Ols
'
.....
I
u
0
.....
w
>
e=.olol
.....

400
0

e=.oOsl
o
o 30 60 90 120 150 180
ANGULAR SHIFT OF LINE OF APSIDES, DEG.
FIGURE 2.5-3
SStlf'RWT! i L
00
12 ..... ..0
ZN
W II
U
10
8
6
4
2
Q..
W U')
Q.
'z
cO
00
Ww
Cl::U')
U')
U'):Q
-
:E
.....
z

.....
.....
W
Q..
o

Q.
2.5-5
I
L
-
z
'
J
!
I
'
I
'
!
"
1
m
T
O
T
A
L
V
E
L
O
C
I
T
Y
C
H
A
N
G
E
,
F
P
S
_
I
,
m
(
I
N
I
T
I
A
L
S
L
O
W
D
O
W
N
P
L
U
S
F
I
N
A
L
S
P
E
E
D
U
P
)
/
,
_
m
l
_
_
m
_
o
o
o
o
_
_
;
"
.
o
0
.
.
_
_
_
a
i
r
,
;
_
N
,
o
,
o
_
I
I
I
I
I
P
R
O
P
E
L
L
A
N
T
M
A
S
S
R
E
Q
'
D
.
,
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
O
F
I
N
I
T
I
A
L
M
A
S
S
(
B
A
S
E
D
O
N
I
s
p
-
2
6
0
)
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
I
.... is: IDEI4ii .... tU
TOTAL VELOCITY CHANGE AND FUEL MASS REQUIRED
TO CHANGE ANGULAR POSITION IN ORBIT
2.5-6
NOTE: BASIC ORBIT ASSUMED CIRCULAR AT 300 NA. MI. ALl.
EFFECT OF BASIC ORBIT ALT. IS NEGLIGIBLE TO ACCURACY
OF PLOT FOR ALTITUDES IN 150 TO 300 NA. MI. RANGE
500ri---------.---------.--------,,--------.---------,
Q..
:::J
C
'" 400 I I ,c120
Q..'"
u.. ....

c>Z
i:i: 300 I i -
,
::I::::J
u ....
>-Q..
t-Z
U 200 I i
o >
.... 0
w
C

.... 0
....
t-'" 1001 ..,. \
0 ....

t-
Z
(h -h ), NA. MI.
a p
O_K ________ ______ ________ ________________
o 2 4 6 8 10
ANGULAR CATCH-UP PER REVOLUTION, DEG.
.11dI isd1'E.
'"
'"

....

5 t-
Z
u..
0
4t--
ZO
w-o
UN
a:: II
w Q..
3 Q.. '"
c
Z
- 0
0
wC

",'"

t-
Z

....
....
w
Q..
0
a::
Q..
FIGURE 2.5-4
l
O
,
O
,
'
,
,
O
I
,
-
O I
L
,
L
U
l
,
v
O z I L
u
I
L
U
z
m
O z
L
U
O
,
u
'
)
O
,
i
v
L
U
e
n
L
U
n
_
L
U
L
U
U
L
l
O
.
0 a
.
S
S
V
W
1
V
I
I
l
N
I
:
1
0
J
.
N
:
l
_
)
_
l
:
_
d
"
C
]
,
O
3
_
1
S
S
V
W
I
N
V
l
1
3
d
O
_
l
d
!
I
O
I (
ii
.1 1
{
{
,.,.=. ITI A I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
EFFECT OF FUEL SPECIFIC IMPULSE ON
PROPELLANT MASS REQUIRED FOR VELOCITY CHANGES
{IDEAL}
24.
lsi ISp, = 160
,
o (H
2
O
2
)
' V 1./

VI
t=
:E z
u..
Z 0

.....

12 I
I ,,,.. --
I
o LiSp = 260
::: 6 (H2
1
0
2 & JP.4)
I
FIGURE 2.5-5
or-
O 200
ISp = 300
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
VELOCITY CHANGE, FPS
am 'ElWt!TI 0 ,,,
2.5-7
t
'
_
m r
r
l
I
'
r
l
C
A
P
S
U
L
E
R
E
A
C
T
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
F
U
E
l
U
S
E
D
-
-
P
O
U
N
D
S
_
O
O
O
O
O
"
U
z
_
_
_
z
_
_
;
I
-
8
-
_
m
"
U
5
I
0 0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

REACTION CONTROL FUEL CONSUMPTION
DURING MANEUVERING THRUST OPERATION
2.5-8
V)
c 80
z
:::>
o
D..
c
60
:::>
LU
:::>
LL.
....I
o

Z
o
u
Z
o
I-
U

LU

LU
....I
:::>
V)
D..

u
40
20
o
o
CAPSULE INITIAL WEIGHT: 3503 POUNDS
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
MANEUVERING VELOCITY CHANGE - AV - FT./SEC.
cop !iLl.
r-
IMANEUVERING IN ORBIT]
1600
FIGURE 2.5-6
I
1
,
,
0
,
-
0
m
m M
,
I
I
,
M
@
_
-
Z
_
Z 0 Z
.
M
4
-
_
I
4
.
a
t
n
.
,
.
4
_
.
_
m
o
o
I
_
.
H -
e
l
-
_
_
,
,
_
!
.
,
-
t
1
]
)
m
0
0 0
.
_
0
o
_
"
r
4
4
a
0
_
0
_
0
.
,
-
I
.
,
-
4
I
>
_
0
o
.
,
.
-
I
I
_
o
_
0
m
_
.
.
P
.
,
-
I
o
_
I
_
0
_
-
-
_
o
_ I
q
0
,
,
,
-
4
o
r
l
0
0
o
_
_
r
,
8
_
g
-
p
r
.
o
o
':.f
.,
(
I
(
(
(
I [
I
iI [

:MANEUVERING IN ORBITI
Guidance Considerations
Mercury with Minor Modifications
With only a few modifications the Mercury Auto-
matic Stabilization and Control System can be
used to demonstrate the feasibility of orbit trans-
fer techniques. One modification recpired is the
provision for inserting attitude commands into the
ASCS. This is the same, in prinCiple, as the at-
titude command for optimum retro-rocket angle, but
the attitude range must be extended to 90 degrees
and provisions must be made for yaw commands also.
Another feature of the present Mercury ASCS which
, might require modification for t
missions is the shape of the switching logic
boundaries in the error versus error rate plane.
The present boundaries allow errors up to three
degrees attitude deviation, which might signifi-
cantly affect the accuracy of some types of man-
euvers. Additional circuitry is also needed to
program the required signals into the ASCS.
A block diagram of this modified Mercury system
is shown in Figure 2.5-1. The desired maneuver
is precomputed and placed in the programmer
before launch but it can be changed by the pilot
at his discretion or by commands from the ground.
At the prescribed point as determined by the timer,
the programmer, through the calibrator and at-
titude control system causes the vehicle and
its propulsion system to assume the proper atti-
tude for initiation of thrust. The duration of
the impulse is controlled by a timer. A display
will be provided to the pilot to allow him to
compare the actual orientation of the capsule
with the desired position.
Inertial System
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
The addition of an inertial system to the pre-
sent Mercury vehicle results in considerable
improvement in the accuracy with which orbit
transfer experiments can be performed. This
improvement is realized both in performing the
desired maneuvers and in evaluating the result-
ing orbit changes.
The installation of an inertial guidance system
requires that several of the present Mercury
subsystems be modified as well as adding the
following subsystems:
A. Inertial Platform
B. Platform Electronics
C. Digital Computer
D. Pilot Display
It is anticipated that the inertial system will
be used during ascent to determine burnout
errors from the nominal trajectory and possibly
to perform the entire ascent guidance fUnction.
By doing this the inertial system will accu-
rately know the vehicle's actual trajectory on
which to base computations for subsequent man-
euvers.
Figure 2.5-8 shows the mechanization of an in-
ertial guidance system concept. Measurement of
vehicle acceleration during ascent and other
periods of thrust are made by the accelero-
meters on the inertial platform. At other times
the accelerometers read zero because the vehicle
is essentially in free fall since the minute
amount of drag in orbit is below the thresholcl
= S CAL
2.5-9
r
o
I
_
o
1
e
l
.
o
!
_
_
.
o
_
_
!
_
_
.
.
_
,
_
,
,
_
_
'
"
,
_
o
_
_
o o
_
o
_
_
_
_
o
o
f
_
c
k
_
'
_
o
t
#
o
_
!
m -
,
4
m
m J U
_
m Z 0 m Z m m m Z 0 m 0 ,
=
,
4 rn,'S'DE"T'A.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
2.5-10
of present accelerometers. The platrorm pro-
vides a reference for the rocket motor employed
during the maneuver. The computer interprets
orbit transfer commands from the progrSDlller in
terms of the time of initiation of thrust and
thrust duration, direction and magnitude. Arter
completion ot the maneUYer # the computer deter-
mines the new trajectory and the errors between
the desired and actual. maneuver. These data
can either be recorded as shown or telemetered
to the ground. For long missions a star
tracker may be added tor plattorm real.igtUllent #
IMANEUVERING IN ORBIT]
and a horizon-scanner JlJay be added to provide
the local. vertical. tor use in reterencing man-
euvers to satellite position over the surtace
ot the Earth. Further deta.:Us on star tracker
alignment ot the platform or pOSition deter-
mination bY'means ot the plattorm horizon-
scanner combination are presented in Section 3
or this report.
A briet sUJlllDal"Y' ot guidance system considera-
tions is given in Table 2.5-1.
t
1
I
O
a
.
1
,
1
,
1
O z m u
.
i
z m O z
1
,
1
,
1
_
E
L
I
,
,
-
.
t m m O m
,
_
0
_
n
_
o
v
t
v
a
I I
_
o
_
o
I
C
t
-
J
.
m
I
_
=
-
.
_ c
)
i
O m u
,
i
l
Z
,
_
1
.
1
.
1
O
z
_
N
z
O
v
,
k
I
.
I
J
=
E
=
E
o r
k
Z 2
_
n
m
_
!
|
I
,
,
I
,
I
|
I
_
I
n
,
.
I
.
I
.
I
f
_
0 u L
U
,
v |
L
U
I
m
0 f
_
J
I
,
i
i
I @
I
L
_
I
L
_
) [
)(
{
I
{
[
,[
I
l
d
,I
d
l
rr,'1141
MANEUVERING IN ORBlTi
MODIFIED MERCURY SYSTEM
VERTICAL DIRECTIONAL
GYRO GYRO
HORIZON CALIBRATOR
SCANNER
BEACON
PROGRAMMER
/
TIMER
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ATTITUDE
CONTROL
SYSTEM
PILOT

DISPLAY
PROPULSION
SYSTEM
RADAR I --I COMPUTER I I RECORDER
FIGURE 2.5-7
2.5-11
--- _____ _
--
I
I
L
I
R
1
L
_
I
L
_
_
m
4
_
J
L
_
!
C
O
I
T
I
I
m
_
=
S
r
m
,
,
,
.
i
m
l
r
n
_
f
m
r
m
m
l
-
1
1
"
1
o
_
Q
I
T
I
I
m
I
"
1
"
1
o I
T
I
-
-
I
M
'
!
_
Q |
0 Q I
T
I
m Z ,
m
l
/ i
i
n
q
t
S
I
D
m
l
m
I
I
'
1
l
I
D
m
l
I
T
I
U
P
I
'
n
_
o
L
r
l
I
T
I
Z B Z I
T
I
I
T
I
m Z t
_
_
O
I
'
M
"
U
0 i
I
,
o
I
d
,
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
II ,.L
INERTIAL SYSTEM
TIMER .... ----------. r---------il PROGRAMMER
2.5-12
PLATFORM" --I
PLATFORM
ELECTRONICS
DIGITAL
COMPUTER
PILOT
DISPLAY
rial.IIP ..
RECORDER
CONTROL
SYSTEM
FIGURE 2.5-8
f
I
1
I
I
O
_
w
0
"
_
L
:
E
l
U
L
l
0
=
"
n u
J
z z I
,
&
l
o
_
o
c
J
.
z
_
r
.
.
,
e
o
_
0
0
_
"
"
'
C
)
_
_
'
0
o
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
,
.
_
_
b
.
O
)
0
o
_
_
_
m
.
o
_
j
E
]
_
o
0
3
I
4
-
1
o
0
0
J
0
_
o
o
-
_
_
_
_
_
0
_
"
_
0
_
(
1
)
:
_
_
o
'r
C
'
_
_
l
m
'I
il !
i
II
I
I (
i {
I
f
{
(
(
I
I
I I
II

I
System Features
Minimum Change to
Mercury Capsule
Early Availability
High Reliability
Low Power Consumption
High Accuracy
Self Determination of Orbit
Future Potential

TABLE 2.5-1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
GUIDANCE SYSTEM CONSIDERATIONS
Mercury Attitude Control System With
Minor Modifications
Uses Mercury Attitude Control System
Modified by Addition of Program Unit
Mercury Components are well along in
Development
System is Relatively Simple
Power Requirements Essentially
Unchanged from Mercury
Provides Attitude and Burning Time
Control
Requires Ground Radar Tracking for
Navigation
Limited to Attitude Control Type
Functions
At sm tErn !!I III
-""
Inertial System
Requires Addition of Several Major Units,
Including Inertial Platform and Computer
Although Typical Components Exist, Much
More Development is Required to Adapt
Them to the Mercury Capsule
Additional Complicated Components are
Required
Will Require Additional Electrical Power
Monitors Thrust as Well as Burning Time
and Attitude to Central Impulse
Combines Navigation With Attitude Control
Functions
Can be Adapted to Numerous Space-Type
Navigation Guidance and Control Functions
2.5-13
!
0
Z
I
,
I
'
I
r
r
l
m
0
0
,
0
,
0
,
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
2.6 RENDEZVOUS - INTERCEPT TECHNIQ'U'ES
2.6-1
One of the obvious objectives of a maneuver in
orbi t capability is to be able to intercept or
rendezvous with another space vehicle. To
accomplish this, at least in the early families
of space vehicles, will require launching into
an orbit close to the target vehicle. A certain
amount of maneuvering will then have to be done
in order to correct the small errors in posi-
tion and Velocity relative to the target aris-
ing from launching errors. A study of these
maneuvers has been made using a system in which
an impulse is applied that will place the ren-
dezvous vehicle on a collision course with the
target, and a second impulse is given to match
veloci ties with the target at the IOOment of
collision.
The equations of mtion of such a system are
given in Reference. .u. The equations are ap-
- .
plicable for cases in which the target is in
a circular orbit, and the rendezvous vehicle is
always wi thin 200 miles of the target and not
wi thin the atIOOsphere. The coordinate system
used to describe the study is shown in Figure
2.6-1. Results of the study are first shown
for errors in one coordinate only and then for
errors in several coordinates in order to clar-
iry the final curve in Figure 2.6-6, which is
for combinations of errors that are assumed
to be 3 is errors for this study. The rela-
tive velocity required to initiate a collision
course, as well as the relative velocity at
rendezvous, are functions of the initial rela-
tive position of the vehicles and of the time in
which it is desired to accomplish the rendezvous
maneuver.
Figure 2.6-2 shows the magnitude of the relative
Z velocity required to effect a rendezvous at any
desired point for an initial error in the Z co-
ordinate only. This corresponds with the case
of orbital plane misalignment. The optimum way
of aligning orbital planes is to match velocities
at the instant the Z realtive coordinate is zero.
The relative velocity changes associated with
rendezvous near any integral multiple of 180
0
travel during rendezvous maneuver are prohibi-
tively large; however, the magnitude of the re-
quired relative velocity is small for optimum
maneuvers.
Figure 2.6-3 shows the magnitude and direction of
the relative velocity required to rendezvous with
the target for an initial displacement in only
the Y coordinate, as a function of the angle
traveled during the maneuver. Since the plane of
the transfer orbit must contain the initial point
and the center of the Earth, it is not possible to
rendezvous with one initial impulse for any multiple
of 360
0
Another point for prohibitively large
relative velocity and, therefore, a violation of
the small relative distance assumption occurs at
5 0 ~ . Similar points occur for larger angles
but are of small importance here. By a proper
choice of interception time the relative velocity
required can be made quite small.
"liS: 11
"""""'I(
1
0
_
0
'
I
.
.
-
L 1
,
1
,
1
1
,
1
,
1
l
.
_
a
-
1
,
1
,
1
Z n K
'
-
-
I
,
U
I
,
L
I
z B O Z I
,
L
I
h
0
X
_
0
0
q
.
O
.
_
o
_
1
_
m
0
o
_
_
_
_
'
_
_
_
.
_
o
O
O
O
,
1
:
:
1
o
_
_
0
_
o
_
-
_
_
_
_
o
_
o
o
4
.
_
h
.
_
0
o
_
o
I
:
/
_
_
,
_
.
_
I
I
_
N
m
0
O
.
'
_
O
I
1
)
,
_
1
.
_
I
O
_
3
_
1
_
_
o
_
_
o
r
-
-
t
!
0
,
-
_
0
1
>
,
-
-
-
I
_
I
_
o
_
.
o
o
"
_
0
,
1 I
!
0
,
,
-
4
_
_
_
O
4
_
C
H
4
-
_
_
M
_
o
0
r
.
.
-
I
.
_
1
0
_
_
_
_
_
o
o
O
_
_
I
_
0
_
1
,
,
-
I
_
_
_
4
a
o
M
_
_
o
_
_
.
_
_
.
_
.
_
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
)
I
:
0
.
.
l
a
.
_
_
'
_
,
_
.
_
.
_
_
,
_
_
o
_
_
.
o
o
I
_
o
_
,
_
O
O
O
.
r
-
l
.
r
'
l
_
4
"
_
"
1
_
_
_
I
0
o
-
,
e
.
l
o
0
o
4
_
o
r
'
l
'
_
1
O
,
r
'
t
[
1
I
: I
:1
(
(
I
I
I
I
i t
,
(
........... -, 'fn'TM'. ,.,--
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 MANEUVERING IN ORBITI
Figure 2.6-4 shows the magnitude and direction
of the relative velocity required for rendez-
vous for an initial error in only the X coordi-
nate against the angle traversed during the
rendezvous maneuver. The singular point of
5 0 ~ appears here as it did in the case of Y
coordinate error shown previously.
Figure 2.6-5 shows the total velocity change
required for rendezvous for an initial relative
velocity of zero but various combinations of
initial relative position error. All the
singular points in each of the one coordinate
error plots show up in the combined error case.
Figure 2.6-6 shows the net impulsive velocity
change required to initiate the collision
course and match velocity at rendezvous as a
function of the angular distance covered from
the time the first impulse is given. The total
incremental velocity changes shown correspond
to those required to rendezvous with the in-
itial position and relative velocity for the
a s s ~ d 3 ($" errors for this study. The effect
of waiting to apply the first impulse is also
indicated.
Rendezvous Guidance
Intercept guidance requires knowledge of the
relative position and relative velocity of the
target vehicle as viewed from the Mercury cap-
sule. A radar system is employed to locate
and track the target. Relative position and
velocity data measured by the radar is applied
to the thrust vector computer. ttbe computer
generates the thrust vector required for ren-
dezvous. The thrust vector is aligned through
attitude control of the vehicle.
Two antenna configurations appear feasible.
In one configuration the antenna scans over a
small search frame. The vehicle in this con-
figuration rotates to poSition the search frame.
tthe second configuration requires a complex
gimbal system. In the latter configuration the
vehicle is not required to rotate.
The time required to search for either of the
above systems can be reduced by: (A) Increas-
ing beam width; (B) Orientation of the vehicle
to reduce search frame; and (C) beam spoiling.
An adapter or extension of the capsule would
permi t the addition of a radar package to
the present Mercury vehicle. While a practi-
cal system is within the state-of-the-art,
development time would be required to produce
a lightweight miniature system. A radar package
could be built with a total weight of 50 - 60
pounds.
2.6-2
St'f'2't'pr
I
y
'
c
_
!
N 0 0 o m
z 0 0 m 0 Z m
x -
(
0 0 _
o
z m Z 0 f
_
z m
_
_
Z
O
m
C
m
_
'-
,
,
,
,
4
N
m
_
_
_
:
_
I
_
C
"
T
m
_
0
C
_
Q
Z
-
l
-
m m
0
x
N
\
m z o m N 0 m
m
Z m m 0
I
m Z 0 m
N 0 C -
,
-
I
C 0
m m
l
m m J
m u '
7
m m m Z 0 m o ,
,
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

COORDINATE SYSTEM FOR RENDEZVOUS STUDY
2.6-3
POSITION OF TARGET
AT SECOND IMPULSE
/RENDEZVOUS VEHICLE

.... ,0
0'\ f1-

TARGET
x
POSITION OF TARGET
""" AT FIRST IMPULSE
""- ANGLE TRAVELED THROUGH
DURING RENDEZVOUS MANEUVER
X & Y COORDINATE IN ORBITAL PLANE
Z COORDINATE NORMAL TO THE ORBITAL PLANE
FIGURE 2.6-1
CONFIDENTIAL
--nn. -
--
I
I
S
_
-
I
-
Z
'
A
I
I
:
)
O
I
:
]
A
:
_
A
I
.
I
.
V
I
:
I
_
I
I
!
0
l
,
'(
I
I i.1
I.
!
II
l
t
I
I
I
1
. ___ _
'Q "
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
RELATIVE VELOCITY REQUIRED FOR RENDEZVOUS
V)
1:1..
LL.
60
40
N 20
,
>-
I-
U
o
....
w
>
w
o
> -20
l-
e:(
....
....
'"
-40
-60
FIGURE 2.6-2
FROM LATERAL DISPLACEMENT
NOTES: (1) INITIAL ERROR OF 18,000 FT. IN Z RELATIVE COORDINATE
(2) TARGET IN CIRCULAR ORBIT WITH ANGULAR VELOCITY, w,
OF .00115 RAD/SEC.
I
::::- "L-
j
(3 ) RELATIVE VELOCITY REQUIRED IS DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL
TO INITIAL ERROR DISTANCE AND TO w
INITIAL RELATIVE VELOCITY REQU IRED TO INTERCEPT
---------- RELATIVE VELOCITY AT INTERCEPT POINT

I

,
,
,
,
,
I
,
/
" ?
/
,
\
\
\ ,

'... '
........ _-.",.,' J
...
... -
,
,
" j
V
I!
I

/

I
. '

,
80 160 240.(': I 320 400/ 480 560 fi40
/ I ANGLE TRAVELED DURING RENDEZVjS I MANEUVER ,B,IDEGREtS
I : I / ! ! I J
'( ,1---",1
:/T -l,
I I
t" I "
" \
til"
i \
rf ' '.
, I
I
,
,
\1
I
, , ,
, ,
I

i
\
1
I
...... LJ
j
i
- ..
IDS5 h LL

72 o
1
-
2.6-4
I
M
A
G
N
I
T
U
D
E
O
F
R
E
L
A
T
I
V
E
V
E
L
O
C
I
T
Y
R
E
L
A
T
I
V
E
V
E
L
O
C
I
T
Y
,
D
I
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
G
L
E
,
F
P
S
D
E
G
.
=
:
o
_
/
I
-
-
"
/
-
,
,
=
_
o
R
_
o
,
_
$
z
.
C
_
m
0
0
0
0
N
0
0
0
0
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
-
I
f
!
/
-
_
$
;
_
"
<
z
_
o
m
<
"
!
"
_
'
_
_
_
.
m
_
0
m
_
-
<
-
'
_
_
z
_
z
=
0
m
<
_
4
_
-
-
-
_
-
,
,
o
:
o
_
_
o
0
0
i
I
I
,
-
-
_
C
N
_
"
,
i
i
_
.
o
O
_
z
=
Z
.
g
_
-
o
_
.
_
_
i
_
z
i
i
0 Z
#
I
\
i
i
P
_
I
"
3
i
I
0
I
0
0 m N <
i
o
I
i
I
'
I
'
l
i
I
I
'
l
'
l
m I
i
,
d
O
,
0
m Z i Z m m i Z C
)
m 0 !
1
,
o
I
'S '.
r lifo ......... ----.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
2.6-5
FROM VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT
NOTES: (1) INITIAL ERROR OF 18,000 FT. IN Y RELATIVE COORDINATE
(2) TARGET IN CIRCULAR ORBIT WITH w = .00115 RAD./SEC.
(3) RELATIVE VELOCITY REOUIRED IS DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL
TO INITIAL ERROR DISTANCE AND TO w
RELATIVE VELOCITY
DIRECTION ANGLE
x
TARGET INITIAL RELATIVE VELOCITY REOUIRED TO INTERCEPT
RELATIVE VELOCITY AT INTERCEPT POINT
>- _ 400
.... w _ ....
vC)
o z 300
;:;::
> Z ci
wOw 200
>_ 0 _ ....
.... v
W
.... IX
w-
IXo
100
o
EARTH CENTER
200
-
I I
I .. _
>-
........
Ou
wO
0 ....
:::l>VI
.... Q..
-w ....
Z>
C)-
....

w
IX
160
120
80
40
o
o
I ' , -c- - ! T ----,
\ J\ .1 .. _
TT i I J \ IA
'N.. I I __ -' ' \. _ .,'-----
\ .. " ... ... .. ' ........ ... ..
... L ! ..... 1 "--r r"-- ___ .. -
r .... - ---.. --+---1-------- ...... I I ---1.._.1.-_
1
80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720
ANGLE TRAVELED DURING RENDEZVOUS MANEUVER,B, DEGREES
.'
..
FIGURE 2.6-3
I
l
I
u
.
m
m
o
m
.
u
_
'
_
=
o
L
r
e
a
L
m
m m
a
L
l
Z .
o L
L
n
,
e
5
o
> u
J
> m I
,
m
,
=
=
1
E
L
m
u
u
Z
a
-
.
=
,
m
M
.
I
e
_
,
_
"
0
r
-
_
u
.
U
-
'
J
_
,
_
.
,
J
Z
_
_
0
_
_
u
J
Z
-
-
.
_
,
.
a
_
0
_
.
:
:
x
_
_
_
3
-
-
.
z
o
0
u
O
0
,
_
z
.
.
-
I
.o
_
_
Z
'
_
u
_
Z
M
.
I
I
,
-
-
0 Z
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
"
O
:
l
O
'
:
I
I
O
N
V
N
O
I
I
D
:
I
_
I
I
O
A
I
I
D
O
'
I
:
I
A
:
1
A
I
1
V
'
F
:
I
_
1
I
V
I
I
I
N
I
o o
W
U
l
O Q
U
l
o
m
,
_
1
I
=
M
>
.
_
o
.
_
.
z
8
_
,
,
>
x .
.
z
.
_
a
.
=
.
1
/
Z
0
0
0
0
0
O
_
0
4
S
d
-
I
'
X
I
I
D
O
1
3
A
3
A
I
I
V
1
3
_
:
1
0
:
I
O
n
l
I
N
_
)
V
W
q
_
!
!
O I
=
-
I
I
(
il
(
f
t
'I
I
I
!(
: 1
e SS'f'PfNJI&
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
FROM TRAILING DISPLACEMENT
NOTES:
z
... 0
> l-
I- V C>
e:( ......
u:: !!!: 0
0 _
...
..... >- .....
e:( I- C>
V Z
l-
Z g e:(
...
>
>-
u.. I-
o V
o
........
o ... II)
::::I > "-
I- u..
- ...
z >
C) l-
e:( e:(
:E .....
...

FIGURE 2.6-4
(1) INITIAL ERROR OF 18,000 FL IN X RELATIVE COORDINATE
(2) TARGET IN CIRCULAR ORBIT WITH w = .0011S RAD/SEC.
(3) RELATIVE VELOCITY REQUIRED IS DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO INITIAL ERROR
DISTANCE AND TO W
(4) INITIAL RELATIVE VELOCITY REQUIRED AND RELATIVE VELOCITY AT RENDEZVOUS
ARE EQUAL IN MAGNITUDE BUT HAVE DIRECTION ANGLES OF OPPOSITE SIGN
Y DIRECTION ANGLE
TARGET
EARTH CENTER
400
300
200
I
!
!
r
./
I

I
,
I
.-.
c r---
I
!
I
I
I

I I
io""'"
1 !
--
. __ .-
I i
I
100
0
i I i
I
i ,
i I
I i--
I I i
,......rT i
30
1\ I
..
I
"',
I I
I
I
I
.
I-t--L.. J
f7 K
-_._-----
y
.....
I I I
20
10
o
o 80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720
ANGLE TRAVELED DURING RENDEZVOUS MANEUVER.f). DEGREES

2.6-6
L
_
I
-
.
.
3
T
O
T
A
L
_
V
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
,
F
P
S
(
I
N
I
T
I
A
L
I
M
P
U
L
S
E
P
L
U
S
R
E
N
D
E
Z
V
O
U
S
I
M
P
U
L
S
E
)
t
,
O
o
o
o
o
o
_
-
_
-
-
_
o
_
.
_
.
_
.
m
m
m
0
0
0
_
n
0
o
o
_
z
>
7
7
7
o
o
o
o
=
o
o
o
.
_
'
5
5
'
5
5
5
5
_
z
z
Z
_
=
"

-
-
4
m m m 0 (
3
i -
K
m
0
n
m 0 "
M
0
m Z 0 r
5
5
N 0 C
m .
.
_
m ,
0
m Z n Z m m i Z m 0 -
-
4
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
NOTE:
1. TARGET IN CIRCULAR ORBIT WITH W = .00115 RAD./SEC.
2. INITIAL RELATIVE VELOCITY IS ZERO
INITIAL ERROR OF + 18,000 FT. IN EACH OF THE X,Y AND Z RELATIVE COORDINATES.
------- INITIAL ERROR OF + 18,000 FT. AND -18,000 FT. IN X AND Y RELATIVE COORDINATES RESPECTIVELY .
............. "."",,.. INITIAL ERROR OF + 18,000 FT. AND + 18,000 FT. IN X AND Y RELATIVE COORDINATES RESPECTIVELY.
VELOCITY
/
DIRECTION ANGLE
x
TARGET
Z IS POSITIVE OUT OF PAPER
EARTH CENTER
w
II)
.....
:::>
Q..

320
i------T-
I
II)
II)
:::>
Q..
0 ...
>
I
I
240
0 N I
w w
a:: 0
I
I
:::>
z
0
w
a::
w
I
I
I
160
a::
II)
>
:::>
.....

0 Q..
I-

.....

I-
Z
\ .......
--t
'r" I .'
'.
80
00
720 80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640
ANGLE TRAVELED DURING RENDEZVOUS MANEUVER, (), DEGREES
2.6-7
FIGURE 2.6-5
..,..-; AU WE" IIAL""'
1 -
o
-
Z
u
_
.
.
=
,
_
_
J
Z
u
J
=
E
t
u
r
w
u Z i _
_
_
J
O
z
_
U
-
r
i O > N Z
!
.
+
i
}
/
i
O
o
t
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
,
0
c
,
l
c
0
,
_
-
o
o
o
I
L
l
,
'
v
'
0 &
.
l
.
l
I
J
.
l
> :
3
I
L
l
Z :
E
:
3
0 > N I
L
l
(
3
Z u
J
0 Z c
_
.
_
I
w > ,
v
I
.
-
,
-
I
.
I
.
I
.
-
-
I
(
.
D
Z
(
:
l
S
l
r
l
d
W
I
S
1
O
A
Z
:
I
Q
N
3
_
I
s
r
l
l
d
3
S
l
r
l
d
W
I
I
_
I
I
I
N
I
)
S
c
l
_
'
(
]
3
_
l
l
n
O
a
_
l
A
T
l
V
I
0
1
0
o I
(
/
)
r
,
D
I
r
,
D
I
-
-
I
ill
I
(
i I
1
I
I
I
(
II
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
w
V)
.....
::::>
0-
:E
V)
V)::::>
!O
- >
o N
w w
",0
::::>Z

w
",V)
::::>
> .....
<\0-
w
..... V)
c:t .....

00-

.....
c:t

z
FIGURE 2.6-6
TOTAL I NCREMENTAL VELOCITY REQUIRED FOR
RENDEZVOUS WITH COMBINATION OF LAUNCH ERRORS
ERRORS AT INITIAL POINT:
(1) ONE MINUTE DELAY IN (5) Y BO 18,000 FT. HIGH
INTERCEPTOR LAUNCH TIME
(2) V BO 10 FPS SLOW
(3) YBO = + .075 DEG.
(6) X BO 36,000 FT. SHORT
(7) Z BO 18,000 FT. TO LEFT
(4) 'I"BO .075 DEG. TO LEFT
NOTE: (6) AND (7) ARE IN ADDITION TO X AND Z ERRORS DUE TO (1).
LEGEND
INITIAL IMPULSE APPLIED AT INITIAL POINT
INITIAL IMPULSE APPLIED AFTER 15
0
TARGET TRAVEL FROM INITIAL POINT I
IN ITIAL 1M PU LSE APPLIED AFTER 30
0
TARGET TRA VEL FROM IN ITI AL PO INT - 1 /'l-
1600, 1
' : : 1
I : : ,
\ i I! \- ;,
t--
i I. i II ; I
L-' ,'.1:,;,
1200"
800

rl-
\. I
+ O.--------t---___
I",
: II
400---

, '.
'.... /--I

-I I
I
I
-- - - --
1 :
0' ! ! !! !!
o 80 160 240 320 400 480 560 640 720
ANGLE TRAVELED DURING RENDEZVOUS MANEUVER ,O/DEGREES
2.6-8
0
m
L 0
L
Z
m
w w z m
0 z _
J
D
0
,
-
4
0
-
,
-
4
o
_
o
_
_
_
_
0
_
_
,
,
-
-
-
I
_
o
_
'
_
4
o
0
o
_
,
_
o
o
_
o
_
o
_
_
l
_
_
o
o
I
_
/
_
_
0
,
,
_
I
_
,
_
o
_
_
-
_
0
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
,
_
_
-
_
_
0
_
J
.
,
_
.
"
1
-
1
_
.
_
_
0
o
_
_
_
_
.
_
o
_
_
,
.
_
o
_
_
_m
0
_
0
o
i
I I
I
I
!I!
I
I
A
CONI IE
SElF-CONTAINED GUIDANCE I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
SEU.-.cONTAINED GUIDANCE
300 INTRoruCTION: As space flight progresses, t.he need for self-contained guid-
ance systems will become increasingly evident 0 These needs will stem from
requirements 'to improve launch accuracy, maneuver and rendezvous in orbit:;
cont.rol t.he touchdown point and perform navigation on lunar and inter-
planetary missions. The Mercury vehicle can" with relatively minor modifi-
cation, serve as a suitable vehicle for test of self-contained guidance
techniques. The system described herein, especially if employed in a
or touchdown-control Vehicle, will allow demonstration
of a number of the improvements to be gained through self -contained guidance c
301 BASIC CONCEPT
Adaptation of capsule provides an
avail9.ble space laboratory for t,he t.esting
and. development of guidance
equipment 0 In addition to providing a true
space flight this technique
offers the following features: on the spot
observation and flexibility in
and the ability to recover the
equipment being tested. As show in the
following sections, it is possible to make
room for the guidance sYRtem components in the
ca.psule by relocating several of t.he storage
batteries in a common package with the
rockets 0 This allows the
to be jettisoned and thereby avoids any
ficant increase in re.-.entry and abort weights.
An ad.di tional battery is incorporated to pro-
vide for the increased electrical power
by the added equipment.
II! i2 COl
3,1=1
0
@
o
_
0
I
_
o
+
I
-
+
.
c
_
_
_
r
,
_
N
f
_
C
D
+
_
e
_
8
r
t
-
g
!
0
o
q
)
m
_
t
_
m
_
r
o
I
T
I
m Z m
m
,
_
,
_
o
i
I
_
m
m
O
m
_
0
'
,
0
,
0
,
,
(
)
'
,
0
1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

L!!:Ii-CONTAINEDG_U IDANi!]
3,2 VEHICLE CONFIGURATION

F.i.gttres 3.2,,1 and. 3 < shu" the arrangement of
equiprncnt that i8 added. to c:onvert
the existing Mercury into a test plat-
form for inertial guldarl' ...'e The prin-
ciple u..'1i tB' addei arE a s tar 9J1
tial platfc:.:rm.
J
ana a 1'1"ivigat:.ion and tracking
C'nmputer. Tho:" hoJrl2'Cni sE;sker is .re taint'-d 6.(1,:1 a
radio al tim.:; ter can be added for sPE""i fie:
mi.ss ions f;:r wh.i::h it is required. The: addie,
ti:lO of thE:6P i t ... th", C'apsu.le in tE'riOl'
Clul re.s rel:)!"'), tLlt; :)f thE' ot", blJiz;a Uon
sys tern hflium b)ttl'::'"E'. th:r'''':6 batt.,.,rif,5 and. tWl)
lDve:cters >:tu'i whleh are also illustrated
l..n new locdtions o
The star tracker is shown pOSitioned normal tn
the capsule skin on the side centerline. An
insulated door, hinged at the shingle mold line
is provided to the star tracker tele-
scope and window from the- heat encountered
during launch and re-entry. The door is actua-
ted electrica.lly when tho;: star tr'3.cker is turm:d
on or 'Jff. A r..and operated mechanical system
for emBrgency operation of the door is also
provided.
The inerth.l lucated_ immediately
bEluw thE- star t.racker} wi th both units at.tachf;j
to a single mULL This fa(';ili tates alignmEnt
of the 'tVCI units with relation to each other
and. minimizes the effects of any deflE'ctitms
on the alignmenL Also, the inertidl platform
may be combined with the star tracker as a
Bingle uni t at any future date wi thout
ing the remaining equipment.
,anlRf
Nr
,""
l -
@
,
,
@
_
,
,
@
.
-
_
J
L I
A
I
I
A
I
L I
J
J
Z m w z m Z
o
H
o
o
_
"
_
o
_
,
_
o
_
,
_
_
.
%
_
o
_
o
_
o
,
_
.
,
_
0
_
0
e
_
_
o
o
_
_
:
_
o
o
_
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
.
_
_
.
_
O
J
J
_
(
f
{
[
{
[
A
'O"iWE
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 SELF-CONTAINED GUIDANCE I
The present Mercury vertical and directional gyros
are reIJK)ved from th"" ca.psule since the inertial
platf'Jrm gyros fulf'ill the same function.
The na.vigation and tracking computer is shown in
three packages on the equipment shelves; two
packages occupy the space where three 3000
hour batteriES were and one package
occupies the space previously to the
directional gyro. The platform electronics pack-
age is added on the shelf adjacent to the largest
computer package. The relay panel as sembly and
inverters, displaced by the platform electronics,
are shown relocated in the space vacated by the
verticle gyro and on the face of the electronic
panels to the right of the pilot.
The three 1500 batteries are retained in
the capsule to supply power for the re -entry and
post landing periods
J
and to provide emergency
standby power. The three 3000 watt-hour batteries
removed from the capsule are augmented by a fourth
uni t and attac.hed to the retrograde package struc-
ture. These are used to supply pre-launch, launch
and orbit power requirements. One of them is wired
for use as a standby unit. 'nle redundant power
supply increases the reliability of the mission.
See Table for definition of power require-
ments.
A weight and C.G. envelope comparison of the
ing Mercury Capsule versus the modified configura-
tion is shown in Tables 3.2-2 and 3.2=3 and Figure
3.2-3.
P ,r'Dr"'TIAI __
3.2-l
.
1
!
L
_
M L
_ !
k
-
L
O
g I
m
O
+
!
i
+
m
e
Z -
4
m
)
>
;
o
Z
0
m
m Z .
-
.
I
Z m Z r
r
l
m m Z
m
m
m 0
m -
'
*
O
,
_
D
_
D
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
melC'.T
- .... ....
/
I
I
!
> ,
, f
'\ . \
,,\,
"
,
"
3.2-2

3000 W.H. BATTERIES
B - B
r - B
\

B
\
\
\
-3000 W.H. BATTERIES
- NAVIGATION & TRACKING COMPUTER
rlNERTIAL PLATFORM ELECTRONICS
/
- STAR TRACKER
/'
trt
INERTIAL PLATFORM
o 20 40
I" II 1111 II I I
SCALE IN INCHES
UPPER BATTERIES OMITTED FOR CLARITY
FIGURE 3.2-1
iPt'E'Rtz.
; .
I
l
O
_
O
,
,
-
u
'
l
O
,
O
,
i
v
u
J
0
"
a
.
:
E
L
U
L
U
0
a
.
L
U
Z
v
_
m L
U
1
4
J
Z m 0 Z u
J
i
.
-
z I
J
J
=
E
I
J
J
Z i
v
I
-
-
Z L
U
a
.
m :
:
:
)
0 L
U
m
z
-
-
Z
m
-
-
<
C
U
C
_
t
!
I
N
g
b
.
1
0 r
_
{
{
FIGURE 3.2-2
,r'DC,'TI A I
EQUIPMENT ARRANGEMENT
/
I
A - A
IAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
o 20 40
L III III III I.. I
SCALE IN INCHES
3.2-3
b
!
0 (
B
i
.
t
c
_
0 0 0
"
_
,
_
f
D I
C
_
B
'
J
(
-
]
!
c
]
r
-
h
(
D
4
-
o
0
>
_
o
.
.
_
_
,
_
.
_
-
'
o
_
,
-
.
.
_
0
D
,
t
D
o
o
e
.
.
_
d
:
,
,
.
t
i
p
,
-
.
.
1
0
o
0
0
0
0
b
_
0
0
0
_
O
C
,
O
0
O
_
I
,
-
]
0
!
.
n
0 r
_
O
'
J
1
"
"
4
0
_
0
0
>
0
c
a
_
J
,
Q
L
X
_
I
m z n X m m I
u
_
Z
m r
T
I
m
m
0
m
J
.
,
o
.
,
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

TABLE 3.2-1
SELF-CONTAINED GUIDANCE I
ELECTRICAL POWER MODIFICATION FROM MERCURY REQUIREMENTS
USING A SELF CONTAINED GUIDANCE SYSTEM
3.2-4
I NORMAL MISSION
ITEM TYPE POWER
A. Add:
1. Inertial Platform DC
2. Compute r DC
3. Star Tracker DC
Sub-Total
B. Remove:
1. Aero Medical DC
2. Capsule Environment DC
3. Attitude Gyro AC
Sub-Total
C. Net Change
II EMERGENCY AND STAND-BY
HOURS WATTS
28
10
27
4.5
4.6
28
90
60
20
44.2
39.9
57.5
WATT-HOURS
2520
600
540
199
184
1696
A. Same as Project Mercury Vehicle for Launch, One Orbit and Re-Entry
cu iULi.'CS as L
D. C. EQUIVALENT
WATT-HOURS
2520
600
540
mm
199
184
2423
2806
+854
l
_
O
,
-
-
I
=
=
i
v
u
J
1
4
,
1
I
,
M
f
_
*
I
=
=
O
a
.
M
.
I
Z
u
_
u I
,
M
M
,
I
z B O z I
,
M
t
t
_
t
_
J
N
[
/
2
O
O
O
_
1
_
_
o
_
_
.
o
o
_
_
N
O o
t
_
_
_
0
i
c
_
1
_
_
-
_
L
O
_
_
_
_
1
_
_
L
"
-
0
_
1
I
N
I
l
[
: I
!I i
Structure
Adapter
Escape System
Heat Shield
Automatic Control System and
Guidance
Reaction Controls
Posigrade
Retrograde
Landing System
Instruments and Navigation
Electrical Group
Communications
Te lemetry and Recording
Recovery Gear
Crew and Survival
Gross Launch Weight
co,'" 1*1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 3.2-2
Mercury Self Contained
Ref. 20 Guidance Remarks
485 485
142 142
932 932
347 347
63 199 Added Inertial Platform, Computer and Star Tracker
132 132
21 21
231 231
155 155
91 91
274 332 Increased Electrical Requirements
109 109
134 144 Increased Cooling Water
92 76 Removed Personnel Data Instrumentation
57 57
229 229
3494 3682
3.2-5
em :&rnn "II'
.
o
I
_
o
t
D
2
_
t
D
_
_
_
_
g
q
Q
_
N
_
l
,
.
d
_
.
,
i
Q
o
-
1
0
v
o
o
_
_
0
Q
_
i
,
.
_
o
0
r
_
I
.
i
_
i
o
.
_
-
_
.
,
,
_
0
_
"
o
I
o
-
1
v
m -
-
I
r
l
'
l
m ,
,
0
m Z 0 m Z m m m
Z 0 m 0
I
I
.
)
1
_
"
I
l
_
I
o
-
1
I
O
_
0
"
_
0
_
.
-
.
_
-
-
_
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Gross Weight - Launch
Less:
Escape Tower
Less:
Adapter
Posigrade Prope Ilant
Weight in Orbit
Less:
Water - Cooling
Hydrogen Peroxide
Retrograde Weight
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
--
TABLE 3.2-3
Mercury
Ref. 20
(3494)
-932
(2562)
-142
-7
(2413)
-27
-7
(2379)
-10
Retrograde Posigrade Installation
Batteries
-245
3.2-6
~ C U N f I U ~
Sell-Contained
Guidance
(3682)
-932
(2750)
-142
-7
(2601)
-37
-7
(2557)
-10
-245
-193
I
l
O
,
a
_
0
1
.
I
,
i
.
I
0 Z m Z m 0 Z I
,
i
.
I
I
m
L l
a
w
v
t
'
-
- !
'
o
0
v
v 0
CO", IbU au L
I SELF-CONTAINED GUIDANCE I
Table 3.2-3 (Continued)
Re-Entry Weight (2124)
Less:
Water - Cooling
-3
AI
Ablated Material
-146 (1)
End of Re-Entry (1970)
I
Less:
Nose Cone -39
Equipment -12
Drogue Chute -8
Main Chute Design Weight (1911)
Less:
Main Chute -60
Impact Weight (1851)
Less:
Reserve Chute -60
Pilot Chute -2
Dye Markers -1
SOFAR Bombs -7
Flotation Weight (1744)
dE C ~ l l " 'BlI2Ta,
--
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
(2109)
-5
-3
-50 (2)
(2051)
-39
-12
-8
(1992)
-60
(1932)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1825)
3.2-7
D
,
9
I
C
o
Q L
_
.
o
0
I
t
.
o
o O
o L
0
o o
N
3
O O O O
O
o
_
0
o o
o
W
E
I
G
H
T
-
P
O
U
N
D
S
o
,
.
b
,
a
o
h
.
1
o
,
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
I
,
O
m 0 Z
Z m 0 m
I
m Z m Z m m m
_
Z
m m
m
3
-
w
m
0
m
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4000
3600
In
3200
c
Z
::J
0
CONFiDER iiAL
[[tv
1
SELF CONTAINED GUIDANCE
I
RV
j
l I ........... .. "' .. j-
Q..
2800
,
.....
, ..................... ,.......................... I I
.... .... " .... "",,, ... "F-j"'._. --+---+----+-----1---+--
:I:

3
...
:: 2400
2000
16'00
0 .10
3.2-8
1. GROSS WEIGHT -LAUNCH I
. 3. ORBIT WEIGHT . ___ ---1
2. GROSS WEIGHT IN
.20
5. RE-ENTRY WEIGHT
6. END OF RE-ENTRY
- 7. MAIN CHUTE DESIGN WEIGHT

.30 .40

.50
Z/D
8. IMPACT WEIGHT
9. FLOTATION WEIGHT
.60 .70 .80
,...*. 3 "&11>'---- _
.90 1.00
l -
FIGURE 3.2-3
O
"
0
_
0
m
G
,
.
0
Z
_
Z
0
Z
J
J
t
(
A.
~ " " b 1 l m ....
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
3.3 LAUNCH, ABORT AND ESCAPE CONSIDERATIONS
Since the changes from the basic Mercury vehicle
are primarily confined to equipment arrangement,
vi th onl.y a moderate effect on overall weight,
the launch phase of the Self-Contained Guidance
mission is identical to that of Mercury. The
Atlas D is used as a booster, and the Mercury
posigrade rockets are used to separate the cap-
sule from the booster.
s:3I''W.IU.''
A summary of the booster characteristics, along
vi th the various stage and weight breakdowns -ror
the subject mission is given in Table 3.3-1.
The abort and escape techniques are also iden-
tical to those of the basic Mercury vehicle.
These provisions are described in References 2
and 20, and, therefore, are not repeated here.
33-1
o
!
_
0
!
v
i
v
o
_
_
g
_
_
e
.
.
n
0
,
.
-
)
t
_
t
_
m ,
.
-
I
m m
m Z m Z m m i Z m
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 3.3-1
5g
NF
'Pft'J' "
ATLAS uD" BOOSTER SUMMARY
Empty Atlas tiD" (Booster stage)
Usable Propellants
Empty Atlas "D" (Sustainer stage)
Trapped Propellantl!l and Fluids
Usable Propellants
Payload
Capsule
Tower
Adapter
6,547
390
202,730
6,754
391
43,500
2,608
932
142
209,667 Lbs.
50,645 Los.
3,682 Lbs .
263,994 Lbs.
PROPULSION SYSTEM THRUST BURNING TIME SPECIFIC IMPULSE
3-3-2
Atlas "D" (LOX/RP-l)
Atlas uD" (LOX/RP-l)
(sustainer)
368,000 Lbs. at S. L. 134 Sec. 244.0 Sec.
84,724 Lbs. at Alt. 294 Sec.
309.7 Sec.
co. n'Pc.'TIAL___.
. ~
l -
I
I
0
,
0
"
O
"
,
,
0
,
-
-
l
,
&
l
I
,
I
,
I
I
,
I
,
I
Z
,
,
_
m
_
,
,
,
,
,
-
l
,
&
l
z m 0 Z
o
_
o
_
I
-
4
.
.
.
-
I
"
I
_
o
4
a
o
_
4
_
,
-
-
t
_
_
4
.
)
_
.
H
,
.
_
)
t
-
I
_
)
_
)
.
c
:
l
I
4
0
_
0
.
H
.
H
I
l
J
_
o
,
_
_
,
o
_
'
_
o
_
-
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
.
I
_
4
.
_
I
.
.
i
I
)
_
.
.
,
-
I
_
o
4
_
.
H
.
,
-
4
.
H
O
-
H
_
J
_
_
4
"
_
_
_
_
4
a
I
_
_
_
,
_
o
_
,
0
0
-
I=
'
.
_
4
-
_
,
I
-
I
I
-
I
&
I
o
-
r
-
t
_
.
t
_
0
r
n
_
-
_
o
e
e
_
_
_
,
.
.
4
a
l
_
'
r
t
_
,
_
,
o
_
o
0
.
,
-
4
_
-
_
"
_
0
_
_
_
_
o
o
o
_
o
,
e
l
u
e
.
a
r
-
4
o
o
o
t
D
o
4
_
0
.
p 0 0
,
-
I I
__ I COi4F1DEN IIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
3.4 THE DESCRIPTION OF GUIDANCE SYSTEM
The purpose of this section is to demonstrate
the feasibility of self-contained guidance and
to pOint out approaches to mechanizing such
systems,
Two guidance systems are discussed:
A) A quasi-inertial guidance system for incor-
poration into Mercury in the near future.
B) A conventional inertial guidance system.
The prefix "quasi n is employed since only the
gimbal angles of the stabilized platform are
used for information purposes, i.e., there is
no integration of accelerometer outputs as in
the so called conventional system.
Quasi-Inertial System
The quasi -inertial guidance system is mechan-
ized around five major components:
A) A stabilized table or platform
B) A horizon scanner
c) A two axis star sight
D) A radio altimeter
E) A computer
Information flow between the components of the
quasi -inertial guidance system is shown in
Figure 3.4-1..
The platform-horizon scanner combination is
mechanized to provide vehicle position on the
surface of the earth. By measuring the angular
posi tion of the local vertical in the inertial
space coordinates of the stabilized platform,
the latitude of the vehicle is obtained directly.
The determination of 10ng1tude requires compen-
sation for the preselected orientation of the
stabilized table plus the angular displacement
of the earth during the mission.
The basic inputs to the quasi-inertial system
are star position and the direction of the
local geographical vertical. The outputs are
altitude and distance ,to destination. Alti-
tude and distance to destination serve as
basic inputs to the control system.
The remainder of this section presents a brief
description of the major components of the
quasi-inertial system.
Table - The table and associated hardware is
presented schematically in Figure 3.4-2.
Horizon Scanner - The direction of the local
geographical vertical is determined by a
horizon scanner. The horizon scanner system
consists basically of the unit employed in
Mercury 'With the exception that it ~ be
stabilized to isolate the scanner from
COl411 SInM
3.4-1
I
I
0
I
'
l
r
l
0
m 7 I
'
I
'
1
1
I
r
l
"
l
_
,
,
P
O
a 7
I
T
I
-
o
0
,
,
,
-
I
p
0
r
r
i
i
l
l
"
1
,
0
i
'
r
t
_
0
-
-
'
O
,
,
,
0
J
,
,
l
p
,
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
gyrat.ions of the vehicle. A single axis bloc;k
diagram of such a stabilization syst.em 1s shown
in Figure 3.4-3.
The system ia compensated to employ the gyro
loop for short-term high-rate stabilization,
while t.he scanner loop is employed for long
term averaging. In this way the anomalies of
the horizon surface are averaged.
The 3 error over the earth as a
function of the angular error in determining
a vertical is shown in the graph in Figure
3.4-4. In addition the performance of present
and future horizon scanners as supplied by
horizon scanner manl1facturers are super-imposed
on this graph. The locus of position
errors resulting from an error (E v) in deter-
mining the true vertical is illustrated in the
sketch to the right of the graph.
Star Sight - The star sight is employed to
sense the misalignment of the stable table from
its correct orientation. This misalignment or
error is applied as a correctier. signal to drive
the platform in such a manner as to eliminate
this error. Th"" star sight COnGiBts of a tele-
scope and rotational gimbal system. The tele-
scope as shown in Figure 3.4-5 is mourlted on
the inner gimbal of a two-axis gimhal system.
Gimbal order is such that the outer gimbal is
azimuth with the inner gimbaJ. elevation. The
optical system is positioned by driving the
azimuth gimbal through the sidereal hour angle
(SHA*) plus a constant. The constant is numer-
ically equal. to the Greenwich hour angle of
Aries (GHAT) at the instant of launch. The
! SELF-CONTAINED GUIDANCE I
elevation axis iti driven through the declina-
tion angle of the star (0*). Both the sidereal
hour angle and declination angle rema.in constant
in table coordinates and are read directly into
the system from star tables prior to launch.
Altimeter - The distance of the vehicle from the
earth and other cele3tial bodies is required.
While space flights are maintained in the
neighborhood of earth, a device similar to
present radio altimeters will meet this require-
ment. On a longer term basiS, ho'Wever, "atti-
meters" will require much greater range than is
currently available.
For the applications discussed herein the alti-
meter is needed only intermittently having a
duty cycle of approximately over a 24 hour
mission. This duty cycle percentage is reduced
as mission time increases.
Computer - The computer to be employed 'Will be a
hybrid system employing beth digital and analog
techniques. In the interest of
reliability, econamy, simplicity and pewar
consumpt10u the computer wl.J.l be ta.ilored to the
job at hand. Transist:.)r cir'!ui try 'Will be em-
ployed where possible to minj.mize power I space
and weight ()t tha
Present latitude and longitude are available
from calculations emplOying the position of the
local vertical in XYZ coordinates described
earlier. The geometry and mechanization for
the determination of latitude and longitude are
shown in Figure 3.4-6. Latitude and longitude
plus altitude locate the vehicle in earth
3.4-2

l
O
"
O
,
O
'
O
'
I
-
-
,
w
u
J
0
m M
.
I
g I
.
&
l
i
a
.
I
Z u 0 z
4
_
.
r
-
I
0
0
_
o
_
.
r
-
I
o
"
_
'
_
0
.
_
0
4
_
_
%
,
-
_
0
r
-
I
.
,
-
I
+
-
_
_
4
_
.
.
_
%
0
c
o
4
_
0
o
4
0
'
0
o
'
_
0
%
'
e
l
o
_
!
-
.
-
I
"
A
,
0
o
o
.
,
-
I
o
_
4
.
_
r
-
I
_
0 _
0
0
0
-
I
_
o
_
_
g
_
o
_
0
_
_
.
_
4
o
N
_
g
.
t
o
4
0
.
_
.
r
_
0
_
_
.
_
_
0
0
(
I
,{
[
CON Pi DC
coordinates. Knowledge of the present latitude
and longitude \II and i\ and the latitude
and longitude 'Yd and'" d of the destination
permits computation of distance-to destination.
Distance to destination and altitude are applied
as basic inputs to the control system.
Conventional Inertial Guidance - The quasi-
inertial system presented thus far is intended
primarily for near earth missions after ascent.
Through the addition of accelerometers the basic
quasi-inertial scheme can be applied to ascent,
maneUver-in-orbit, rendezvous, interplanetary
missions and descent. To gain insight into the
various modes of operation of the conventional
inertial system a lunar landing and return
mission is employed to carry the discussion.
During ascent from the earth the guidance sys-
tem serves the function of guiding the vehicle
onto a lead collision course with the moon.
After attaining free flight the horizon scanner
and ranging device are employed to determine
the position of the vehicle with respect to
the earth and moon in the XYZ coordinate sys-
tem discussed earlier. The inertial system
defines the velocity of the vehicle at
injection into orbit. The position and
velocity thus obtained ar'e compared in the
computer to the correct position and
velocity required to effect a collision with
the moon. Should error exist the impulse
required to correct the flight path is deter-
tid 81.1F'IEamAl
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
mined. The vehicle is oriented to apply this
impulse in the required direction. The
accelerometers, during the application of thrust,
are used to meter the impulse. The process may
be repeated as necessary to correct the flight
path of the vehicle.
On approaching the moon the vehicle would "back
down" the local moon vertical by applying thrust
to decrease collision velocity. The horizon
scanner and the ranging system serve as the
basic input devices during the control to
touchdown.
On return to the earth the process is basically
the same as that for the outward leg until
entering the atmosphere. In the interest of
conserving fuel,energy is dissipated by aero-
dynamic drag to retard vehicle veloCity.
The guidance system operates in the same manner
as a quasi-inertial system during touchdown on
the earth. Should the horizon scanner prove
unreliable at the lower altitudes (100,000 feet
or less) a pure inertial mode is available for
guidance to touchdown.
The key components to the system are the horizon
scanner and ranging device. Great payoff would
be realized through research and development in
these areas.
3.4-3
C
_
I
_
1
I
I
0
1
I
I
0
1
I
i
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
-
4
I
I
|
i
"
r
l
I
I
I
'
_
I
I
_
I
',
,
,
4
m
I ! I i
n
0 z ,
=
=
1
0
0
z
I
>
-
_
,
I
I
J
0
z
0 -
=
t
-
-
0 Z
I
I
m m
m
m
0
m
--.
COl" IDElq I IAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
3.4-4
INTEGRATED QUASI-INERTIAL GUIDANCE SYSTEM
* * \
\ 12
\ I
\ I
\ I
\ I
\ /
VI
* ..
STAR I ,l2 SHA 1 SHA 2
SIGHT ..
FLIGHT
-----II
PERTURBATIONS
STABLE
TABLE
.. I,.. N
- C"I
::I: * J:'"
II) CO V) CO
1 ? 1 7

STAR POSITION DATA
COMPUTER t-:a* -a-* .... ....
1 2 SHA 1 SHA 2
[ TABLE ORIENTATION
FLIGHT
.. I
PERTU RBA TlON S
SCANNERS I
VERTICAL
SYSTEM
TIME
HTORQUERI
1
I
RESOLUTION
MATRIX

COMPo
.
EARTH RATE
l/f d ---

SYSTEM
A d- - -1=--_ .....
SHA"= SIDEREAL HOUR ANGLE OF STAR
l/J = LA TlTU DE
A = LONGITUDE
d = DISTANCE TO DESTINATION
aJf.= 0 E C LI N A TI 0 NAN G LEO F S TAR
h = ALTITUDE
Ll = ERROR
RADIO I h ISMOOTHERr
AL TlMETER
,.."' ... r. ..",r ,., ,
FIGURE 3.4-1
l -
I
o
o
_
u
J
u
J
Z
u
_
i
r
!
I
{
(

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
...J..,
'" I
DECLINA
f
tY
>
t. I II -%- * \ "

ANGLE
Z I X
CElESTIAL EQUATOR
THE STAR SIGHT IS DIRECTED TOWARD STAR AND MEASURES ERROR BETWEEN
STAR POSITION IN STAR SIGHT COORDINATES AND TRUE POSITION OF STAR.
ERROR IS APPLIED TO PLATFORM TORQUER THROUGH APPROPRIATE AMPLIFIERS
IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO DRIVE THE TABLE SO AS TO ELIMINATE THE ERROR.
GYROS ARE EMPLOYED IN TIGHT STABILIZATION LOOP TO ISOLATE THE SYSTEM
FROM SPACE PERTURBATIONS.
ST AR SIGHT - PLATFORM COMBINATION CONSTITUTE A SPACE-STABILIZED I
CElESTlAL-SPHERE-ORIENTED COORDINATE SYSTEM.
THE XYZ COORDINATE SYSTEM OF THE INERTIAL TABLE IS A THREE AXIS RIGHT
HANDED ORTHOGONAL SYSTEM HAVING FIXED ANGULAR ORIENTATION SUCH
THAT THE Z AXIS IS SLAVED TO THE GREENWICH MERIDIAN AT THE TIME OF
LAUNCH, WITH THE Y AXIS DIRECTED ALONG THE AXIS OF ROTATION OF THE EARTH.
THE PLATFORM SUPPORTS THREE MUTUAllY PERPENDICULAR ACCElEROMETERS
AND GYROS WITH APPROPRIATE TORQUERS AND RESOLVERS.
FIG URE 3.4-2
COlCPln,mA!
3.4-5
I
_
_
_
l
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
fQNflPENn Al
SINGLE AXIS HORIZON SCANNER CONTROL SYSTEM
3.4-6
TIGHT STAB. LOOP
COARSE TILT
COMMAND
,
I
TORQUE
MOTOR
,:- .. .:.:-:.:.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.;.: ;.::< ,.:-:-:-;.:.;. ... ;. .. ;.;.. ;.:.:.:.: ;';':':: ;.:-;.;.: ;.;.: .... ;.:./ :! I
~ l J =FINE TILT COMMAND
HORIZON
SCANNER
cot'n? II m . t : ~
----------
I
I
I
FIGURE 3.4-3
I
l
(
'
I
W
"
V
N
}
d
_
7
'
_
l
O
_
l
_
l
:
:
l
N
O
I
J
.
I
S
O
d
.
0
L
'
-
,
.
i
I
0
CONFIDZi c' 'iIII,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
ACCURACY IN DETERMINING POSITION ON THE EARTH
WITH
HORIZON SCANNER-PLATFORM COMBINATION, PLATFORM DRIFT=O
Ll P = 60 iV
:: 30 PRESENT.
~ IR SCANNERS
. (UNCOOLED
~ 25 DETECTORS)--+I-#----l
Q.
'0:::]
.:i201 I
o
011:
011:
w 15 PRESENT
Z IR SCANNERS
o (COOLED
~ 10 DETECTORS)
'"
o
Q.
~ 51 I
___ ---tFUTURE MICROWAVE
t
SCANNERS
FIGURE 3.4-4
PLATFORM COORDINATE SYSTEM
TRUE
VERTICAL
z
MEASURED
VERTICAL
y'
SIMU LATED EARTH
ON VEHICLE
.J-= :V 'L I X'
SEGMENT
iV=ERROR IN VERTICAL
CONFIDE! j'j , ,
~
3.4-7
i
i
I
C
o
_
j
I
I
I
c
_
-
r
"
1
-
t
_
i
,
i
m
0 I
'l
P
I
,
-
-
I
5 z
1
0 Z
0
0
"
U
C m
\
I
I
m _
Q
0
"
1
-
I
I
l
i
Z
_
,
=
=
1
_
0
o
z
C
0
_
_
Z
_
0
m
#
i
5 z
CO"F1DENTlR'
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 [SELF-CONTAINED GUIDANCE [
3.4-8
ONE OPTICAL SYSTEM
IS DRIVEN BACK AND FORTH
BETWEEN TWO OR MORE STARS.
STAR SIGHT
SYSTEM
\

/'"
'"
TABLE
",/
*
'" 2

STAR SIGHTI NG
*2
,
,
,
,
,
I
I
: ./
I
/'

6SHA
2

VIDICON
'",,-
I
I
I
SHA* & SHA*
y2
L
L
*1
SHA*= SIDEREAL HOUR ANGLE
0*= DECLINATION OF STAR
L1 = ERROR
CORRECTION COMMAND COMPUTER
TABLE
c= =-:::J ___________________ J
FIGURE 3.4-5
CQD'PLZldIIAL
,
,.
O
,
O
,
O
"
O
_
'
0
,
-
-
n
,
,
w
0
,
n
L
L
U
J
_
'
I
-
-
0
_
-
M
J
Z I n
,
,
'
-
-
I
,
I
J
z m 0 z L
U
x
X
o 0
I
Z
0 o
)
-
-
u
l
o w o _
J
o
o
Z Z 2 0 o z
_
Z )
-
-
Z o Z
o 0
!
Z Z L
)
Z
0 o "
1
-
!
t
_
I
0
i I
(
{
{
I !
II
.....- tSlrnBOW, '?
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Y,Y
x Y Z - REFERENCE SYSTEM FIXED IN CELESTIAL SPHERE
X'Y'Z' - COMPUTER REFERENCE, PARALLel TO XYZ SYSTEM
x Y z - FIXED IN ROTATING EARTH
STABLE
PLATFORM
I GYROS]
t-I ''--------------+ = LATITUDE
PLANE
GEOMETRY OF METHOD FOR
DETERMINING POSITION BY MEANS OF
HORIZON SCANNER-PLATFORM COMBINATION
FIGURE 3.4-6
fJ ;. Q9 _ A = LONGITUDE
V
HORIZON
SCANNER
EARTH
ANGULAR
RATE
PLATFORM-HORIZON SCANNER MECHANIZATION
CONI ISlr an AI
-,
3.4-9
0
'
,
0
'
,
-
u
"
)
,
,
0
,
-
i
-
-
0
u
4
0
=
0
=
-
=
E
L
U
L
U
0
I
"
n
_
0
,
1
,
Z
m 0
"
"
I
,
,
&
i
i
J
J
z
m
0
Z I
,
M
!
!
0
E
l
N
m
o
r
,
.
)
=
_
o
=
=
0
.
.
.
d
"
I
,
-
4
w
r
I(
11

!(
(
, (
{
(
{
)[
I
i: \.
CblIPRSNTlAI.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
FOUR'l!I5EN DAY MISSION
4.0 INTRODUCTION: Great emphasis will be placed on extending mission tille, once
man has achieved the initial. exploration o't space through Project Mercury.
This W'lll require intensive investigation into the problems of hUlllan adapta-
bili ty and equipment performance during long periods in the u.nt'am1liar
environmebt. With an enlarged booster adapter to provide additional. space
for equipment the Project Mercury capsule is considered a suitable test
veb.1cle for developlEnt of hardware and techniques applicable to tuture
missions. The objective of this study is to determine how the mission time
of the cap8ule can be extended for this purpose.
4.1 BASIC CONCEPT
'lbe design approach is to retain the basic struc-
ture of the MercUry capsule and to lim! t changes
to those items which are directly at'tected by the
longer mission ti1Df' such as the oxygen and en-
control syStems, electrical powel"
supply, food, and vater. 'lbe extra oxygen, :ruel
and equipment is stored in the adapter which is
carried into orbit but is jettisoned prior to
retrograde or abort.
for deSign studies. However, it 1& felt to be a
reasonable value in the sense that 1 t 18 long
enough for design and reliability problems to be
typical of those which might be encounteJ:ed in such
missions as scientific observation, military re-
connaissance, or even lunar trips, and still
By this technique the weight of the capsule vi th-
out the adapter is kept essentiall.y the same as
that of the Mercury vehicle. '!his aVOids ex-
tensive redevelopment of the abort, escape,
re-entry and recovery systems.
A specific upper limit of fourteen days is some-
what arbitrarily selected to serve as the basis
short enough that it might be feasible as a one-
man mission.
The overall weight in orbit for this mission ex-
ceeds the capabilities of the basic Atlas "D"
booster. However, it is shown in Section 4.5
that the addi capability can be achieved
by adding a liquid rocket posigrade thrust system
in the adapter. A .econd alternative, vb1ch is
also shown, is to use the Vega booster, which
has mre than enough capability.
4.1-1
.......... ...
II'
I
rONCIDC .... TIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.2-1
The basic design concept used in rearranging the
Mercury vehicle is to utilize the adapter for
of added items of and fuel
needed to extend the mission to fourteen days.
'!he basic structure of the capsule is not
m:::>dified and the retrograde and re-entry weight
is not significantly changed. ']his avoids
redesign and development of the retrograde
rockets, re-entry heat Shield, and recovery
systems, and utilizes all of the basic struc-
tural. tooling.
Figures 4.2-1 and 4.2-2 shoy the interior
arrangement of the capsule. Only those fea-
tures which represent departures from the basic
Mercury arrangement are specifically called out
0.0 the drawing.
'1hree posi tiona of the Astronaut are shown:
(A) Seated for launch and re-entry; (B) Kneeling;
and (C) Legs outstretched, deDDnstrating the
abili ty to straighten and flex all joints. The
auto-control helium bottle is relocated to give
the Astronaut DDre 1eg room. Space is provided
below the Astronaut I s seat for disposition of
ute
Sufficient gaseous oxygen and carbon dionde
(C0
2
) absorber, along vi th the necessar,r environ-
mental control and electrical power systems to
complete pre-launch, launch, two complete orbits,
and re-entry are provided in the capsule. To
obtain space for the food and drinking water
supply, the three 3000 watt-hour batteries pro-
vided in the basic Mercury capsule are reDDved.
'1hree 1500 watt-hour batteries are retained in
the capsule for emergency and tor operations
subsequent to adapter separation.
The two alternate boosters mentioned in Section
4.1 require different adapters. '!he adapter for
the Atlaa plus pos1graQe booster is shown. in
Figures 4.2-3 and 4.2-4 and that tor Vega in Fig-
ures 4.2-5 and 4.2-6. In either case additional
equipment installed in the adapter includes two
oxygen-hydrogen f'uel cells tor electrical pover
generation in orbit, liquid oxygen and hydrogen
supplies tor the fuel cells, liquid oxygen for
breathing, and the environmental temperature con-
trol, vater separation, and air purification
systems used during the orbital portions of the
mission. ']he basic Mercury retrograde rockets
are also 1l8ed in either adapter. In addition,
the adapter for the Atlas plus posigrade booster
contains the posigrade system which consists of
two liquid rockets vi th their attendant JP4 f'uel,
hydrogen peroxide (11202) oxidizer, and heliua
pressurization ..,.tea.
'Pt
I
ElCI.I1IIII\L
I
l
_
.
-
u
'
l
'
4
)
.
-
.
u
a
0
m
8
-
I
E
u
.
i
u
J
0
L
u
J
Z
m
i
.
u
l
a
,
I
z m 0 z
i
.
u
/
_
_
.
_
_
_
_
o
,
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
0
"
_
_
!
_
o
_
_
.
_
,
.
-
:
_
.
_
_
.
.
.
o
o
o
_
.
,
-
I
o
_
_
_
_
o
_
_
_
O
_ I
O
J
,
I (
I
II
i
{
{
(
t
(
: [
FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
The structure of the two adapters is similar
Longitudinal hat section stiffeners are spaced
around the outer shell at 15
0
intervals. The
panels between the stiffeners consist of an
outer sandwich and an inner corrugated skin
wi th an air space between which serves as
the environmental control heat exchanger air
passage. The outer double skinned sandwich
serves both as the radiating surface and as
a meteoroid protection for the heat exchanger.
Details of the adapter attachment to the booster
and of the environmental system disconnect be-
tween the capsule and the adapter are also
shown in Figures 4.2-3 and 4.2-5 for the two

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
adapter configurations. In each case, the adapter
is retained with the capsule during the mission
by a clamP ring which uses the same explosive bolt
separation technique used on the basic Mercury
capsule. An additional cla.m.P ring is provided to
allow for separation of the from the
booster. Separation velocity is imparted by the
standard Mercury soli a rockets for the
Vega configuration and by the liquid rocket posi-
grade for the Atlas plus posigrade configuration.
Weight and balance data for this are
compared to the basic Mercury vehicle in Tables
4.2-1 and 4.2-2 and Figure 4.2-7.
4.2-2
,
,
'/
/
/
:
/
/
/
'
,
,
,
,
Q
!
/
\
i
I
4.2-3
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
COIIPl?5)'H'I.
DRINKING WATER \
AUTO CONTROL FUEl '
PRESSURIZATION HELIUM
_-:::::lC"--o
FOOD \
SUIT AND CABIN ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMJ 0 20
'1111111111
SCALE IN INCHES

\ /
\;
II
\
\ I
ATlAS

__
-I
FIGURE 4.2-1
I
l
O
,
O
,
O
,
o
,
,
0
,
-
e
_
L
u
0
"
_
L L
U
L
U
e
_
,
i
-
0
L L
U
Z
m
L
U
L
U
z i 0 z L
U
i
.
-
Z L
U
2
E
L
U
(
9
Z ,
v
r
v
,
.
v
0 ,
.
v
L
U
I
'
-
-
Z
E L
d
Z L
d
_
E
Z
0 Z L
d
Z e
-
-
I
Z
"
r
"
Z Z u
,
J
!
I
: (
I
:(
t
I
{
t
1
{
ji[
;1
II
I-I
4 TIMES SCALE
TYPICAL CAPSULE-ADAPTER ATTACHMENT
o 20 40
II I II I ! ! II I I I
SCALE IN INCHES
FIGURE 4.2-2
--=::XU,,, '.OmAL
--
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
rDRINKING WATER
A-A
SUIT AND CABIN ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM
4.2-4
!C'nr"TIAI
I
"
I
"
iln
I
ir
X i-
iii
/
-
-
I
:
I
i
=
_
0
-
-
I
_
I
1
m
-
-
I
0 m
1
1
.
m
m Z 0 n Z m m I Z
m m
i
i
i
i
I
0
m
-
=
I
-
-
@
,
,
0
,
0
m
m m
O
z
-
=
I
m
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
- CONFIDENTIAL
ADAPTER ARRANGEMENT
ATLAS PLUS POSIGRADE BOOSTER
A-
\ AIR DUCT
/'
=----.. .... ;:
-- .. --", .. ?'
CAPSULE ADAPTER
I
INSULATION.
/ / FIXED ADAPTER
y/
\

--_- \

L
\
- A HAS BOOSTER
4.2-5
/" \ "'\,
SPLICE BOLT
STIFFENER - STIFFENER
- CLAMP RING
(
4 TIMES SCALE
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM DISCONNECT
I
D
-'"
-i- __
"
I
-\ - POSIGRADE I
THRUST CHAMBERS
'. --I
-. I
(J .... l.J ._-< h "/ ____ __

A-
- (
DISCONNECT THRUSTER
I
D
CAPSULE ADAPTER-
FIXED ADAPTER
D-D
o 20 40
L I I II . II I I I
SCALE IN INCHES
FIGURE 4.2-3
COl CFIDENTIAL
I
l -
,
-
-
u
'
)
O
_
O
'
,
0
,
-
-
I
-
-
N
,
V
L
u
0
"
L
=
E
u
l
I
L
l
0
a
.
L
U
Z
v
_
n
,
"
L
U
L
U
Z
m
0 z
L
U
I
L
l
I
-
-
u
l
I
-
O
Z
O
I
J
J
u
J
Z
|
i
_
1
=
E
C
D !
I
_
r
_
L
_
II
: (
i I
,
I
I
I
1
I
I
rnt.,'Cj'DF,IYI A I
.,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ADAPTER ARRANGEMENT
ATLAS PLUS POSIGRADE BOOSTER
O,jH, FUEL CELL-
METEOROID SHIELD -
SANDWICH
CONSTRUCTION
FUEL CELL HYDROGEN
O';H, FUEL C ELL -
INNER SKIN
BEADED CONSTRUCTION B
AIR PASSAGE
STIFFENER
POSIGRADE PROPELLANT
B
TYPICAL ADAPTER SECTION
HEAT EXCHANGER PANEL
4 TIMES SCALE
FIGURE 4.2-4
tClIFI? III A!
AA
PROPELLANT PRESSURIZATION HELIUM
/- AUT 0 CON T R 0 L FUEL PRE S SUR I Z A TI 0 N HELl U M
. AUTO CONTROL H,O,
PROPELLANT H,O,
. -FUEL CELL OXYGEN
AIR PURIFIER
o 20 40
11111111111 I I
SCALE IN INCHES
4.2-6
Q
c
:
:
l
I
I
I
-
f
-
j
.
_
\
0
_ I
'
M
_
Z
m
,
-
-
i
\
\
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
4
CON FIDEi 2 11M
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ADAPTER ARRANGEMENT
ATLAS PLUS VEGA BOOSTER
o
20
40
L
I
SCALE IN INCHES
ADAPTER SKIN . ! SPLICE BOLT
.. --

\-STIFFENER B
4 TIMES SCALE
INSULATION
\\ r CAPSULE ADAPTER
... -FIXED ADAPTER
\ 'c-"'! ! ADAPTER SKIN
CLAMP ___ ._ I
-.J
(
.. STIFFENER
4 TIMES SCALE
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM DISCONNECT -
DISCONNECT THRUSTER
D-D
(
D
r.
"'--.,..-,
D
CAPSULE ADAPTER
!
'VEGA BOOSTER
FIXED ADAPTER J
4.2-7
FIGURE 4.2-5
cel.PI llLA L
I
I
I
1 -
I
i
i
_
4
-
(
r
I JI
t
,
1
I
I
I
J
, !
[
-
Y MISSION
ADAPTER ARRANGEMENT
VEGA BOOSTER
METEOROID SHIELD
SANDWICH
CONSTRUCTION
r
FUEL CELL HYDROGEN \
INNER SKIN
BEADED CONSTRUCTION
ii/I
1/ i-AIR PASSAGE
I'i
STIFFENER
WATER ACCUMULATOR
E
TYPICAL ADAPTER SECTION
HEAT EXCHANGER PANEL
4 TIMES SCALE
AUTO CONTROL FUEL PRESSURIZATION HELIUM ._- I',
AUT 0 CON T R 0 L H
2
0 2 ./ .
WATER SEPARATOR
AIR PURIFIER
FIGURE 4.2-6
cn,'I!'nI:IIJTTAI
i-tj
/

,v ,
I ,"J "'
",. /' -.,\
. '\ \;-' \

(-'t -l:--
.. ' , /
" -.-/
A-A
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
o
FUEL CELLS
FUEL CELL OXYGEN
,\
\\
II
I
HEAT EXCHANGER
ENVIRONMENTAL OXYGEN
20 40
SCALE IN INCHES
4.2-8
I
e
,
D
c
_
p
,
.
l
C
_
c
_
0 C
_
0
c
:
.
-
,
.
o
:
z
_
,
,
d
.
0 C p
,
,
,
h
C
_
0
,
-
_
0
_
D
"
_
'
-
'
"
_
_
o
_
_
_
0
_
0
_
_
0 r
_
_
C
_
C
C
0
_
_
_
1
_
:
-
,
.
_
0
_
_
-
_
,
,
_
_
u
0
_
0
_
,
_
0
m z 0 m Z m m
j
_ n
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
EONfiBbN' :A.
TABLE 4.2-1
.
Mercury 14 Day Mission
(Ref. 20)
Vega Atlas D
Structure 485 485 485
Adapter structure 142 369 227
Escape Tower 932 932 932
Heat Shield 347 347 347
Automatic Control System 63 63 63
Reaction Controls 132 169 188
Posigrade 21 21 181
Retrograde 231 231 231
Landing System 155 155 155
Instruments and Navigation Equipment 91 91 91
Electrical Group 274 229 229
4.2-9
.. Jller 'S'QFNTIAL ~
"'-
Remarks
Increased Size and Addition of l-1eat
Radiating Area
Increased Capacity for Longer Orbital
Period and Increased for Posigrade
Transfer to Higher Orbit
7 I
I
I
Increased Basic Electrical System Capacity by
Adding H/0
2
Fuel Cells. l -
Removed (3) 3000 Watt/Hour Batteries
0
w
u
u
0
a
.
U
L
I
Z m z
m
0 z
_
o
-
_
0
_
.
_
-
_
_
r
.
_
.
N
_
C
0
'
_
o o o f
f
0
I
,
,
,
-
4
I
1
)
4
_
0 0 0
C
o
!
0
0
v
-
r
_
_
0
_
o
_
.
-
o
'
_
L
_
-
'
_
o
'
_
_
1
c
o
o
o
_
c
o
L
_
-
L
_
C
_
0
0
o
r
_ C
o
.
o
'
_
1
_
o
_
0
_
o
C
.
,
-
4
c
'
_
m
o
N
m
e
_
l
_
o
[
[
I I
I
I
I
1
i I
I
I
i :
[FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen Systems
Communications
Te lemetry and Recording
Recovery Gear
Crew and Survival
Gross Launch Weight
.... cal" lunrr:or,..
360 360
134 267 267
109 109 109
92 127 127
57 57 57
229 328 328
3494 4340 4407
CONEiPUm
e
,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Added H2 and O
2
for Electrical Power,
Added Liquid O
2
System for Man for
Longer Endurance
Increased Capacity of CO
2
Absorber,
Odor Control, Etc. and Added Heat
Radiating System
Increased Capacity of Cameras, Recorder
j
Etc.
Increased Supply of Food and Water
4.2-10
!
i
-
t
"
o
r
-
l
.
-
0
o
_
i
-
,I
p
)
p
.
-
,
.
o
_ E
c
.
,
o
c
.
o
v
(
"
o
0
(
'
I
)
I
_
_
,
,
_
.
E
i
r
/
l
>
.
_
.
=
_
_
_
_
_
,
_
;
_
=
_
_
_
L
'
z
'
J
_
'
_
'
_
N o 0 0
0
_
o
_
:
.
_
>
.
-
_
,
_
,
.
,
.
_
,
"
"
_
.
E
1
_
"
"
"
0
0
E
n
E
0
>
m Z m Z m m
.
_
_
P
O
m
u
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m J ,
,
0
,
_
t
_
o
_
_
D
v
t
_
I
L
_
_
D
o
o
v
I
I
i
i
_
_
I
_
I
I
i
i
i
_
_
A
I
r
/
l
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
d2 EONPIb2i hiiifl
4.2-11
TABLE 4.2-2
Mercury
(Ref. 20)
Gross Weight - Launch
Less:
Escape Tower
Less:
Adapter Fixed to Booster and Clamp Ring
Injection Weight
Less:
Orbit Transfer Posigrade Propellant
Hydrogen Peroxide
Vehicle Separation Posigrade Propellant
Weight in Orbit
Less:
Adapter and Equipment
Structure
Equipment
Oxygen and Tanks
Hydrogen and Tanks
Water - Waste
Hydrogen Peroxide and Tank
Lithium Oxide, and Absorbed H
2
0, Odor Control,
Tanks and Installation
Capsule Items
Wate r - Cooling
Hydrogen Peroxide
Retrograde Weight
'00"15 II'
(3494)
-932
(2562)
-142
(2420)
-7
(2413)
-27
-7
(2379)
i FOURTEEN-DA Y MISSION I
14 Day Mission
Vega
(4340)
-932
(3408)
-188
(3220)
-7
(3213)
-181
-140
-272
-88
-69
-37
-121
(23Q5)
Atlas D
4407
-932
(3475)
-42
(3433)
-86
17
(3330)
-215
-235
-272
-88
-69
-37
-121
(2293)
I
l
I
0
_
a
n
_
D
-
O
a
.
Z m z B 0 z G
L
I
I
(
D
0
0
I
E
_
! r
I I
i I
I
(
(
I
1
: il
I ,
II!
CO,,, iDE" J5AL-
'FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
-10
Retro-Posigrade Installation
-245
Re -Ent ry Weight
(2124)
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
-5
Wate r - Cooling
-3
Ablated Mate rial
-146 (l)
End of Re-Entry
(1970)
Less:
Nose Cone
-39
Equipment
-12
Drogue Chute
-8
(1911)
Less:
Main Chute
-60
Impact Weight
Less:
(1851)
Reserve Chut e
-60
Pilot Chute
-2
Hydrogen Peroxide
-37
Dye Markers
-1
SO FAR Bombs
-7
Flotation Weight
(1744)
NOTES: (1) Mercury SpeCification Value
- - fONE" Ii'! i",
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
-10 -10
-245 -231
(2050) (2052)
-5 -5
-3 -3
-56 (2) -56 (2)
(1986) (1988)
-39 -39
-12 -12
-8 -8
(1927) (1929)
-60 -60
(1867) (1869)
-60 -60
-2 -2
-37
-37
-1 -1
-7
-7
(1760)
(1762)
4.2-12
t
_ !
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
\
_
J
d
_
t
_ !
0
!
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
,,"E'n, 'iI16l
VI
0
Z
::>
0
0...
I
l-
I
(!)
w
::
4.2-13
________ ADAPTER WEIGHT INCLUDED IN ORBIT
WEIGHT FOR FOURTEEN DAY MISSION

6
1
I ,

e.G.
4400-
4000 1-----1--1 ------t-------+-------+__
3600
Iii I ........ .. .. .. ..
14 DA Y MISSION i .............. ..
J] "I ,L- A Tl AS" D " + PO S I G R A DE ... " ............ .
I
I I ........ ]1... <..... I
i ......................
I I ........... .......... I I
.... .. 1. GROSS WEIGHT --
.................. .. .. 1 I I 2. GROSS WEIGHT IN ORBIT
... 3. INJECTION WEIGHT
3200
13&4
2800
2400
.5 4. WEIGHT IN ORBIT
6
6. RE-ENTRY WEIGHT
7. END OF RE-ENTRY
8. MAIN CHUTE DESIGN WEIGHT
20001
10
---+1- ---
9. IMPACT WEIGHT
9
10. FlOTATION WEIGHT
______ ______ ______ ______ ____ ____ ______ ______ ______ ____ ___
O. .10 .20 .30 .40 .50
I/O
CO! IflSd4llAL
r .
.60 .70 .80 .90 1.00
FIGURE 4.2-7
l -
I
p ,
0
I
-
,
0 a
_
i
,
&
l
m
_
0 Z m I
,
M
Z m 0 Z I
,
U
i
O
,
I
.
I
.
I
m I
,
U
I
-
-
L
_
.
4
_
o
o
o
,
1
:
-
I
o
o
_
o
_
o _
o
.
i
-
t
O
_
_
o
_
,
,
-
I
.
o
_
o
_
,
-
4 !
_
4
,
II
,
,(
(
I
(
(
I
, I' i I
!
! I
..
--
, j r,j--
. ,
,
I FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
.If IFI 1d ""lI.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.3 ORBIT
Orbit Decay
Figure 4.3-'1 shows approximate orbit times
in terms of hours required for the perigee alti-
tude tQ to 7Q0,000 feet. For the,four-
teen day miSSion, these curves show that the
starting altitude, assuming a circular orbit,
should be ,about 900,000 feet, which is equiva-
lent to 150 nautical miles. To reduce this sig-
nificantly, say 100,000 feet, requires an in-
i tial overspeed of about 80 feet per second,
as shown by the curves of Figure 4.3-2. Since
this is I1Dre than the amount of posigrade
quired (two speedups of about 30 feet per second
each; see Figure 2.5-l)to raise the orbit alti-
tude by 100,000 feet it is better to choose a
circular orbit as the nominal for the fourteen
day mission.
Both Figure 4.3-1 and 4.3-2 are based on spher-
ical nonrotating earth and should therefore be
regarded as approximate. Also, in keeping with
the approximate nature of the orbit decay ,
analysis, the value of .8 for en AIM used in
Figure 4.3-4 is typical, not precise. It is
high for the Atlas plus posigrade configuration
and low for the Vega configuration. However,
Figure 4'.3-2 shows the effect of (CD AIM) varia-
tion over the expected range. In view of this,
the selected nominal orbit, zero overspeed at
150 miles ini tiel altitude has been
computed I1Dre accurately by including earth
,9
NF1
RfbP'AL
rotation and oblateness effects, and this cal-
culation shows that the selected starting con-
di tions do allow completion of the fourteen
day mission although the al ti tude is below
700,000 feet on'the last two days.
These calculations are based on a drag co-
less than that for the capsule with
the Vega adapter. In this con-
figuration the vehicle will not remain in
orbit for fourteen days starting from a 150
nautical mile altitude orbit with zero over-
speed. However, there is an ample boost capa-
bill ty, with the Vega to inject into an orbit
of sufficient al ti tude to remain in orbit for
fourteen days.
Touchdown Swmnary
Figure 4.3-3, the latitude at which the cap-
sule crosses 75 W longitude on any given revolu-
tion in the fourteen day orbit. These data are
based on a latmch at 75
0
heading Cape
Canaveral. Initial orbit conditions are zero
overspeed and zero flight path angle at 150
nautical miles altitude. Thirty-nine of the
211 revolutions made during the fourteen day
orbit are satisfactory for effecting touchdown
in the crosshatched area shown on the accompany-
ing map. The mniIlDlm latitude of this area is
chosen so that all land masses are excluded
from the touchdown area.
4.3-1
!
,
,
o
o
Z
I
1
I
I
D
A
Y
S
4.3-2
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.. o,'S'DENIIAL
-
LLI
~
oCt
EFFECT OF I NITIAL PERIGEE VELOCITY
ON DECAY OF PERIGEE ALTITUDE
SPHERICAL NONROTATING EARTH
(CD A/M}=.8
500 i ,
/INITIAL OVERSPEED, FPS
100 751 50 I 25 o
LLI
01::
I "1" 11 J 280
U
LLI
C
O ~
1-01::
I I ,. A A
r

400 v
A ,f I ,f A A 240
LLI:::)
cO 300 I
:::) ::I: '
~ jM I- jP ,
~ ~ . -
~ L - -
<
o
LLlO 200.
LLI 0 '
C> ~ v ~ I'"
_0 - -
",0 - -
Wh
Q.
0
8
100 I J / I "
LL ~ : . . r ~
:;r.- ,
LLI
~
(
NUMBER OF REVOLUTIONS
TO 700,000 FT. ALT.
I FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION!
20
16
12
8
4
VOl
>-
oCt
C
I- O ~ r - - I 0
700 740 780 820 860 900 940
INITIAL PERIGEE ALTITUDE, 1000FT.
FIGURE 4.3-1
C 2 !'PFtIJl 0'
?
l
I
O
_
O
,
O
,
O
,
I
.
=
e
_
,
0
m
8
-
:
E
u
w
I
,
M
u
J
X m M
J
I
,
M
z i 0 z u
_
u
J
,
v
0
u
J
L
U
:
D
I
=
=
.
m I
-
-
.
_
>
=
o I
-
-
,
.
,
.
,
_
,
O
o
,
v
-
-
O
L
u
I
_
"
I
-
-
,
V
O
L
E
0
o
,
<
.
.
J
m
L
U
-
-
I
,
.
_
m
a
a
I I I I
Z a
.
0 O
,
_
0
.
_
,
0
0
.
_
,
_
_
,
o
y
/
,
j
,
:
,
:
:
r
"
o
_
I
o
/
,
l
i
r
a
I
/
I
-
I
m
/
/
,
I
u
.
/
/
,
o
I
I
,
4
)
I
u
J
;
/
,
.
.
I
a
.
I
,
v
/
_
o
'
"
_
I
I
/
/
,
,
I
I
I
Z
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4
'
!
I
o
V
/
,
/
,
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
,
0
(
_
o
o
"
_
0
"
1
:
:
i
0
0
0
[
'
:
i
G
N
I
l
I
1
V
:
l
:
1
9
1
_
l
:
:
]
d
]
V
I
I
l
N
I
c
O
I
0
3 0
,
1 !
0
3
p
_
1
'
-
-
4
! >
l
(
{
I
(
(
1
(
, I
,
i I
! I
i [
FIGURE 4.3-2
COt'f'RfNTIAL
-DAY MISSION
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
....
u...
INITIAL ORBIT CONDITIONS REQUIRED
FOR A 700,000 FT. PERIGEE ALTITUDE
AFTER ORBITAL DECAY
SPHERICAL NONROTATING EARTH

9001 ..........
--+1 14 DAY DECAY TIME
I
-----.. 7 DAY DECAY TIME
o
o
o 860
...
.........
...
w
o
::::>
....
...... ... ...
820 r ...... -.........
"'...... r.... ......
... ...... -...::
......... -,..""...
" ............ =--+---
w
w
......
......
................. ---
(!)
......
.. 781 1'","'rC""-'r
i
....
w ............... ... ........
a.. .. .. -- .. -- .6
....r

1.0
....
---_.L. -"'-j

Z 740 I ... - ............. 6
700' ! , ! I I
o 20 40 60 80 100
INITIAL OVERSPEED, FPS
SSNf'PfNT! 'I
4.3-3
o
,
0
-
_
,
o
0
i
-
-
I
(
_
0
I
o
-
.
.
.
.
-
-
0
.
-
.
.
F
-
-
-
_
0
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
3
-
-
o
o
,
-
%
_
_
-
-
.
.
.
o
-
-
_
"
,
i
i
l
_
H
Y
:
.
.
_
z
0
0
m
m
z
o
Z
-
-
0
0
O
i
O
m
.
,
_
1
1
m
m
C
_
_
t
0
r
_
t
,
:
,
/
:
E
/
o
:
E
o
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.....:::::s::.u , iDCN' IIIL
4.3-4
TOUCHDOWN TIME AND POSITION SUMMARY
\
.".
30
0
TOUCHDOWN AREA FOR
LATITUDES SHADED BELOW
------------------
WOP\C Of CANCER
90
0
W 80
0
W 75W 70
0
W 60
0
W
POSITIONS SHOWN FROM A TRUE ORBIT CALCUATION INCLUDING OBLATENESS AND DRAG
EFFECTS FOR A 75
0
LAUNCH FROM CANAVERAL, INITIAL ORBIT ALTITUDE OF 150 MILES
40
0
LA T IT U 0 E LI MIT S FOR TO U C H DOW N -,----,-------,,------,,-----,----,
.: .:.JIl:
w I 0 I / Q J I f I , / I' ri , I , I <;> i b / I / I
::) Cob ! I / I Y / I / I .;, / ' I , \ , I 6 'i' <'> !,
..,.,::) 20 I / 9' , I / 'I ? II / I ' <'> , : I <;> I , I , I
Q..!:: I I:> I , b ' I 6 I , , I I' , , ? I I , I , I
<!) 1'1' '1'1/ 'I l'I'r:> 0 I 'i',6 6 1
U Z I:> I I , \ b I I I \ 6 '7 I I I I 1 I I '" I I I "I I
.... I I I I I I' I I 1 I I Y I I Ii I ,I I I I I
CO I! b ? \ I I I "I 'I \ I I I Y I I I I I I I I I I I
- .... I,,' I I I I I I I I I Y <;> I I I I cl I I I I I
:: 0 0 I 10 20 130; 40 50 I 601 70 80 I 9 100 110 I 120 130 ,140' 150 160 \ 17 0 180 190 (200 210
o Q' I I I T Q I I N U M B E R
O
0 F REV 0 L UTI 0 N S 6 I I b I I I I '( I I
I I I i, I / I I 6 I, I "" I 1 I I 1 I 0 , I
" I I "T I' I 9 I I I I, I I I I I' I 'ii , I
IA 'II A' I 111116 '6 'I' I' I" I' , I
w"'" I Til I I I / Y / I I / I / 6,l, I / ,J,
;, / I I "I:> / I i I,J, ,,/ I / I j I Y i / 1,( I I '1 I
2"'" _20
0
\ 6 I 7 I, \ ? I J I I 9 : \, I; T 6 I !, ! \ f
-0 ).,1 "/ 61 \' 1/ '1
1
1/ 1/ 66 1/ II I 00
IX "\ / 16 \ y '\ / I:> I\,,,\ / >,1' \I q I L( I c\ i /
U (9 Q
e
C\\ 'cP t 4:i is! If '5 a\ IP '1J Cd a:l
....
2 4 5 6
_40
0
L-'
12 3 7 9 8 10 11 13 14
NUMBER OF DAYS
habUII ....
FIGURE 4.
l
O
_
O
,
_
,
t
e
l
O
_
O
_
I
,
=
-
_
,
o
J
o
.
J
b
,
,
.
Z m o
a
I
d
d
z m
0
z
0 I
-
4
g
o
0
_
o
.
o
o
o
c
8
,
r
-
I
,
,
-
-
4
Q
-
4
0
g
-
O
m
r
-
I
d
u
l
_
P
_
O
m
.
r
l
.
.
_
0
0
.
,
-
I
I
:
N
_
0
1
:
_
4
_
c
8
,
-
-
4
4
.
_
g .
-
g
o
,
-
H !
(
(
(
{
II r
2t"R
M
Lt.L
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.4 MISSION PROFILE
Figure presents a mission profile diagram
for the fourteen day mission. 'lhe sequence of
operations is shown for launches with both the
Atlas plL"; Lsigrade and the Vega boosters.
launch ivi th Atlas Plus Posigrade
The launch with this booster combination is the
SaLle sequentially as Hercury up through burnout
of the Atlas sustainer stage. As discussed in
4.5 however, a 90, rather than 105,
nautical mile orbit is entered. At this point
the attachment clamp ring is released and the
capsule plus adapter are separated as a unit
from Atlas by means of the liquid rocket posi-
grade thrusters located at the aft end of the
adapter. The posigrade rockets continue to
burn until a sufficient velocity change is gen-
erated to allow the vehicle to coast up to 150
nautical miles. At 150 nautical miles the
posigrade rockets are again started to
the vehicle velocity and flight path angle to
near circular orbit conditions. After the posi-
grade rockets are shut dO"lm, the autopilot
rotates the capsule to normal orbit attitude.
Launch with Vega
The launch sequence with this booster is the same
as Mercury up to the separation of the second
stage fl'om the Atlas sustainer stage. Fron
this tine on, the second stage, with continuous
burning, pushes the fourteen day capsule into a
nearly circular orbit at 150 nautical mile alti-
tude. After the second stage is shut down the
capsule plus adapter are separated by means of
the present type posigrade rockets,
following release of the attachment claW-p ring.
After seEaration the autopilot rotates the cap-
sule 180 to the normal orbit attitude.
Re-Entry
The capsule is rotated to the retrograde
tude by the autopilot. After the proper atti-
tude is reached the adapter separation mechanisT:'
is :J.ctuated which then allmols retroroc':ets
to fire. This separates the capsule fror.:. -t.he
adapter. After firing the retrorockets, the
re-entry is sequentially the same as ge:'cury.
CON'R? IX ....
!; .4-1
1
d
_
I
t
_
0
;
O
!
r
+ m
8 Z u
_
.
.
.
.
.
-
0
.
f
P
_
f
t
_
P
Z
0 z
z z
0
J
z c m 0 m -
<
m Z
J
/
/
0 =
=
m Z _
0
Z
0
m
m
Z _
o
y
z
< _
"
I
I
"V
0
_
:
z
i
z m Z
:
z
m -
.
4
m m
m Z 0 i Z m m n Z 0 m 0 J ,
,
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.4-2
ISO N.
CONTINUOUS BURNING
ATlAS
(Q)\
ATLAS'i
BOOSTER

VEGA
(J

tq;
' ..

ATLAS + POSIGRADE
SJ II iL
MISSION PROFILES
c[D
POSIGRADE
(!> a:cn
IJ"
,p' <1l
[:I
\
STAGE
-.y
WITHIN 3 MINUTES RETROGRADE 0 _______ RETRO-ROCKET
WITHIN 3 MINUTES
aG.
PACKAGE
RE-ENTRY
COAST

c:=:q :=0 '[DD
90 N. M.
000""""""'"0'.'''
POSIGRADE
DROGUE CHUTE AND ANTENNA FAIRING
"
\ ...... ESCAPE TOWER
t IFlDSt'll .,. ,
I" /1

MAIN CHUTE DEPLOYMENT
BALLOON

FIGURE 4.4-1
l
O
_
O
,
O
*
O
,
_
0
,
-
b
-
,
v
K
w
0
m
L M
I
,I
L
U
_
'
I
.
.
.
.
k
l
i
,l
Z m u
a
[
u
Z
m
0 z i
H
I
0
b
o
o
_
-
r
-
I
r
"
l
_
J
_
.
_
o
_
_
_
.
_
_
_
o
o
O
_
_
_
0
N
.
,
-
.
I
_
.
I
_
_
0
.
:
:
1
,
-
-
I
m
_
o
o
_
_
H
m
o
o
_
4
-
_
_
1
0
o
t
O
O
r
_
O
.
r
.
I
_
o
_
r
.
I
_
H
_
_
,
_
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
s
.
_
_
o
_
O
0
g
_
_
_
0
r
.
I
.
r
'
l
_
.
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
-
_
o
!
{
(
{
, (
I
: (
(
II
- ,
I HI"es"
I FOURTEEN-DA Y MISSION I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.5 LAUNCH CONSIDERATIONS
The requirements of the fourteen day mission
dictate a basic orbit altitude of 150 nautical
miles as discussed in Section 4.3. Figure 4.5-1
indicates that the Atlas "D" booster is not
capable of placing the required weight of ap-
proximately 3300 pounds into this high an orbit.
Two possible ways to reach higher orbit alti-
tudes are to have a booster with either a long
burning time or restart capabilities in the
final stage. The equivalent of re-start capa-
bili ty can be provided with the Atlas "D" by
the installation of a small posigrade rocket in
the Atlas "D" capsule adapter. Two advanced
boosters which are now under development possess
both these characteristics; these are the Cen-
taur and the Vega. The fuel loadings, struc-
tural weights, thrust characteristics, and other
pertinent data on Atlas plus Posigrade, Centaur,
and Vega are shown in Tables 4.5-1, 6.4-1 and
4.5-2 respectively.
Based on these characteristics, the orbital gross
weight capability versus circular orbit altitude
was calculated for continuous burning and for
coast and restart trajectories. For the contin-
uous burning trajectories, all booster stages
are fueled to capacity. As the orbit altitude
is increased, the take-off gross weight is
adjusted as necessary by removing payload weight.
The coast and restart trajectories for Centaur
and Vega are based on a minimum energy, Hohmann
transfer ellipse from a low altitude, 100 nauti-
cal miles, Circular orbit. This altitude is felt
COle: IElI3'"
to be the lowest practicable because the long
burning time of these two boosters results in
large maneuvering losses when a rapid turn-
over to lower altitudes is attempted. The basic
assumption in the Centaur and Vega coast and
restart trajectories is that the upper stages,
including payload, are restricted to 30,000
pounds due to Atlas limitations. For this
reason, the coast and restart trajectories
are all computed for the same take-off gross
weight. In each case the Atlas is fueled to
capa.ci ty, but in the upper stage the fuel load-
ing is varied so that no excess fuel is carried,
and the reduction in fuel weight is offset by
increased payload. The maximum altitude of
270 nautical miles shown on the Vega curve
represents the expenditure of the maximum fuel
loading. To achieve altitudes above this,
further reduction in payload would be required
while maintaining maximum fuel loading. The
results, plotted in Figure 4.5-1 show that either
of these boosters is more than adequate, even
wi thout the use of dual burning. The Centaur
performance greatly exceeds that which is required
for this mission.
In view of the excessive capability of Centaur
and Vega a study was made of the application
of a relatively small posigrade rocket system
on the fourteen day vehicle to augment the
Atlas "D" booster performance. Figure 4.5-1
shows the orbital gross weight capabilities
of the augmented Atlas computed, as in the
case of the larger boosters, for continuous
-
4.5-1
I
m
c
l
-
m
c
l
-
m
m
m
0
o
_
0
_
1
(
I
0
m
t
o
m
o
F
0
0
_
'
_
.
n
0
0
0
_
_
n
_
_
!
o 0 o
d
-
_
_
.
.
o
_
o
_
.
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
o
o
_
.
_
_
c
t
-
o
_
I
_
e
l
-
0
I
_
_
o
_
_
"
_
I
-
-
_
(
P
I
-
_
e
l
-
I
-
_
O
a
_
c
l
-
_
m
o
I
_
_
0
0
I
_
c
J
.
I
_
0
I
:
_
'
0
_
1
_
I
.
_
"
P
O
l
O
?
_
o
_
I
'
1
'
1
Z
@
m
Z I
T
I
I
'
1
'
1
i Z
m m
i
'
1
'
1
0
m ,
0
'
,
0
,
0
_
0
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
- , INFlDd:SIAL 1
45-2
burning and coast and restart trajectories. In
this case the curves are based on a constant fuel
loading of 500 pounds in the posigrade system
~
v.l.th no trade-off between fuel and payload. It
can be seen that even this augmentation is not
sufficient for the fourteen day massion if em=
ployed in a continuous burning trajectory. How-
ever, if the minimum energy transfer ellipse is
initiated at 90 nautical miles, the capabilities
are in excess of the mission requirements. Ninety
nautical miles is chosen as the transfer altitude
because, with the relatively short burning time of
the Atlas "D", large improvement in capability can
be realized through rapid turnover. It is not
deemed practical to transfer from altitudes any
lower than this due to atroospheric effects. Wi th
500 pounds of posigrade fuel, 4000 pounds can
be put into a 150 nautical mile orbit, compared
to the required weight in orbit of 3330 pounds
for the fourteen day mission. '!he posigrade
propellant to place the 3330 pounds into a 150
nautical mile orbit is only 86 pounds.
The posigrade system consists of two small liquid
rocket IOOtors, propellant tanks, and a tank pres-
-
surization system which are placed in the vehicle
adapter as shown in Figures 4.2=3 and 4.2-4. Each
of the liquid rocket motors develops 250 pounds of
thrust and has a specific impulse of 260 seconds
in a vacuum. They are designed to operate on
hydrogen peroxide and JP-4 with the hydrogen per-
oxide being decomposed in a catalyst bed before
injection of JP-4. The decomposed hydrogen per-
oxide and JP-4 are hypergolic which eliminates
igni ters and permi ts r e ~ s t a r t s as often as desired.
The system is not exotic but it is safe, reliable,
and well sui ted to the present application as a
posigrade device.
In all the cases shown, the effect of the Mer-
cury escape tower weight which is jettisoned
during launch is accounted for in the booster
capability calculations.
TYPical time histories of the launch trajector-
ies up to the transfer orbit injection point
are shown in Figures 4.5-2, 4.5-3 and 4.5-4,
for the three basic booster configurations
investigated.
I
l
I
O
_
O
_
,
O
,
-
N
u
u
O
'
t
'
L
U
1
,
1
,
1
J
_
'
I
-
O
a
.
I
J
L
I
Z i u
J
i
I
,
l
i
,I
z I O z u
.
i
I
I
-
-
(
J
r
v
i
l
l
I
-
-
U
'
)
O O d
:
l
1
1
1
i
0
0 U
I I I
I
0 0
c
_
k
L
L
0
I
I
I
I
S
C
l
N
n
O
d
0
0
0
t
-
l
l
g
_
l
O
N
I
J
.
H
E
)
I
3
M
S
S
O
_
I
_
)
O
O
I
H
(
r
(
,j
10
(
Vl
C
Z
- 9
::J
(
0
c..
8
0
0
0
,....
7 -

CO

0
Z

5
-
:::J:
C>
w

4
Vl
Vl
0

-
C>
7
o
FIGURE 4.5-1

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
BOOSTER CAPABILITIES
---COAST AND RESTART
-----,CONTINUOUS BURNING
- ........
........
.... ,
'\
"
-
"
"
'",,-
" ..
"
" CEN
TAUR

,
........ "
-
"
, ,
' ..
"
-
'" VEGA
" I
d ATLAS "0" PLUS POSIGRAOE
- (500 LBS. OF J P4 - H
2
0
2
)

.
,
"0"
,
100 200 300
ALTITUDE - NAUTICAL MILES
4.5-3
--
m ,
-
,
I
0 -
<
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
OJiC\;Kr--.-
90
80
V)
w
w
28 .-

70
e>
w
c
U
I
6w- w 24
;-. . 60
V)
I
"-
W
.....
l-
e>
5
LL.
V) I-
5 20 z 50
w
w 0
4:
.....
w 0
LL.
0 :I:
:E
0 -
I-
4 4
I
16 4: 40
..... 0
>
4:
0
I

U
0
>- l-
I-
:I:
I-
3
0
3
e>
::> -
u
12 30
I
0
4:
...J::.
.....
Z
I
..... LL.
W
W
0
2
c
2
>
8 I-
0
::> .....
20
I-
4:
l-
I-
.....
w
1
4:

e>
w 4 I- 10
z
Z
4:

0' 0' o ' 0
4.5-4
ATLAS"D" BOOSTER
INJECTION WEIGHT - 3503 POUNDS
INJECTION ALTITUDE - 90 NAUTICAL MILES
I
INJECTION POINT
[

z
=8.30-
1\/ FLliHT PATH ANGLE
\ i I . i ALTITUDE '
I l .... _,4<._. .... ,
n
z
=5 37 ... 7=t- "
. ,,/ -r
[ , .. '
. ' .. "
. ,., -,' ,
INERTIAL VELO ........... . ....... , .
CITY .....' .'
. ,_- I l ...... .
......
i ,.I' ..... ,_.-
, . . ....
I /' / --- .......... ..
, .' .. .
I "., .. ".. .
-" ... ' ..... "
...... _ ..... 1'. "-- I I
____ -----,--- ",_' _ _ _ .............. RANGE
_._ ..... -....... [ ........... .
L .......................... 10.......... .. .. .. .. .. ..
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
TlME-t-SECONDS
FIGURE 4.5-2

l -
O
,
O
,
,
,
O
f
-
l
y
O a
_
k
U
O z 1 1
4
4
I
d
1
4
z
1
O z
1
4
4
O
,
O
,
1
4
4
1
4
4
a
_
>
.
.
O u I
=
M
=
,
_
"
1
-
u
Z .
=
.
I
=
.
=
I
u 1 a
=
>
.
.
k
i
L
l
O O _
a
(
.
9
M
=
I
>
a z 0 a
.
o o .
4
)
I
I
"
1
-
i
x
l
Z 0 I
,
=
-
u u
l
Z
I
,
u
u Z o o
I
I
m ,
.
.
.
i
Z 0 u
Z
o
o
I
o o
q
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
r
,
,
,
.
,
,
o
u
'
_
_
0
3
'
,
.
i
S
:
I
3
_
I
O
3
0
-
/
,
,
-
3
"
I
O
N
V
H
.
l
.
V
d
1
H
O
I
'
I
:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
3
_
S
/
'
I
_
G
0
0
t
-
A
-
J
L
I
I
3
0
3
_
A
I
_
I
I
_
3
N
I
I
I
l
I
I
I
o
l
o
l
o
l
O
1
=
1
3
:
1
0
0
0
'
O
O
t
-
4
-
_
O
O
I
I
I
I
V
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
S
_
I
l
W
l
V
3
1
1
O
V
N
0
0
L
-
3
O
N
V
_
I
o
I
I
r
.
=
l
p
:
;

;j
UIW
VEGA BOOSTER
INJECTION WEIGHT = 6500 POUNDS
INJECTION ALTITUDE = 100 NAUTICAL MILES
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
90...... 1 I I
INJECTION POINT 1\ !
8r
z
=3.64 .
7 J.- 7 .- 2 8.- ::::: 7 a ---1
w /\1 I
I
VI u c> .... _i_._
W 6 6 W 24 W 60 '
.... VI C .' ... ' ,
::.;... ; ..... I,}'
.... W ... I I , ' ,-1
< 5 5 0 20 50 + ," I . .i '
u 0 0 c> n =2 38 I.... "Il
0 0 Z z . ...
::> 0 '"7 < " " ....
< 4 4 > 16 40 - ..
Z g >.;: I.,.' ".... I."""
3 3 12 30 '. _. '
...:. I .. .. ...... !
c> ::> W C> i.l I ....... I RANGE
Z >.... I"
< 2 2 .... 8 ... 20 -1--, I
"." -; < l ,'f ....... .
.... , , .,'
:;; , ,. .'
W 4 10
Z ,',,'
.. ,',
i
.,...... . .. ....... .
-0 ' 0 I 0 I 0 ', .. rC :!!I,." ....
a 100 200 300 400 500
TlME-t-SECONDS
FIGURE 4.5-3 4.5-5
sm.,.
Ii -
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
..
: FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
REVISED 5 OCTOBER

. ,
, TYPICAL LAUNCH TRAJECTORY
9
8
In
1&.1
71- .....

.....
c(
6
u
....
;:)
c(
5
z
0
0
- 4
,
1&.1
(!)
Z
c( 3
ac:
21-
7
6
....
1&.1
1&.1
"-
5
0
0
0
0
4
0
-
,
.s:.
,
3
1&.1
Q
;:)
....
2
....
.....
c(
28
u
24
........
....
"-
o 20
o
o
-
,
> 16
,
>-
....
u 12
o
.....
1&.1
>
.....
c(
....
ac:
1&.1
Z
8
4
CENTAUR BOOSTER
INJECTION POINT
90
!

!
"
In
1&.1
1&.1
_ ......
80

.........

60 "
'OJ ", ,
Q ALTITUDE ",
, l '
.... 50 "'1 I I
.. ,.," .,.
, n =2.32 ,,' ""','
z '-- INERTIAL
40 ,.' """ VELOCITY-I-----1
c(
:z:
30 I I
a..
....
20 I I
it FLIGHT PATH ANGLE
10 .. '
, ...
," .. ..,"
,,,,,' ,.1"'"
____ -1 ______ .. LJ
o ' 0 ' 0 ' .# .......
o 100 200 300 400 500
TIME -t- SECONDS
4.5-6
FIGURE 4. 5-4
__
\
O
,
0
,
0 a
.
0 z m I
,
U
z m 0 z
O
"
U
'
)
O
,
t
v
1
.
1
.
1
I
.
.
.
,
-
a
.
L
U
d
d
O
_
0
!
L
_
/
.
<
m
.
<
.
a
.
a
0
r
_
O
_
0
"
_
0 0
i I
(
, I
(
! I
I
I ~
I
TABLE 4.5-1
ATLAS "0" BOOSTER SUMMARY
Empty Atlas "D" (Booster Stage)
Usable Propellants
Total Dooster Stage Weight
Empty Atlas "D" (Sustainer Stage)
Usable Propellants
Total Sustainer stage Weight
Payload
Capsule
Tower
Adapter* + Equipment
Gross Launch Weight
PROPULSION SYSTEM
(Sustainer Only)
* Adapter Goes into Orbit with Capsule
6,547
390
202,730
6,754
391
43
t
500
2,293
932
1,182
THRUST
368,000 Lbs. at S. L.
84,724 Lbs. at Alt.
209,667 Lbs.
50,645 Lbs.
4 ~ 7 Lbs.
264,719 Lbs.
BURNING TIME
134 Sec.
294 Sec.
n
~ - - -
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
rr
,; I;
; 'I
L --i--
I I
SPECIFIC IMPULSE
244.0 Sec.
309.7 Sec.
4.5-7
c
o
d
_
t
D
t
D
t
D
L
_
C
_
C
_
_
0
-
.
1
r
_
t
D
t
_
C
_
t
D
I
.
-
I
L
_
o
o
D
o
t
.
_
o
_
j
r
l
-
,
,
1
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ECkEl
TABLE 4.5-2
VEGA BOOSTER SUMMARY
Empty Atlas "D" (Booster stage) 6,547
Trapped Propellants and Fluids 390
Usable Propellants
220
,
000
Empty Atlas UD" (Sustainer Stage) 6, r/54
Trapped Propellants and Fluids 391
usable Propellants 28,200
Total Sustalner stage Weight
Empty Vega (Second Stage)
Usable Propellants
Total Second Stage Weight
Payload
Capsule
':':'ower
Adapter
Gross Launch Weight
PROPULSION SYSTEM
Atlas UD" (LOX/RP-1)
(Sustainer)
Vega Stage (LOX/RP-1)
(Second Stage)
:J-.5-8
3,100
18
21,082
2,312
932
1,096
T H R U ~ T
368,000 Lbs. at SG L.
83, 808 Lbs. at Alt.
33,300 Lbs. at Alt.
226,937 Lbs.
35,345 Lbs.
24,200 Lbs
4,340 Lbs.
290,822 Lbs.
BURNING TIME SPECIFIC IMPULSE
146 Sec. 244.0 Sec.
249 Sec. 309.7 Sec.
191 Sec. 296 Sec.
I
1
I
O
"
0
"
0
" u
a
0
_
0
Z
_
Z
0
Z
1
d
I
(
I
(
f
l
f
1
1
:1.,
I
, I
,. !
II I
"'"0'" 'DL""AL
l!OURTEEN-DA Y MISSION I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.6 ABORT AND ESCAPE
The concept of escaping from the booster in the
event of an aborted mission is basica.1.l.y the
same in the case of the fourteen day 'Vehicle as
for the present Mercury configuration.
As shown in Table 4.2-2, the gross weights at
launch for the fourteen d ~ 'Vehicles are 4385
pounds and 4340 pounds, respecti'Vely,' for the
Atlas and Vega boosted 'Versions, as compared to
3494 pounds for the basic Mercury. Howe'Ver,
when the weight of the adapter and associated
equipment along with the retrograde packages
are jettisoned, the actual abort weights are
3078 pounds for the Atlas 'Version, 3076 pounds
for the Vega 'Version, and 3100 pounds for the
basic Mercury.
Examination of the launch trajectories for the
three boosters as shown in ligures 4.52, 4.5-3
and 4.5-4 discloses that the longitudinal ac-
celerations with the Vega booster are less than
with the Atlas booster. Consequently, escape
will be less critical: with the Vega than with
the Atlas.
From the above considerations, therefore, it is
concluded that the basic Mercury escape system
is adequate for the fourteen day 'Version of the
Mercury capsule.
The only 'Variation from the Mercury sequence
for the ad'Vanced Vega and Centaur 'Vehicles is
the time of escape tower jettison during launch.
This time is preset to correspond to the point
in the trajectory where the dynamic pressure
drops below two pounds per square foot. With
the ad'Vanced boosters it 'Varies between Atlas
staging and 24 seconds after staging, depend-
ing upon the burnout altitude of the particu-
lar mission.
...,V .... 'ULI' I iAL
4.6-1
4
:
"
!
I
-
'
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
--
CONFIDFWW
[ FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION i
4.7 RE-ENTRY CONSIDERATIONS
4.7-1
The results of studies, described in detail in
succeeding paragraphs show that re-entry design
should be used on: (A) Orbit -
Perigee at 150 nautical miles; Eccentricity .005;
(B) Retrograde - Impulse applied at perigee and
directed af't and down. 1hree retro-rockets to
provide 500 feet per second velocity change.
Heat load based on only two of the three retro-
rockets firing; and (C) Heat Shield - Phenolic-
fiberglass ablation shield to be used.
Variables Involved
Tb determine design conditions for
several variables are considered. These include:
(A) Orbit altitude; (B) Orbit eccentricity;
(C) Orbit position at which retrograde is
applied; (D) Direction of retrograde velocity;
and (E) Amount of retrograde velocity.
Each of these variables is discussed below, and
reasonable combinations of critical values are
used for design conditions.
Orbit Altitude
As discussed in Section 4.3, the nominal initial
orbit is circular at 150 nautical miles alti-
tude, and decays during the fourteen day period
to sOlD!thing less than 115 nautical miles. How-
ever, re-entry may have to be initiated at any
time after injection. With fixed retrograde,
maximum heating occurs for re-entry from maxi-
mum altitude, therefore, the critical deSign
re-entry condition is for retrograde applied at
150 nautical miles.
SOtlE'RstFF e 5
Orbit Eccentricity
Although the nominal orbit is circular, it is
conservatively assumed that the initial orbit
may have an eccentricity of up to .005 with the
perigee height at 150 nautical miles.
Orbit Position at Which Retrograde is Fired
Studies have shown that maximum re-entry heat
inputs occur for retrograde applied at perigee.
Since touchdown location may dictate application
of retrograde at any point in the orbit, the
perigee position is chosen for design.
Direction of Retrograde Impulse
']he results of re-entry heating studies shown
on Figures 4.7-2 through 4.7-5 are based on
firing of the retrograde at an angle of 40
degrees with respect to the flight path. ']his
angle is considered to be near the final se-
lection based on Ddnimizing touchdown disper-
sion. Inclusion of this effect is necessary
since it is the source of greater heating
than for retrograde firing directly forward.
Small variations from the 40 degrees do not sig-
nificantly alter the results obtained.
Trajectories
With the pre-retrograde orbit, orbit position
at retrograde, and direction of retrograde
application established, the re-entry trajec-
otries can be calculated. These trajectories
were computed for several different values of
l
O
_
O
_
O
_
O
_
t
,
u
0
m
a
.
:
E
@
o
.
I
,
A
,
I
u I
A
I
I
A
,
I
Z
m
0
Z
_
P
!
I
0
1
=
4
O
_
0
"
_
'
_
1
1
_
m
_
h
_
o
_
_
"
_
_
o
O
,
J
I
o
_
_
,
_
o
o
o
_
0
_
I
_
_
.
_
4
a
_
1
_
o
_
_
1
_
_
0
_
1
_
)
_
1
o
_
-
I
4
-
_
4
-_
_
o
_
o
0
I
.
_
o
_
o
_
_
4
-
_
0
.
_
.
_
i
_
_
0
e
o
_
1
I
I
I
1
I
:(
:11
",,,,,,p'Dre ,., ,
. ...

),. l,!>-_
.
\
fOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
retrograde velocity. Results for two of these
are plotted in Figure to show velocity
altitude variations and in Figure 4.7-2 to show
average front face heating rate and load factor
variati9ns. Summary results of all the tra-
jectories are given in Figure which shows
peak values of average front face heating rate}
average total heat input, and maximum load
factor as a function of the am:mnt of retro-
grade. '!his figure includes values of these
parameters for re-entry from circular orbits
for comparison with re-entry from orb! ts of
.005 eccentricity. For total heat the
orbit with .005 eccentricity is critical and
is used for heat shield design, while for peak
heating rate and load factor, the circular
orbit is critical and is used for items critical
to these quantities.
Heat Shield Requirements
Ablation material requirements at the stagnation
point were calculated using the method presented
in Section 6.6 and are sho'WIl in Figure 4.74.
From this figure can be found the thickness of
material required for insulation of the back-up
structure and for ablation.
Retrograde Velocity Considerations
Using the data from Figure 4.7-4, a ratio of
average to stagnation point thickness of 1.07
(from a plot similar to Figure 6.5-10) and the
back-up-structure weight of 146 pounds as deter-
mined for the Mercury Capsule, a total front
'-i"".' .DL .......
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
face heat shield weight is computed and sho'WIl
in Figure 4.7-5. Also sho'WIl are the weight of
the retrograde system and the sum of these two
items. From this figure it is seen that the mini-
mum heat shield plus retrograde weight is ob-
tained with between 325 and 340 feet per second
retrograde velocity. However, the weight pen-
alty rises very rapidly if the retrograde vel-
ocity is decreased below this point, due to the
rapid rise in total heat as sho'WIl in Figure
4.7-3. Therefore, a higher value must be pro-
vided to allow margin for retrograde rocket
failure. ']he Mercury retrograde system, supply-
ing 500 feet per second, is considered suitable
for this purpose even though the margin over
minimum requirements is slightly less than in
the Mercury application.
Heat Shield Selection
Based on the discussion above an ablation shield
wi th an average of .505 inches of material for
ablation and insulation and weighing 315 pounds
is required. To minimize changes, the basic
Mercury shield with .60 inches of ablative and
insulation material weighing 347 pounds is used.
The Mercury heat shield in this application pro-
vides about a 2fY1, margin in ablation and in-
sulation material over the computed minimum.
In the Mercury application, the heat shield pro-
vides a margin based on the same method of
calculation. In view of prior Mercury experience
and a better technical knowledge of low heating
rate ablative action, the lower margin is con-
sidered reasonable.
4.7-2
-
.
3
!
O
0 C
_
d
_
-
.
3
I
A
L
T
I
T
U
D
E
-
1
0
,
0
0
0
F
T
.
J m .
-
I
m
m m J ,
,
o
t
,
n
,
0
m Z 0 m Z m m
i
Z 0
m 0 ,
-
I
O
,
m
l
_
o
/
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
so,,, iSU""L
40
36
32
...:
28
u..
0
0
0
0
24
w
c
20
:::>
l-
I-
....
16

12
8
4
o 2
4.7-3
RE-ENTRY TRAJECTORIES
PERIGEE ALTITUDE = 150 NAUTICAL MILES
ORBITAL ECCENTRICITY, e =.005
RETROGRADE VELOCITY ADDED AT PERIGEE IN A DIRECTION
AFT AND 40 BELOW FLIGHT PATH
NOMINAL RETROGRADE VELOCITY, .1 V =500 FT .jSEC.
DESIGN MINIMUM RETROGRADE VELOCITY, .1 V=333 FT./SEC.
-I
i
I
+
4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
VELOCITY - 1000 FT. /SEC.
, , . " . . , ~
24 26
FIGURE 4.7-1
I
l-
8
I
I
>
8
_
8
o
0
0
0
0
c
o
,
,
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
1
H
)
I
:
I
M
I
b
"
I
I
I
I
_
4
"
T
o
I
I
0
p
_
"
1
:
1
0
0
0
'
0
0
_
7
S
:
]
:
1
_
1
9
:
!
(
]
-
_
]
I
g
N
V
X
_
I
I
N
-
]
-
:
:
I
_
I
I
:
:
:
:
:
:
)
0
I
[
I
t
1
1
!:
I'
, "PROm AI p
[ FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION!
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

u..
0
0
0
0
0
oq-
@J
In
w
w

C>
w
0
I
0
Xl
w
.....
C>
-3
z -2

>-

-1
z
w
I
W

o
ROGRADE ROCKET AND ABLATION SHIELD WEIGHTS
In
cc
.....
ORBITAL ECCENTRICITY, e=.005
IN A DIRECTION AFT AND 40 BElOW FLIGHT PATH
800. I
TOTAL WEIGHT DESIGN BASED ON
2/3 RETROGRADE ROCKETS FIRING
I
TOTAL WEIGHT BASED ON
ALL RETROGRADE ROCKETS FIRING
600 I 'l .-.-.- .. -
.-'-
.-'-
.-
DESIGN RETROGRADE ROCKETS WT. BASED
400 ION 2/3 ROCKETS FIRIt;-JG
... .-
....-
... '"
w
3
"
ABLATION SHIELD WEIGHT? .................
... '-
.-'"
.-'-
... ,-,
.---
.. c ________ _
.-'-
.-'-
.-'-
' .... -.-
... '-
.-'"
.-'-
... .-
-,
.-'-
.-'-
.-'-
.----------
.-'-
200 1
,-,-'-'-'-1 RE-ENTRY ANGLE
, ... -", I
.-.- ...... .-... "RETROGRADE ROCKETS WEIGHT BASED
.- ON All RETROGRADE ROCKETS FIRING
o
o 200 400 600 800
TOTAL RETROGRADE VElOCITY-FT./SEC.
FIGURE 4.7-5
seeIIPlu.m.,.
4.7-4
J
I
o
'
1
_
0
I
t
_
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
H
E
A
T
I
N
G
R
A
T
E
,
2
q
-
-
B
T
U
/
F
T
.
S
E
C
.
0
0
0
0
0
I
I
I
I
I
L
O
N
G
I
T
U
D
I
N
A
L
L
O
A
D
F
A
C
T
O
R
,
n
z
-
G
'
S
I
J
4
:
,
o
,
.
0
o
o
o
0
'
M
@
,
0 o
b
b
b
b
t
%
%
%
N
-
_
:
o
_
_
0
_
_
_
_
0
_
-
_
_
.
_
-
-
'
'
_
0
I
I
_
O
_
m
o
n
o
b
m
-
-
0
t
-
-
-
0
0
_
m
-
<
m
(
.
/
I
r
n
0 0
Z
-
-
I
G
O
m
m
C
O
n
-
L
0 Z
(
'
3
-
n
-
.
-
I
0
Z
0
0
c
_
m
_
_
n
0
_
_
0
0
Z
Z
m
_
-
r
m _
"
m
"
0
m
m
Z m z m m m
_
Z
m
m
m
_
0
m ,
O
,
O
U
_
-
-
,
'
,
O
_
O
l
rot

1 SEPTEMBER 1959

",11'>__ -
4.7-5
W
I-

a::
e>

".,:\",
\
LONGITUDINAL LOAD FACTOR AND AVERAGE HEATING RATE
DURING RE-ENTRY FROM 150 NAUTICAL MILE PERIGEE
80 r
e>
I
N
t:
a::
U 60 0
w l-
\1'1 u
ORBITAL ECCENTRICITY, e = .005
RETROGRADE VELOCITY ADDED AT PERIGEE IN A DIRECTION AFT
AND 40 BELOW FLIGHT PATH
NOMINAL RETROGRADE VELOCITY, i1V = 500 FT./SEC.
DESIGN MINIMUM RETROGRADE VELOCITY, i1 V = 333 FT./SEC.
8.0 Ir-----,--------,-- ----,----,---' --------r
i1V = 500 FPS
6.01 .'1 " / 1 \ +----
\
\
ZN

u..
\
\
,
,
I-
...:
u..
w
;- 40
::I:
W
I-
e>
I:Q
i
a::
a
w
>

20
0
0
I

0
.....
.....

Z
4.0 1 I /-\--+ \
;;;",-,
;;
0
...... 1 I "
...... " I
I
'
-_- ot--- ' .
.....-r " .'
120 --- L ". '
---"-""'--- ' ' .
\
\
"ft:
::>
l-
e>
Z
0
.....
--_ ... .,...-'
2.0 1 ,;' 1 II \I---+--.
200 280 360 440
TIME FROM 400,000 FT.
........ 6_
,
520 600
SECONDS
680 760 840
FIGURE 4. 7 -2
I
l -
i
-
-
,
w
e
w
u
i
0
m
L L
U
L
U
i
,
M
Z m I
l
l
L
U
z m 0 z u
J
c
O
I
D
-
$
3
3
_
t
9
_
(
]
-
-
Z
"
l
J
0
0
0
'
0
0
1
7
i
V
3
1
O
N
V
A
_
I
I
N
3
-
:
I
_
I
_
_
_
_
,
,
0
t
i
i
O
g
o
I
"
,
\
_
I
e
,
\
/
/
I
t
_
.
.
z
_
"
'
"
'
%
%
%
R
L
U
-
-
_
,
'
"
'
_
X
.
,
#
o
I
I
,
_
u
a
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
0
o
o
_
f
_
"
\
_
I
/
,
,
V
/
>
_
.
-
,

_
o
_
o
_
_
=
>
o
O
i
l
I
_
,
_
-
0
,
o
c
_
_
s
,
O
"
Z
U
'
a
O
J
.
:
)
V
:
I
a
v
o
l
I
V
N
I
O
A
I
I
O
N
O
1
J I
I
I
i
I
I
I
0
,
o
c
_
_
_
-
0
,
0
"
I
d
/
A
l
g
-
-
b
'
3
1
V
I
J
O
N
I
I
V
3
H
]
O
V
_
3
A
V
I I
I
I
I
i
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
0
_
_
"
l
d
/
A
l
8
-
-
O
'
/
V
]
H
1
V
i
O
l
]
O
V
_
F
I
A
V
"
3
3
S
I
o
o
o
o
o
o
c
o
i
L
'
-
","01.1 lULl. I IML
RE-ENTRY PARAMETERS
150 NAUTICAL MILE PERIGEE
I
RETROGRADE VELOCITY ADDED AT PERIGEE IN A
DIRECTION AFT AND 40 BELOW FLIGHT PATH
I
ORBIT AL ECCENTRICITY
e = .005
e = 0
-------
I
14,000 r
74 r
9.6
1
,
i NOMINAL -----j
,
RETROGRADE i
I
u ~ VELOCITY
13,000
w
70 _II> 9.2
C"I VI
e>
...:
C"I
u..
...:
......
...
u..
c
I
:::l ......
....
12,000
:::l
66 ~ 8.8
ICQ
....
CII: I
I ICQ
0
I I
0
....
I .
..
U
I I I
I
....
11,000 D'" 62 ~ 8.4 \j-!

\ I
w
w C I
:I:
....

.....
0
1

10,000
CII:
58
..... 8.0
....
e>
0
.....
.... z

....
z
w
e>
c
I

9,000
w
54 :::l 7.6
CII:
:I: ....
w w
e>
> C>
Z

0
8,000
CII:
50 ..... 7.2
w
DESIGN MINIMUM--i
>

RETROGRADE
: I
7,000L- 46 L 6.8
VELOCITY
100 200 300 400 500 600
I
I
II
RETROGRADE VELOCITY, Do V - FT ./SEC.
FIGURE 4.7-3
-
2oi<JPiDZldII "
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
-2.8
" VI
w
w
CII:
-2.4
e>
w
c
"Yo
I
0
# -2.0
.,..
....
u..
-1.6
0
0
0
0
0
-1.2
o:t
....

w
.....
-.8
e>
Z

>-
1:1.:
-.4
....
z
w
I
w
CII:
0
700 800
4.7-6
i
-
.
,
,
1
I
-
.
,
1
t
'
)
_
o
o o
0
o
]
>
O
_
0
<
.
_
-
n
o
m
0
_
<
.
_
t
L
,
_
0 0 o m < r
_
m =
.
.
4
,
<
I
=
=
=
1
I
o o
G
o
o
8 o 4
:
,
,
0 0
o r
,
o
"
r
r
,
"
"
4
r
-
o
_
/
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
T
H
I
C
K
N
E
S
S
-
I
N
C
H
E
S
;
,
0
o
/
/
_
O
-
r
O r
'-
m
o
T
O
T
A
L
W
E
I
G
H
T
L
O
S
T
B
Y
A
B
L
A
T
I
O
N
-
-
L
B
S
.
0
0
0
0
0
m
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
co,,: WE I 'e r.
V'l
.....
:z:
v
Z
I
V'l
V'l
.....
Z
::..:
v
:z:
I-
.....

.....
I-

4.7-7
ABLATION HEAT SHIELD DESIGN PARAMETERS
RE-ENTRY FROM 150 NAUTICAL MILE PERIGEE
ABLATION MATERIAL
.. ... 0::_ PLUS INSULATION
====:====-. .2 INCH BACKUP
STRUCTURE
.70.r --------,---------,--------,--------,
ABLATION MATERIAL PLUS INSULATION
I / REQUIRED TO LIMIT TEMPERATURE OF
.60 r BACKUP STRUCTURE TO 500
0
F.
I I
.501 '\.
.40
.30
.20
10
1 R I
ABLATED FIBERGLAS
o I I! I
300 350 400 450
RETROGRADE VELOCITY,::'V - FPS
vi
Dl
.....
I
z
0
I-

.....
Dl

>-
Dl
I-
V'l
0
.....
I-
:z:
(}
.....

I-
0
I-
500

70
\
60

"""-
50
40
_ ..
30
20
10
o
300
-
350
NOTE:
RE-ENTRY FROM PE RIGEE
e =.005
W /CDA=45.2 LB/ FT. 2
CL = 0
RN = 6.67 FT.
I
I
I
I
400 450 500
RETROGRADE VELOCITY, ::'V- FPS FIGURE 4.7-4
l -
I
I
0
"
0
,
,
0
_
a
Z
0
c
o
a
l
J
J
I
I
J
.
.
i
-
'
J
. {
(
[
I !
f. f
~
COI.PlbEI' i iAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.8 ATTITUDE CONTROL
The automatic control system for this mission is
the same as that of the present Mercury capsule
except for details of the orbit mde. To avoid
an excessive fuel consumption due to extended
mission time, the orbit mode deadband is i n ~
creased from 3 degrees to 20 degrees. However j
for those periods when attitude control is
deSired, reaction control fuel for a total of
24 hours of orientation to 3 degrees has been
included in addition to that for 14 days at 20
degrees. Because of the increased deadband and
the higher inertia (about 4 times as high as the
present Mercury capsule about the pitch axis) it
is necessary to increase the reaction control
pulse width in order to keep the limit cycle
oscillation period from becoming too long. If
the present .2 second pulses were retained, the
period would be almst one hour, which is near
the period of the oscillation due to the gravity
gradient torque. To avoid possible coupling
with such oscillations the orbit mode limit
CONf'REW'
cycle oscillation period will be shortened by
increasing the pulse width to .4 seconds. Re-
action control fuel is provided to allow for
this increased pulse width. The same period
shor-rening could be obtained using the present
.2 second pulse width and a deadband of 10 de-
grees rather than 20 degrees. This would give
reduced fuel consumption as well as a narrower
deadband, because the fuel consumption varies
as the square of pulse width but only linearly
wi th d.eadband width. However, the narrower
deadband scheme has the disadvantage of a lower
stabilizing capability in terms of maximum
allowabie rate which can be reversed by the
pulse. Since. the fuel saving afforded by re-
taining the .2 second pulse is small, about .4
pounds per day, and since the maXimum rate
which it can reverse is less than .05 degrees
per second, it is considered better to use the
.4 second 20 degree combination. Which can
reverse .1 degree per second.
4.8-1
_
0
I
I
-
-
'
I
.
-
'
.
_
_
o
+
o
_
1
_
0
0
_
_
_
1
I
_
g
_
o
o
o
_
"
_
.
o
_
.
I
:
:
1
0
0
_
I
_
o
L
o
i
o
_
.
_
.
,
+
O
_
O
o
_
O
_
.
o
_
_
_
o
_
.
o
_
_
.
_
'
_
o
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
.
e
t
.
d
-
_
_
I
'
0
I
-
-
'
d
-
O
d
-
_
,
,
F
_
_
o
_
_
p
_
o
0 o o o
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
_
o
_
o
1
-
_
.
(
I
i
_
I
_
0
o
'
-
_
o
_
,
.
_
.
o
_
,
_
,
_
_
0
,
'
_
o
_
_
"
o
_
.
_
o
_
o
o
_
H
_
d
"
m
I
_
e
l
-
o
_
0
.
.
I
-
'
.
_
.
N
_
_
p
.
'
,
_
0
o
c
t
-
c
t
-
_
[
o
_
o
_
_
_
e
l
-
I
_
0
i
_
_
.
I
_
_
_
o
0
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
e
O
_
-
_
,
-
_
_
o
0
I
-
,
.
M
I
-
-
_
o
I
_
0
c
_
I
0
_
"
O
_
_
_
'
_
o
_
,
o
_
_
_
N
e
t
_
"
I
0
I
-
_
_
_
.
_
_
,
"
0
o g
o
l
i
m Z m Z m m u
_
Z
m m
m "
_
0
m -
-
'
0
,
,
'
,
,
0
'
_
0
'
,
0
,
,
0
P
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.s co:" is .... u
~ ~ . ' . FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
'
~ , ~ , . ~
4.9-1
~ j { ~ > ~ -
r;..' '\ ,
,
4.9 DESCRIPTION OF' STRUCTURE
Modification of the basic Mercury vehicle struc-
ture for this mission consists primarily of
changes to the adapter to contain add! tiona.l..
equipment and supplies needed for the longer
time in orbit and to serve as a heat exchanger.
Table 4.9-1 shows a comparison between the
structure for this vehicle and basic Mercury.
Only minor changes are made to the basic Mer-
cury capsule structure. These include:
A. Changes in shelving and supports for changes
in equipment stowage.
B. Provisions for air connections to the heat
exchanger.
The required heat shield thickness, as calcu-
lated using a realistic value for effective
heat of ablation, is less than that actually
supplied for the Mercury vehicle. (see section
4.7). However, the Mercury heat shield will be
used to avoid unnecessary changes.
In other respects the capsule is structurally
the same as Mercury.
DeSCription of Structural Environment
'l'hermat EriTironment
A discussion of the considerations involved in
selection of critical re-entry conditions and
curves of total heat input are given in Sec-
tion 4.7. Although the total heat input is
slightly higher than for the basic Mercury
vehicle, slight refinement in the thermal
analysis used for Mercury permits retention of
the Mercury ablation shield.
Load Environment
Effect of retrograde velocity on re-entry load
factors is shown in Figure 4.7-3. For both
minimum and nominal retrograde, the variation
of load factor with time during re-entry is
shown in Figure 4.1-2. Boost, escape, and
landing impact load factors are the same as
for Mercury.
Micrometeoroid Environment
The available theoretical and experimental data
on micrometeoroid frequency and lethality were
studied in detail. Density, average velocity,
and frequency distribution given by Dr. Whipple
in Reference 29 are deemed the most authorita-
ti ve. Actual frequencies are obtained by
using the mean of experimental data from
Explorer I, Sputnik III, and Vangard II re-
ported in References 25, 26 and 27, and are
shown in Figure 2.9-2.
particle sizes are computed from the reported
threshold energy of the detector installed in
each of the vehicles, and the particle density
and velocity are given in Reference 24.
Penetration effects have been investigated by
Naval Research Laboratory and University of
utah (Reference 28 on particles .125 to .22
inches in diameter at velocities up to 4 kID/sec.
IF - . ~ . ~
l-
O
,
O
,
O
-
O
"
I
,
-
.
0
_
i
-
.
a
,
.
Z
1
.
1
,
1
Z
0
Z
U
d
I {
{
I (
\1. {
ill
t I
: r
i {
'.11'1111111: L
and at Stanford University, Reference 29, on
smaller 5-150 micron diameter particles at vel-
ocities of 4-6 kID/sec:) FUrther tests at Stan-
ford are expected to achieve 20 kID/sec:
The Stanford experimental data are compared. in
Figure 4.9-3 with theoretical results using the
Grimminger equation (Reference 30). The equa-
tion parallels the experimental data but is
seen to be conservative. Consequently, the
Grimminger equation is considered to be a good
design criteria and is employed in this stud7.
The diameter required to penetrate a single
skin thickness of several typical structural
materials, based on the Grimminger method, ia
The effectiveness of the double skin in pro-
viding meteoroid protection has not been ex-
perimentally verified. Dr. Whipple estimates
a decrease in rupture probability of 10 to 100
for an outer skin one-tenth as thick as the
inner skin. For an outer skin equal in ef'f'ec-
tive thickness to the inner skin the larger
f'actor appears conserTati ve and is adopted f'or
use here. On this basis, a Tehicle vi th a
fourteen day exposure of 220 square f'eet of'
TUlnerable area protected by a thickness of
.02 titanium plus one of' .01 super alloy bas
a probability of not bein& punctured of' . mr .
eo,.rIUtNIIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Radiation En:rl.ronment
The level of r&d:1ation, as estimated in Section
4.12 lor the s-..lbJect mission will produce no
noticeable effect on 8lJ.Y of' the structural
materials which are used.
Acoustic EnviroDJDellt
The acoustic environment is no more severe than
that of' Mercury which will have proven the
structural resistance to noise.
Adapter
The outer skin and core of' the outer wall of'
the adapter provide protection :from meteoroids
f'or the inner skins. Protection for the equip-
ment is provided b;r covering the booster attach-
ment end of' the adapter with a meteoroid bumper.
Boost loads are transf'erred. through the adapter
by external bet stiffeners attached to and
wr1d.n& nth toe adapter outer wall. Resist-
ance to acoustic and vibration loading is
g r e a ~ enhanced b;r the sandwich construction
of' the two walla.
See Figures 4.2-3 aDd 4.2-4 and Sections 4.2-5
and 4 . 2 ~ f'or dea1p details on the adapter.
Critical. adapter loada are shown in IP1sure
4.9-1.
4.9-2
o
c
m
U
J
C
_
)
$
0
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
m
.
-
Z
o
,
0
J
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 I FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
Manned
Heat Shield
Escape System
Shingles
Adapter
Capsule
Retrograde --
Posigrade Unit
4.9-3
TABLE 4.9.-1
STRUCTURAL COMPARffiON ~ T H MERCURY
MERCURY
Yes
.6 Inch of Ablation Material + .2 inch
of Structural Material
Tower Mounted Solid Rocket
L-605 Material
Attaches at Heat Shield.
(Titanium for Boost Temperatures)
Double Wall Titanium with Long-
itudinal Stringers
Package Containing 3 Retrograde and 3
Posigrade Rockets Strapped to Heat
Shield
14 DAY VEIDCLE
Yes
Same as Me rcury
Same as Me rcury
Same as Mercury
Two Versions Studied, One for Atlas, the other for Vega.
Both Attach at the Heat Shield Similar to Mercury.
Material is Titanium. In Each Case the Structure Consists
of Meteoroid Shield Sandwich, Air Ducts for Cabin and
Suit Air Cooling, and an Inner Skin Supported by Corrugated
Sheet.
Same as Mercury, except for Minor Changes for Passage of
Air Lines to Adapter
Vega Version same as Mercury.
Atlas-Posigrade Version Uses Same Retrograde rockets.
However the Incorporation of the Liquid Rocket Boost Posi-
grade system, eliminates the requirement for the Solid
Propellant Separation Posigrade Rockets. The Retrograde
Package is Redesigned to Eliminate These Rockets. The
Posigrade Liquid Rockets are Supported by the Adapter
Instead of the Capsule.
r."".,rlnr,'TI. I
l
O
_
,
0
,
-
0
"
a
.
:
E
L
U
I
L
l
0
a
.
I
.
L
l
D I
.
M
L
U
z B 0 z L
U
Z m C
_
0 _
,
I
U m D L
J
,
v
I
L
l
Q
.
C
_
Z
o I
L
l
> _
C
6
W
_
5
0 u
_
O
.
O
.
z
o
_
n
0
,
_
.
I
_
"
1
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
g
5
_
U
0 0
F
_
Q
.
{
'
,
3
.
_
_
.
_
J
o
:
"
_
o
0
0
o
o
,
*
d
0
-
/
_
-
'
_
o
O
.
0 0
0
7
"
/
I
o o
J
o
o
0 0 0 u
_
I
L
J
M
.
l
_
3
.
0 a z a 0 .
,
,
1
Z o u
l
> W o D
.
+
0
u
.
.
Z
0
a
o
0 0
_
0
_
o
g
m
-
r
Z
"
-
_
,
o
.
_
,
v
o
,
_
_
-
.
_
z
a
_
Z
_
z
_
_
_
0
a
_
z
_
_
_
q
z
,
_
>
_
_
Z
0
,
_
O
_
O
o
a z
- u
u
,
_
.
_
.
,
_
0
_
0
_
Z
!
I
0
I
[
(
(
(
{
I
:; l
' ,
; I
II
11
I
\

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ADAPTER CRITICAL LOADING
ATLAS + POSIGRADE VERSION VEGA VERSION
'\ CAPSULE (REF.) " BOOSTER
CAPSULE (REF.)
3 PSI 600STER I'/EF.) 7
FIXED ADAPTER (REF.)
_1
-\'----" \, -- '\ _.-_.-
------- ,.,.,.'
I
- \ -_. __ ._-!
\ \
\ \- \
\ \
\ 22,190# "28,830#
\-
1-
\ \ t
I I
,340# 43,840# 40,SOO# _: 2790#.,
\: I \, I 7
750,000"# t; \ ',,600,900"#' 750,000"# ;1 - 1,366,900"#
10,500# / 650# \ 10,500# / 530#
'-.
FIGURE 4.9-1
I I
I \ I ,
I f._. I ,
I I
f f
..... r , _._. __ ._ --J
ADAPTER e.G.
LOADS ARE ULTIMATE AND POSITIVE AS SHOWN APPLIED TO STRUCTURE.
LOADING CONDITION IS 6 HARD OVER GIMBAL AT 35,000 FT. ALTITUDE.
INERTIA LOADING AT STAGING IS LESS CRITICAL.
ADAPTER DESIGN TEMPERATURE IS 160F FOR ABOVE LOADING.
ADAPTER MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE IS 6001'. FOR POSIGRADE VERSION
AND 700F. FOR VEGA VERSION, AND OCCURS DURING FIRST STAGING.
_ cu .. IUJ;I"' .-rI'W"""W'"
'-.
'-.
-,
4.9-4
roan tJCIIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.9-5
METEOROID VULNERABILITY
lOr"
V)
w
J:
CURVE SLOPES,PARTICLE VELOCITIES AND
DENSITY FROM WHIPPLE ARS PAPER 499-57,
6 OCTOBER 1957
U
Z
I 10-
1

CI::
w
I
w -
r----

u 1-+-1-
SPUTNIK m DAd
c

\

CI::

c..
EXPLORER II DATA I 0
VANGUARD II DATAJ
10-
51
I I I
10-
8
10-
6
10-
4
10-
2
1 10
2
10
4
PROBABLE IMPACTS PER FT2 EXPOSED AREA PER DA Y
Figure 4.9-2
5 "t" 'tN! :n )

l-
,
,
0
0
L 0 z I Z m 0 z
L
_
O
,
m i
m
n
_
o
,
U
"
W
V
I
(
]
o
o
]
I
D
I
.
I
.
_
]
V
d
/
N
O
I
J
.
V
_
J
.
:
I
N
:
I
d
-
(
]
/
I
u
t
_
0
I
I
.
G
_
,
-
-
I
{
{
:E
<s:
(
0
UoI
.....
u
l

CI::
<s:
Q.
.........
( Z
0

<s:
( CI::

UoI
Z
UoI
Q.
I
0
.........

! I
Figure 4.9-3
--- cO"iisttn4L
DAY MISSION
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
METEOROID PENETRATION
COPPER TARGET, STAINLESS STEEL PARTICLES
4.8. ::a
4.0 I I I " I
" I
!G RIM MIN G ERE QUA T ION
3.21 I
2.4 I I I I
o
(j
I
I I , (j I
. 000 00 ,
T 0 ';,0 _"--.... POINTS FROM
T
1.61 6i, 0
I I 0 SUMMARY
" 0 0
.81
o I I I
.15 .5 1.0 5 10
VI-PARTICLE VELOCITY-KM/SEC
4.9-6
",,"VI IULiWliMa
d
_
i
-
,
,
1
_
J
I
-
-
'"
r
,
D
I
_
>
P
A
R
T
I
C
L
E
D
I
A
M
E
T
E
R
-
I
N
C
H
E
S
t
_
,
o
_
a
_
j
_
r
n
Z
'
o
O
_
a
I
_
Z
&
_
.
-
,
-
,
-
,
'
r
,
_
,
_
,
I
a
_
o
.
_
.
_
o
-
o
.
_
,
-
O
z
0
_
0
_
:
n
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
_
>
-
_
0
Z
!
m
_
j
>
_
_
_
-
_
z
_
,
_
!
"
a
0
-
_
m
-
o
\
\
s
0
0
!
]
i
_
m
=
o
,
,
'
,
,
\
0
m m D
m Z n Z m m m
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
_
l
,
n
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
'FIll' IilAL
METEOROID PENETRATION
OF SINGLE THICKNESSES OF
Y MISSION
ALUMINUM, TITANIUM AND TYPICAL SUPERALLOYS
4.9-7

10.
PENETRATION COMPUTED BY GRIMMINGER
METHOD FROM RAND RPT.-P-18
V)
u.I
::I:
U
z 10-
1
,
-
I
PARTICLE VELOCITY AND DENSITY

FROM WHIPPLE ARS PAPER
499-57,6 OCTOBER 1957
NICKEL AND COBALT ALLOYS a.::
u.I

u.I
10- 2 1 I \( tTlTANIUM I
c
u.I
.....
u
10-
31
'
:
10-4 ' I I I I
10-
5
10-
4
10-
3
10-
2
10-
1
PENETRA TlON-INCHES
EOt'f
IRnm
44
Figure 4.9-4
l
I
J
O
,
O
,
w
0
"
0
m
.
&
w
Z
m
I
L
l
Z m 0 z I
L
l
(
2
0
_
o
_
_
o
4
o
,
o
o
_
o
_
o
,
-
-
4
_
g
.
_
o
_
O
H
_
1
O
o
O
4
-
_
O
%
o
o
_
r
.
.
I
_
_
.
P
g
l
_
.
_
_
_
.
_
-
-
I
I
O
o
,
.
-
I
I
0
0
_
o
4
-
>
.
_
_
_
"
_
_
.
_
o
_
o
!
o
o
4
-
"
_
-
_
0
0 %
.
H
.
H
0 O
_
o
.
_
)
4
-
_
.
,
.
-
t
_
o
O
.
H
4
.
_
.
r
t
.
r
-
t
4
.
.
_
f
.
.
_
e
l
_
_
.
_
,
-
4 I
O ,
-
4
o
0
.
H
o
_
g
_
.
,
.
.
i
_
o
o
_
o
_
_
_
_
o
1
-
1
o
_
.
_
o
_
_
0
_
_
0
0
_
.
H
u
_
.
,
.
.
4
,
.
-
-
4
r
n
4
.
.
_
w
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
.,.I
_
o
_
,
_
,
_
_
,
-
I
_
0
_
o
4
_
_
O
.
H
0
_
)
_
,
_
0
.
,
4
i
_
_
_
_
COl Ci ibdC i Itt
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.10 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SYSTEM
System Concepts
The functions and basic design concepts associ-
ated the environmental control systems are
outlined in Tables 4.10-1 and 4.10-2 respect-
i vely. The primary differences between this
system and the basic Mercury system affect
operations in orbit. During this phase of the
mission, liquid oxygen, rather than gaseous,
is used for the normal supply; radiation cool-
ing is used in place of evaporative cooling;
and lithium oxide rather than lithium hydroxide
is used for the absorption of carbon dioxide.
For the fourteen day mission these methods have
a distinct advantage over the basic Mercury
concepts in terms of reduced and volume.
System Description
The environmental control system is shown
schematically in Figure 4.10-1, illus-
trates the portion of the system housed in the
adapter, and in Figure 4.10-2, which covers
the portion in the capsule proper. MaJor com-
CONPiB
ponents are numbered and a key to these numbers
is given at the bottom of the figure. For clar-
ity, integrating connections and directions
are represented by details of the
control system have been deleted. In the sec-
tions to circled numbers refer to the
identification presented in these figures.
The system the capsule is capable of
complete life support during all phases of
operation. to conserve space and
weight the portion of the system shown in the
adapter is substituted for the corresponding
functional components in the capsule during
normal operation in orbit. Operation during
pre-launch, launch, initial orbit, re-entry,
post landing, and emergencies is provided by
the system the capsule and is similar
to that for the basic Mercury Mission.
A more detailed description of the major sub-
systems is given in the pages.
4.10-1
o
I
m
"
_
0
m 0
< m
0
m
m
.
n
o
I
"
t
'
l
C
m
Z m
l
m
c
z
m
.
<
0
"
_
m .
-
I
t
'
_
C
0 ,
.
_
,
n
0
-
-
Z
z
m Z
m
3
=
_
0
C
:
_
Z
_
C
'
_
m
0 z
,
n
0
"
_
m
0
< m
u
_
Z
m -
-
.
I
'
-
-
I
-
1
-
"
t
"
D
m
Z
-
i
C
-
r
_
m
i
_
0
.
.
<
C
,
n
"
_
m
O
0 Z 0 Z O x O C
:
t
_
L
/
I
m z m
l
m z O ,
=
i
=
i
O ,
,
=
=
I
m "
I
-
C m O m =
-
I
.
.
<
O
z
O t
_
O
"
r
m z z o (
Z
u -
'
4
m C m I
'
,
4
.
-
-
,
I
m O Z
O < m O m O r
T
'
l
O
C
_
-
=
I
i
=
I
=
i
O O m z O -
I
=
I
O _
3
m
O
C
:
i m z m
l
I
,
O
=
I
"
I
=
_
O
_
_
O
m
'
-
r
-
O
i
=
i
=
i
i
=
i
=
I
z
0 0
,
=
=
t
m
-
,
=
1
m 1
>
m Z 0 m z ,
=
-
I
_
0
Z
'
3
C
m
"
_
Z
Z _
0
"
I
"
Z
!
_
-
-
-
t
_
D
0
Z
r
-
0
_
e
-
m
o
_
X 0 m z
Z =
=
,
t
i 0 Z i
,
n
o
I
m Z o I Z m
m
n
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
_
_
-
-
4
-----_ ....
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.10-2
TABLE 4.10-1
BASIC FUNCTIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SYSTEM
1. SUPPLIES THE OCCUPANT WITH HIS NORMAL OXYGEN
REQUIREMENTS.
2. PROVIDES A COMFORTABLE THERMAL ENVIRONMENT
FOR THE MAN.
3. PROVIDES ADEQUATE COOLING FOR EQUIPMENT.
4. CONTROLS BOTH CABIN AND SUIT PRESSURIZATION.
5. MAINTAINS A COMFORTABLE HUMIDITY.
6. PREVENTS THE BUILDUP OF C02 AND NOXIOUS
ODORS WITHIN THE SYSTEM.
7. PROVIDES EMERGENCY FEATURES IN CASE OF FIRE,
METEOROID PUNCTURE, OR COMPONENT MALFUNCTIONS.

I
1-
_
-
U
_
u
J
u
u
Q
g
_
-
u
u
Z 1 1
1
.
1
_
u
Z 1 0 z
I
M
-
-
a
.
0 U
1
I
L
l
r
_
:
E
U
d
>
-
r
_
0 M
-
:
E
M
-
>
-
>
-
,
w
U _
J
U
W
J
o ,
w
p
-
.
.
J
1
Z X u
J
U
I
0
I
l
(
I
(
(
I
! {
d
:11 !
II I
sm If'QfNTI&J.
"---.,
..

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
" .. if!so, .... ,
" \
TABLE 4.10-2
DESIGN CONCEPTS
ENVIROMENTAL CONTROL SYSTEM
1. EXTEND PROJECT MERCURY SYSTEM TO 14 DAY
CAPABILITY.
2. UTILIZE SYSTEM COMPONENTS OF PROJECT MERCURY
TO MAXIMUM EXTENT.
3. PROVIDE INDEPENDENT LIFE-SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR THE
CABIN AND SUIT CIRCUITS.
4. USE LIQUID OXYGEN DURING ORBIT AS PRIMARY
OXYGEN SUPPL Y.
5. USE RADIATION COOLING IN ORBIT.
CUNflDtN IIAL
4.10-3
i 0
I
c
_
I
,
-
-
4
0
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CIRCUIT LOCATED WITHIN THE ADAPTER
4.10-4
FROM HELIUM SUPPLY
FROM FUEL CELL
LOX TANK
311
1. NORMAL GASEOUS 02 SUPPLY
2. EMERGENCY GASEOUS 02 SUPPLY
3. PURGE GASEOUS 02 SUPPLY
4. O
2
FILL VALVE
5. 02 SHUT-OFF VALVE
6. 02 PRESSURE REDUCER
7. 02 CHECK VALVE
8. FREON 114 CHECK VALVE
9. 02 FLOW CONTROL ORIFICE
10. EMERGENCY 02 VALVE
11. LAUNCH 02 BAROMETRICALL Y
ACTUATED VALVE
--
at:
w
l-
e..

0

0
w
l31j
""
N
at:
30) 1111
::::I
V'I
V'I
w
at:
e..
,
12. SOLIDS TRAP
13. PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE
14. SUIT CIRCUIT BLOWER
15. TWO-WAY VALVE
16. C02 AND ODOR ABSORBER
17. H20 EVAPORATOR
18. H20 SUPPLY
19. WATER FILL VALVE
20. TEMPERATURE CONTROL VALVE
21. BACK PRESSURE CONTROL VALVE
22. TEMPERATURE INDICATOR
l -
fiGURE 4.10-1
0
'
,
,
,
0
a
_
0 Q
.
.
u
a
0 z m I
,
M
I
,
M
Z m 0 z I
,
M
O
.
0
'
,
,
v
L
U
=
E
I
,
M
I
'
-
a
.
u
_
l
ir
a
,
M
.
I
I
,
-
-
t
.
/
"
1
>
,
.
<
(
,
.
)
-
-
J
L
U
0
"
1
"
(
,
.
j
_
-
-
,
u
,
,
_
:
1
1
r
l
S
d
V
D
(
]
]
Z
l
_
l
n
S
S
:
l
_
d
I
0
I
0 o I
-
-
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
,
!I I
CON FIDEI C' JaW.
..

[FOURTEEN-DAY MISSiON]
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.
FIGURE 4.10-2
CIRCUIT LOCATED WITHIN THE CAPSULE
c
...
N
co:
::J
VI
VI
TO
CABIN
23. PRESSURE ACTUATED SHUT OFF VALVE
24. CABIN BLOWER
25. SUIT 02 FLOW AND PRESSURE REGULATOR
26. CABIN 02 FLOW AND PRESSURE
REGULATOR
27. PRESSURE RELIEF AND EMERGENCY
DECOMPRESSION VALVE
28. CABIN OUTFLOW VALVE
29. CABIN INLET AIR VALVE
30. HEAT EXCHANGER BY-PASS VALVE
31. RADIATION HEAT EXCHANGER
32. SPONGE TYPE H20 ABSORBER
33. WATER CHECK VALVE
VI
=.:J-....I
...

co:
_ 0
_r-Z
VI
34. ENVIRONMENTAL LOX EVAPORATOR
35. FUEL CELL lOX EVAPORATOR
36. WATER COLLECTION BOTTLE
37. LOX CHECK VALVE
38. LOX FLOW CONTROL VALVE
39. OXYGEN PRESSURE SENSOR
40. LOX STORAGE BOTTLE
41. DISCONNECT
42. GROUND 02 QUICK DISCONNECT VALVE
43. SOLENOID ACTIVATED LOX SHUT-OFF VALVE
44. PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE
45. VENT CONNECTION FOR WASTE DISPOSAL UNIT
COl" 12 II 111 n L
4.10-5
0
I
0
"
_
8
_
I
o
.
.
J
O
_
t
o
m m m
m Z 0 u Z m m o Z 0 m 0 -
-
4
O
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Oxygen Supply and Pressurization Systems
COtrs 12id1 'XL
The oxygen supply is stored in four separate
containers. Gaseous oxygen, initially pressur-
ized to 7500 pSia, is stored in three con-
tainers located in the capsule and liquid oxy-
gen is stored in the fourth which is in the
adapter. A one pound gaseous sUPP1y(l) pro-
vides oxygen for purging the cabin of nitrogen
during launch. This system is activated by a
barometrically actuated valve @ at 10,000 feet
wi th purging being completed at approximately
27,000 feet. Breathing and pressurization re-
quirements are furnished by the normal gaseous
supplyC!) during the pre-launch, launch and re-
ent.ry phases and liquid oxygen supply 0 during
orbi t. These have capacities of six hours and
fourteen days respectively. Figure 4.10-3 shows
the weight and space advantages gained by using
liquid oxygen instead of gaseous oxygen during
the orbital phase. A four pound emergency gas-
eous oxygen sUPPly@sufficient for two hours, is
also provided. Gages indicating the quantity of
oxygen remaining in each storage bottle are
located on the pilot's control panel.
Each of the oxygen storage systems is provided
wi th a shut-off valve and pressure reducer.
The liquid oxygen shut-off valve ~ is solenoid
operated and opened by the pilot in orbit after
an initial cooling off period. The gaseous
oxygen shut-off valves (5)are opened by a ground
crewman during pre-laun'c1i and remain in that
position for the entire mission. The liquid
oxygen and the normal and emergency gaseous
oxygen pressure reducers are set at 120 psia,
100 pSia, and 80 psia respectively. This pro-
vides an automatic oxygen re-supply feature
in case of failure or depletion of the system
normally intended for operation during a parti-
cular phase. In orb:i,t, for example, if the
liquid oxygen supply pressure drops below the
control point of the normal gaseous supply,
oxygen from the latter system will be used.
Suit and cabin circuit pressure indicators are
provided on the pilot's control panel.
When the solenoid operated shut-off valve @ is
opened, liquid oxygen is forced out of the sup-
ply bottle @ and into the converter @ by
pressurized helium gas acting against a mylar
4.10-6
ve8 .. '.Bln.lllit --
"1 -
I
.
-
-
I
"
O
"
0
'
0
'
,
0
"
I
-
-
0
m
a
.
Z
I
,
I
-
,
Z
0
z
I
,
U
|
0
(
I
I ,
I
l
II [
, ........... - d.";. .......
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
diaphragm. The liquid oxygen is vaporized and
its temperature increased in the converter by
the transfer of heat from the suit circuit gas.
The liquid oxygen flow control valve automati-
cally regulates the flow to maintain a constant
oxygen gas pressure of 150 psia immediately
downstream of the converter. The pressure is
then reduced to 120 psia by the pressure
reducer.
Above an altitude of 27,000 feet, cabin pressure
is maintained at five psia by the admission of
oxygen from the oxygen supply system throug4
the dual cabin flow and pressure regulator @.
If the pressure wi thin the cabin tends to
increase above five psia, the regulator auto-
matically shuts off the oxygen supply. At the
same cabin pressure, relief portion
of valve @J.b located in the cabin wall and set
to relieve slightly above five psia, discharges
any excess gas overboard, thus restoring normal
cabin pressure. The oxygen supply to the cabin
will be shut off by this regulator if the cabin
pressure drops to 4.5 psia. If this occurs,
"f'11 I ' I
the regulator may be manually re-set in an
effort to re-pressurize the cabin. In case of
fire, the cabin pressure relief valve may be
manually actuated to decompress the cabin and
simultaneously de-activate the cabin fan.
Sufficient make-up oxygen to maintain the suit
pressure at approximately five psia is intro-
duced through the suit pressure regulator .
When the cabin is at zero pressure this regu-
lator controls to 4.7 psia. The suit pressure
relief valve @ located downstream of the
pressure suit, is set to relieve at five psig.
A failure wi thin the system causing the suit
pressure to drop to four psia or a failure of
both the suit fans is detected by the emergency
oxygen valve @. This valve admits oxygen
directly to suit through the flow
control orificet.2Jat a rate satisfying both
the pilot's pressurization and respiratory
needs. The instant the emergency oxygen valve
is actuated, a bell rings warning the pilot to
initiate the normal re-entry procedure as soon
as possible.
4.10-7
O
!
O
o
O
L
-
e
J
O
!
C
o
o O
m
l
m )
,
-
<
W
E
,
G
H
T
O
F
O
X
Y
G
E
N
A
N
OT
A
N
,
A
G
E
,
N
L
B
S
.
I
1
O
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
/
V
O
L
U
M
E
O
F
O
X
Y
G
E
N
A
N
D
T
A
N
K
A
G
E
I
N
F
T
3
o
b
,
o
_
-
b
b
_
b
0
4
_
h
3
_
a
\
m
o
_
X
t
'
_
.
K
O
0
Z
m
<
Z
m
_
m
m
_
o
o
O
O
o
m m
m =
o
m ,
o
Z o
I
X
p
m 0 C 0
con 'FII II "'AL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.10-8
COMPARISON OF LOX & GASEOUS 02
WEIGHT
240.
2001 J!
::::I
z GASEOUS OXYGEN
SYSTEM 7500PSIA
LLI
(!)
<
,
Z
<
I-
c
z 120 I I
< ..
Z
UrI
(!)
:>0-
X 80 I If I -
o >
LL
o
t- :A
::I: 40 I ..
(!)
I I
VOLUME

M
l-
LL
JI
LLI
C)
<

GASEOUS OXYGEN
z 2.01 I I
c SYSTEM 7500PSIA 7
Z
<
1.51 1:/
(!)
:>0-
X
o
o 1.0 I I ;
LLI

::::>
::::I
o
> .51 I
LIQUID OXYGEN SYSTEM
INCLUDES CONVERTER
./ LIQUID OXYGEN SYSTEM
LLI
3:
INCLUDES CONVERTER
o
o 7 14 21 o
7 14 21
ORBIT TIME-DAYS ORBIT TIME-DAYS
FIGURE 4.10-3
...
5Otmrsn"!
I.
I
1
I
0
m
I
,
l
,
I
u
_
l
C
1
_
-
-
0
"
"
I
,
&
l
Z
,
.
,
,
I
d
,
,
I
I
,
&
l
z 0
z I
g
l
,I
i
h
O
.
,
-
I
!
o
_
J
_
o
_
,
'
t
.
.
4
o r
_
_
o
r
_
_
o
!
_
$
0
.
r
4
0
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
.
_
_
o
O
-
_
i
_
,
x
_
o
_
_
_
'
_
_
.
_
_
:
_
o
_
_
_
_
_
;
o
_
o
_
_
b
O
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
.
r
-
I
4
_
_
,
.
-
I
O
.
r
4
,
-
I
_
-
I
.
_
,
-
-
I
_
-
_
.
_
_
.
_
g
_
_
_
'
_
'
/
_
.
_
_
l
_
_
0
-
_
o
o
_
_
_
o
4
o
c
d
_
l
_
_
o
O
0
_
o
4
_
-
,
-
4
_
_
_
_
o
_
_
0
,
.
c
l
0
_
o
o
_
_
=
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
:
_
?
_
"
_
.
,
_
_
_
_
o
_
0
0
r
-
i
_
_
o
r
4
o
_
!
I
II
I
I
(
I
I
I
II
CONFiDli Ii5W'L
fOURTEEN-DA Y MISSION I
Recirculation and Purification System
The recirculation and purification system util-
izes the principal of continuously recirculating
and purifying the' ga.seous medium wi th
oxygen supplied only whyn the cabin and suit
pressures tend to drop below pre-set levels.
The gases wi thin the cabin and suit circuits
re-circulated by variable speed fans @ and
@ at rates of approximately 35 eFM and 10 OFM
Two-speed fans are used to con-
serve electrical power during launch, re-entry,
and post landing. Also, the above flow rates
can be maintained nearly constant durl,ng all
phases regardless of the higher pressure drop
characteristics of the circuits used in orbit.
An alternate suit circuit fan is provided which
will operate if the normal fan becomes inopera-
ti ve If both suit fans cease to operate, the
emergency oxygen supply is activated.
The purification system consists of lithium
oxide and lithium hydroxide, activated charcoal,
and a vinyl sponge for the rerooval of carbon-
dioxide, noxious odors and excess water vapor,
respectively, from the recirculated gas. In
addi tion to the normal system, a trap @ is
provided for the collection of solids. Instru-
ments for indicating the carbon dioxide and
water vapor concentrations wi thin the suit and
cabin circuits are provided on the pilot's
control panel.

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Table 4.10-3is a comparison of the various
chemicals presently available for absorbing
carbon dioxide. Although some of these simul-
taneously produce oxygen while absorbing carbon
dioxide, they are considered unsatisfactory in
other respects. Other methods of carbon dioxide
rerooval such as freeze-out, amine scrubbers and
molecular sieves are also considered unsatis-
factory at the present time. Since the
chemicals listed in the table liberate heat
during their reaction with carbon dioxide, the
weight and volume penalties associated with the
removal of this heat must be considered in addi-
tion to that of the chemical itself. From the
standpoint of these facts, lithium oxide and
Ii thium hydroxide both appear fa.vorable for use
in the purification system. However, lithium
oxide is used while in orbit principally because
of its lighter weight and lithium hydroxide is
used during all other phases because of the
lower heat dissipation which is a IOOre important
consideration for the portion of the system
located in the capsule. The odor and carbon
absorbants are packed in cOIlm:m cannis-
ters Q:) and located upstream of the heat
exchangers. Since possible dusting of these
chemicals may occur during launch, a filter is
provided at the exit of each cannister.
Wi th the pilot in the pressure suit, only a
portion of his total metabolic will be
removed as sensible heat. Therefore, in order
4.10-9
!
F
J
m -
,
4
m m J ,
,
0
,
,
0
m z 0
i
z
m m u z
0
m 0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
to maintain the normal body heat balance, the
remaining metabolic heat must be given off as
latent heat by evaporating the perspiration.
Based upon a total metabolic heat production of
400 Btu/Hr and an oxygen flow of 10 eFM through
the suit, Figure 4.10-4 presents the required
perspiration rate for various oxygen temperatures
at the suit inlet. When this vapor is circula-
ted through the suit circuit heat exchanger, it
is condensed and then carried downstream where
it is absorbed by the vinyl sponge 62\ Every
twenty minutes, the sponge is
squeezed by a solenoid-controlled piston. The
power required for actuating the piston is fUr-
nished by the high pressure gaseous oxygen
supply. The water squeezed from the sponge
cannot be dumped directly overboard because of
the possibility of its freezing and eventually
--
4.10-10
_lEI nmAL
AY MISSION
forced into a collection bottle in the
clogging the outlet duct. it is
adapter where it is stored and je tisoned with
the adapter prior to re-entry. In orbit, any
oxygen squeezed into the collection bottle is
vented back to the suit circuit upstream of
the heat exchanger During other phases,
it is vented to the cabin.
The build-up of water in the cabin will not
exceed the human comfort level under any opera-
ting conditions even without a cabin circuit
water renoval system, provided operation of the
suit circuit system is satisfactory. However,
a cabin circuit water removal system is provided
for use in orbit to keep the condensed moisture
return from the heat exchanger as low as
possible.
l
0
'
,
0
'
,
,
-
i
,
_
0
'
,
0
'
,
a
.
.
=
E
I
L
l
I
L
I
L
I
=
i
_
I
-
0
a
,
.
I
J
L
I
Z
v
'
,
iiiii
I
L
_
z m 0 w
I
_
_
_
.
_
o
_
.
.
.
.
.
_
o
_
-
_
_
.
_
.
o
,
_
_
,
_
.
o
_
_
,
_
o
_
_
'
_
o
_
,
.
_
o
_
.
_
'
-
_
I
i
_
-
_
1
_
.
_
_
_
'
i
_
i
i
-
o
-
.
_
'
_
_
,
_
.
.
.
_
_
,
_
,
_
.
,
.
:
_
i
_
_
o
.
_
o
E
_
o
_
1
0
_
_
_
_
o
_
o
d
_
d
z
o
0
0
.
o
I
0
o
.
o
_
"
1
[ FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
Chemical Name
and Symbol
Lithium Hydroxide
LiO!i
Lithium OXide
LI
2
0
Sodium
NaO'!
Sodium OxIde
Na20
Sodium Peroxide
N&:!2
Potassium Hydroxide
KOI-i
Potassium Peroxide
K:!2
Potassium Supero:dde
K:!4
Calcium :iydroxlde
Ca(oH)2
CalCium OXide
CaO
Magnesium :iydroxlde
Mg (OH)2
Lbs. Pure Chemical
Lb. CO
2
Absorbed
1.0e 3
0.579
1.820
1. 410
1. 770
2.55
2.51
3.24
1. 685
1.275
1.325
Lbs. "2 Produced
Lb. CO
2
Absorbed

l"';one
None
None
0.363
None
0.353
1.09
None
l'otone
None
COl" iD!I C I Itt
TABLE 4.10-3
CO. CHEMICAL ABSORBENTS
(BASED ON 100 % REACTION)
Lb . r'20 Required
Lb. C02 Absorbed
None
0.409
None
0.409
0.409
None
0.409
0.409
None
0.409
None
Btu Liberated
Ill. CO
2
Absorbed
1260.
2180.
1660.
3142.
2275.
1825.
2529.
1995.
1100.
1735.
785.
I! It IFIDEN!! AL ..
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Comments+
Considered the best C02 absorber for launch and re-entry
due to weight, heat generation and safety of chemical re-
action.
Requires 37 % less weight of absorbent than lithium hydroxide
however 73 %more heat is liberated. The h20 output from lhe
occupant is more than sufficient for the reaction. Considered
the best C02 absorbent for orbit operation with radiation
cooling. System weight decrease;!" 12 !bs. With water cooling
there is a weight increase of 6 lbs.
Requires ';, ?omore weight of absorbent than llthlum hydroxide.
Liberates 32 %more heat.
Requires 30% more weight of absorbent than lithium hydroxide.
Llbe rates 150 % more heat.
Requires 63 %more weight of absorbent than lithium hydroxide.
Liberates 80"l.more heat. Produces 42%of the required
metabolic oxygen rate. System weight Increase = 13 !bs.
Requires 135%more weight of absorbent than llthium hydroxide.
Liberates 40 %more heat.
Requires 131 %more weight of absorbent than Iithtum hydroxide.
Liberates 100 % more heal. Produces 42 %of the required metabo-
lic oxygen rate. System weight increase 43 lbs.
Requires 199%more weight than lithium hydroxide. Liberates
58 %more heat. Produces 125 7.of the required metabolic
oxygen rate. System weight increase 42 lbs.
Requires 55%more weight of absorbent than lIthtum hydrOXide.
Liberates 13 %less heat.
Requires 18%more weight of absorbent than lithium hydroxide.
Liberates 38% more heat.
Requires 22%more weight of absorbent than lithium hydroxide.
Liberates 38%less heat, System weight Increase:7.6!bs.
when used In orbit. A very small system weight decrease Is
realized when used during launch and re-entry.
4.10-11
Q
U
A
N
T
I
T
Y
O
F
W
A
T
E
R
-
L
B
S
/
M
A
N
-
D
A
Y
b
b
b
b
b
b
o
_
_
_
I
o
0
!
'
M
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
..g2" 12214 "AL
! FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
4.10-12
VARIATION OF MAN'S WATER REQUIREMENTS
WITH SUIT VENTILATION

e::(
c
z
e::(
WATER REQUIRED FOR DRINKING
::E 6.0 I
.......
VI
., J.oo'"
-r
50 I I
w .
l-
e::(

REQUIRED WATER LOSS THROUGH
PERSPIRATION I I
u-
o

l-
I-
Z
e::(

o
____________________________________ __________________
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
TEMPERATURE OF VENTILATING GAS ENTERING SUIT _oF
FIGURE 4.10-4
"WII
S ..
l
w
0
m
L
u
1
,
1
,
1
0
a
.
1
,
1
,
1
Z
L
U
1
,
1
,
1
z 0 Z I
&
l
.
.
,
-
4
0 0
.
e
4
0 0
_
_
.
_
_
_
o
4
J
n
-
J
_
_
,
-
-
I
.
_
0
,
_
_
_
-
_
,
'
_
.
_
_
_
0
.
_
_
_
_
_
.
o
_
_
_
_
.
.
,
_
0
b
O
O
t
_
.
_
,
.
_
_
J
.
_
,
.
_
,
_
_
_
_
_
0
o
_
o
*
_
_
;
'
.
,
0
_
'
_
_
_
_
s
_
-
_
_
!
_
,
'
-
4
I
_
0
_
.
_
o
_
;
_
,
.
-
_
_
_
_
;
,
_
o
.
,
_
_
'
=
_
>
.
_
o
.
-
_
,
-
4
_
!
0
i

---. .. c-.:\J:n'I."rl., i , 2Q
i FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
Temperature Control System
1)\.u:1np; stabilized orbital conditions both cabin
tuH1 ..,u .. t c0uling is obtained by circulating their
n'".0- t i VE" '1tr.nspheres through individual radia-
tion heat exchangf'rs located in the periphery
of adapter. During the remaining phases of
flight, cooling is obwineJ in a manner
to that of Project pre-lal.U1ch cooling
is by externally supplied Freon 114, while
cooling during lal.U1ch, re-entry, and the initial
stage of orbit is by water evaporation and/or
stored capacities in the form of lag in vehicle
heating.
During Freon 114 is directly
to the evapvrative heat exchangers through
In umbilical connection. After absorbing
from the re-circulated gas flowing through the
heat exchangers, the Freon 114 vaporizes and is
discharged overboard.
The water supply utilized for cooling during
the initial phase of orbit, and re-entry
is contained within a collapsible bladder
in the water storage bottle An inter-con-
necting duct to the suit Ilircui t J'!lUintains the
pressure on the outside of the bladder equal to
that within the suit circuit, i.e. atmospheric
pressure below 27,000 feet and 5 psia above
this altitude. Below 27,000 feet when the
pressure differential the bladder and
at.mospheric is zero, thE _ no flow of water
to the heat exchangers. Above an altitude of
27,000 feet, when the atmospheric pressure is
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
less than 5 psia, water is forced through the
heat exchangers where it absorbs heat from the
recirculated gas and is vaporized, providing the
gas temperature is at a higher value than the
water evaporation Since the boiling
point of water is a flU)ction of absolute pres-
sure, the cooling capacity available from water
alone is not adequtite below ngproximateLy 70,000
feet (boiling point equals 76 F.) However, dur-
ing lal.U1ch and re-entry there is sufficient heat
lag in the vehicle to maintain tolerable suit and
cabin temperatures in the regions where water
evaporation is not a.dequate. In order to provide
cooling capacity, the vehicle is cold
soaked prior to launch and re-entry. During
re-entry, between altitudes of 70,000 and
20,000 feet, tolerable suit and cabin temperatures
are maintained by the vehicle heat lag and/or
partial water evaporation. Below 20,000 feet the
suit is vented to ambient, thereby increasing
cooling capacity. Aqua-ammonia was investigated
for possible use as the cooling medium due to its
low ooiling point. However, due to undesirable
characteristics such as toxicity, it was dis-
carded in favor of water.
Manually opera ted valves @ provide tempera-
ture control within system capacity during
launch, initial orbit, and re-entry phases by
varying the quantity of water flowing to the
heat exchanger. Each valve is
linked to a back pressure control valve
which maintains a nominal pressure of. psia
in the heat exchanger. 'Ihis setting results in
a bo ili l1.g tempe ra ture of 40
0
F. Also, tempe ra ture
4.10-13
O
!
i
_
_
.
l
I
<
_
_
<
_
<
_
_
<
+
_
<
_
_
_
,
o
_
+
o
'
l
_
_
_
o
_
.
_
_
'
_

_
o
_
H r
d
_
8 O
O
D z m
I
T
I
n
m ,
,
_
O
m
I
T
!
o
=
0
m
-
"
0
,
,
,
,
0
,
,
0
'
,
0
'
,
0
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
indicating gages @ are provided as a safety
feature. If' the discharge temperature should
dr:) p belnv 4CCy 1 the vater rate should be re-
duced by moving the temperature
control valve t3Vard the closea position.
Since the heat 18ss through cabir. walls is
very 10101
1
primarily due to insulation
under vacuum the heat
output frGm the man and is
to maintain a (:abin temperature,
even duri!lg the time spent in the earth's sha-
dow. In fact some degree of ccoling is
required at all times.
Radiation type heat were chosen
orbital use cf the greater weight sav-
ings over other means of coeline. Automatic
temperature systcms with manual over-
ride features are provided for use in orbit.
Indexed positions of' a selector dial, located
on the pilot's instrument panel, correspond to
various temperature control points. When the
pilot selects a particular setting, the sys-
tem automatically controls the amount of gas
bypassed around the heat exchanger necessary
to achieve the desired temperature.
Figure 4.10-5 presents a comparison of normal
incident thermal radiation per orbit for solar
radiation, Earth ref'lected solar radiation,
and Earth emitted radiation. The curves rep-
represent the heat that would be absorbed by
a black body oriented normal to each source
4.10-14
C71l1 iDENIiAL,
..
of' heat radiation. The heat absorbed by th<;
actual fourteen-day vehicle in orbit will vn.ry
considerably from that shown, due to orientation
and finite absorption coefficients. The
of orientation is illustrated in Figure 4.10-6,
which presents the total orbital incident
radiation per foot. of conical afterbody
and adapter The calculations aSS11me
the vehicle longitudinal axis to be tangent to
the Earth's surface and in the plane of ths
orbit. From this figure it is seen that orbits
with noon transit angles of f3 = 74
0
and 0
0
represents the extreme conditions of maximum and
total heat input respectively. These
cond:l tions were therefore examined furt.her
establish design conditions.
Fi
6
'H<: )L.1')-7 th,:, radia:1t heat absorp-
tion rate o'!'C!!' the conical surface of
the and aclapt2r as a function of pos-
ition ir. or'hi t f:)r the b.ro orbits ({3 := 7
40
anl] )C)
r.rc s-"ts of C-:,.l"les arc shown in this figure,
cne set based predicted emissivity and
a1s orpt i " i ty '.-al,les of .8 for Earth er:li tted thel"Innl
re.,:1i2.tion, and .1,- for absorptivity of solar enlitteu
and "=arth r'?'lectcd radiation. For the heat
it is assUlI:ed that a special coating will
be used tc 6ive values of .9 and .2, respectively,
'01' these coefficients. is presently conductinG
experil'L2ntal ,wrk 0:1 coatings which indicate that
301ar absorpti ';ities and surface emissivi ties of this
order can be F:Jr exa.rr.ple, prelirr.inary re-
suI ts indicate that ti taniUlI. c.ioxide is a desirable
CO", IS Iii' 0 ,
4.
m
_
r
l
)
m
.
_
0
m
a
.
m
i
l
l
i
V
I
,
-
-
0
a
.
I
.
&
l
Z
u
_
Z 0 Z
0 G
)
0 Q
I
,
_
m
_
.
,
d
.
4
-
)
%
j
:
_
_
o
_
O
.
,
d
.
_
_
r
.
.
.
_
O
.
t
"
t
I
I
)
t
l
J
"
-
'
_
.
,
_
'
1
.
r
l
e
l
O
.
-
-
t
4
.
_
0
0
o
_
_
o
_
)
o
-
_
,
-
-
I
'
9
_
.
_
o
_
.
,
-
_
_
4
-
_
)
m
N
.
,
_
_
_
'
_
'
_
,
.
_
_
o
_
_
_
,
_
_
_
o
_
,
o
O
_
_
_
_
,
,
_
_
_
_
'
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
i
_
t
_
I
o
_
1
:
_
!
_
I
_
o
_
o
_
.
!
.
.
_
O
O
O
N
.,
",
"I
II,
II
J
I
I.
;/\
II
Ii

J.
.81211514111
coating tllr the surface teJlPeratures enCOlmtered
in orbit. A solar abso:rptivity ot .22 bas been
measured at sea level and an eDlisai rl ty ot
approxiDlltely .95 is expected at low "telIpera-
tures.
Figure 4.10-7 indica:t..es that the WlXi-- thenBl.
radiation rate occurs at a position in
orbit of e:: 30 pa.st noon, on an orbit ot
IJ :: 0
0
.1.Dclination to the Earth-3un line.
This point then represents the crl tical opera..J.ng
condi tien f'or the radiation beat exchanger, and
is the point upon -lIIhi.ch the design is based.
As a IIBtter of' interest, however, +..emperatu....""e
and heat f'1o" data variations throughout the
8 :: 0
0
and 74 orbits are presented. Figure
4.10-8 presents the rate ot beat loss through
the cabin valls. Figure 4 presents exter-
nal skin temperatures averaged over the conical
sur1"ace of' the versus position in orbit.
'lbe external surf'ace temperatures averaged over
the adapter skin heat exchanger, with heat
exchanger internal gas temperatures as parameters
are presented in Figures 4.10-10 and 4.10-11 for
the 8 = 74
0
and 8 = 0 orbits, respectively.
'1he latter curves indicate the heat rejection
rate potential ot the adapter skin heat ex-
changers. As noted in Figure 4.10-11, the
design point () = 300, IJ = 0
0
represents the
condition vb1ch results in the mininun temper-
a ture difference, and therefore the m1 nj nUl
heat flow potential between the internal gas
and the heat exchanger surface.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTonER
Table 4.10-4 presents a summary of the euit
and cabin circuit heat loads which must be dis-
sipated by the heat exchanger. 'lbe mintmum,
average and maximum heat rejection rates by the
occupant correspond to conditions of rest,
and light activity, respectively. The sensible
portion of' the total heat rejected by the pilot
is considered constant all levels of
activtty and was based upon an oxygen flow rate
of ten CFM through the suit at an inlet tempera-
ture of' 50
0
F. Any additional metabolic heat is
dissipated by the latent heat of evaporatfon of
perspiration.
Figure 4.10-12 presents the adap eer skin heat
exchanger areas required to maintain the cabin
and suit inlet gas temperature at 50
0
F, as a
function of heat load, the most critical
conditions of solar radiation. The suit circuit
skin heat exchanger area is presented for three
different rates of metabolic heat rejected by
the pilot representing the three levels of
activities noted above. On the basis of light
pilot ar.tivity and peak electrical equipment
loads, the required suit and cabin heat exchanger
areas at the critical orbit design point of
ii = 0
0
and e :: 30
0
are 34 and 40.0 square
feet respectively.
The heat exchangers are designed so that their
performance change will be minimized if tumbling
of the occurs during orbit. Alternate
axisymmetric flow passages around the adapter
circumference are provided for the cabin and
sui t circuits.
4.10-15
COIIPREt'TlAl
I
O
_
.
_
0
_
_
_
0
c
t
-
_
_
_
0
,
'
_
_
-
_
O
_
_
I
-
0
N
O
_
0
I
_
I
_
_
'
_
-
_
,
(
_
o
.
_
_
.
.
_
I
.
_
o
o
o
'
-
_
:
m
w
0
0
_
-
_
g
_
_
o
0 0
r
_
N
_
0
_
-
_
.
c
_
-
O
_
c
_
(
_
_
o
g
_
,
_
r
+
o
N
N
m Z D Z m m u
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
,
,
o
,
,
o
I
21 idI iDEN IIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
As may be deduced from Figure 4.10-11, for a
suit in10t temperature of 50
0
freezing
of condensed water in the suit circuit heat
may occur during positions in
orbi t. System will be maintained
such conditions by providing several
D'at pclssages with large flew areas.
Consequent.ly, if freezing occurs .. the flow
areas are expectpi to be sufficiently la:r-ge to
pr,:,vent complete blockage. Also, as the
freezing progresses the heat removed is decreased
in higher discharge gas temperatures.
The presented in Figures 4.10-10
and 4.10-11 are averages corresponding to infi-
nite skin conductivity. In practice, portions of
the heat exchanger will have higher temperatures
and others lower. Since the heat exchanger area
4.10-16
extends completely around the adapter circumfer-
ence, the same degree of freezing would not occur
in each passage. When operating on the bright
side of the Earth no freezing is anticipated.
Partial passage freezing in the Earth's shadow
is considered an advantage since the heat of
fusion is thus stored for cooling on the bright
side of the Earth.
Only a cursory examination cf the launch and
re-entry heat inputs and temperatures was made,
since the change in trajectories from tbose of
Project are not suf"ficient to result in
any significant change in requirements during
launch and re -entry. Therefore, details of
heat inputs and temperature distribution during
launch and re-entry are not presented.

-
.I
u
J
l
V
W
_
I
O
N
II
I I
I
I
I
{
,
ii (
I I
DAY MISSION
&
CONFIDENt IAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
SOURCES OF NORMAL INCIDENT THERMAL RADIATION

800
II:ID
CI::
NOTES: I I I
0 1.) 150 NAUTICAL MILE ORBIT. .
2.) HEAT FLUX INTEGRATED OVER ONE ORBIT PERIOD
N
.

u.
3.) SURFACE NORMAL TO
RADIATION SOURCE
I
, 600
I
:::>

II:ID
I
Z
0

c

CI::

Z
w
C
U
z
-'

CI::
0
z
SOLAR RADIATION
4001 I -q

______ .
.. t
.. -..
- L... ',-'.,_
,
_
-..

o 15 30 45 60 75 90
NOON TRANSIT ANGLE, 8-DEGREES
FIG URE 4. 10-5
COldll nmAl
EARTH-SUN
LIN E
EARTH-SATELLITE
LINE
NOON TRANSIT
POSITION 8 = 0
MIDNIGHT TRANSIT POSITION
4.10-17
I
.
,
.
4
.
O
I
I
,
-
L
C
O
_
J
I
,
-
-
I
o L
'
z
'
J
O
I
T
O
T
A
L
I
N
C
I
D
E
N
T
R
A
D
I
A
T
I
O
N
-
B
T
U
/
O
R
B
I
T
-
F
T
.
2
-
C
O
N
I
C
A
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
A
R
E
A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
_
Z
E
> Z ,
-
I
z
_
Q P m
0 Z
E m z
1
>
"
o
m 0 z i
,
n
E -
n
1
>
m
-
-
I
0 m P z m Z -
,
q
m 1
>
-
-
I
0 z
m Z m z m m m
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
_
_
,
,
,
4
,
0
,
0
l
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
C0i4F10EN II.
4.10-18
TOTAL ORBITAL INCIDENT THERMAL RADIATION
ON CAPSULE AND ADAPTER CONICAL SURFACE
z
o
I-
<
o
<
<
w
'" <
w
u
<
...
'" ::>
VI
'"
<
I- U
Z -
w Z
NOTES:
240
220
200
o 0
u u 180
z '
-'"
I-
< ";-
I- I-
o iii 160
I- '"
o
1. 150 NAUTICAL MILE ORBIT
2. CAPSULE AXIS TANGENT TO EARTH'S SURFACE
3. HEAT FLUX INTEGRATED OVER AN ORBIT
I : ---,-- '-r '
-t---.
! MAXIMUM HEAT INPUT
-<-----------t-
I,
"-
::>
l-
cc

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
NOON TRANSIT ANGLE, f3 - DEGREES
<
eClilll mol
1 FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION 1
EARTH-SUN \,1 /J ,EARTH-SATELLITE
LINE 1 -- LINE
--
NOON TRANSIT
POSITION () = 0
FIGURE 4.10-6
l -
0
l
l
.
.
,
w 0 z i z I 0 z
0
'
,
I
I
,
l
i
J
l
l
.
,
.
M
.
I
i
,
,
#
l
o O
I
I
I
I
!I (
,I

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
RADIANT HEAT ABSORPTION RATE AVERAGED OVER
CONICAL SURFACE OF CAPSULE AND ADAPTER
---CAPSULE -,-,_.- ADAPTER HEAT EXCHANGER
SOLAR ABSORPTIVITY =.4 SOLAR ABSORPTIVITY =.2
SURFACE EMISSIVITY = .8 SURFACE EMISSIVITY = .9
100 NOTES:
1.) 150 NAUTICAL MILE ORBIT.
w
c 01: 2.) VEHICLE AXIS PERPENDICULAR
w
a:I w TO LOCAL EARTH VERTICAL.
o 80 3.) ABSORPTIVITY OF EARTH EMI TTED
RADIATiON ASSUMED EQUAL TO
: tiEAT E]<C,HANGER SURFACE EMISSIVITY.
..... 60 DESIGN POINT
w , /3
::z:: u ""r. =0
0
,
- .... ) "
.... Z I ... ... '
Z 0 , ..
u "' ..... --
- ,-' ..
ON 40
.
01: ....

fJ =0
0

0
::z:: 20 I I 1='
> ......
::::>
....
r::tl
EARTH-SUN
LINE
EARTH
NOON TRANSIT
POSITION 8 = 0
TRANSIT POSITION
o ' ! I I ! I ' _______________ --'
o 60 120 180 240 300 360
VEHICLE VEHICLE VEHICLE
NOON MIDNIGHT NOON
POSITION IN ORBIT A L PLANE, e -DEGREES
TIGURE 4.10-7
cotml?n 'flY , ..
4.10-19
O
I
C
_
O
I
O
O
R
A
T
E
O
F
H
E
A
T
L
O
S
S
-
B
T
U
/
H
R
0
o
m
-
-
0
,
Z
0
0 0
Z
o m m
"
_
_
Z
r
_
,
-
,
o z
_
.
_
COD' IS EiC liAt
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.10-20

J:
"-
:::>
I-
a:!
I
VI
VI
o
-'
I-

w
J:
u..
o
W
I-

500
RATE OF HEAT LOST FROM CABIN
THROUGH CAPSULE CONICAL SURFACE
150 NAUTICAL MILE ORBIT
SURFACE EMISSIVITY = 0.8
SOLAR ABSORPTIVITY = 0.4
AVERAGE CABIN AIR TEMPERATURE = 70 F
EARTH-SUN
LINE
EARTH
NOON TRANSIT
POSITION 8.::: 0
! I I
i I I
I . !
4001 .- .... -_ .1-.
NOON /'
I
300 I ! I II

I
2001 -+ -:
{3= 74
_'
10 0 1-'1 ', .... c--- ---+--- - t----+-

o 40
I
VEHICLE NOON
80 120 160 200 240 280
I
VEHICLE MIDNIGHT
POSITION IN ORBITAL PLANE, 6 - DEGREES
ill" jijF"T"L _ .
....7'
320 360
I
VEHICLE NOON
FIGURE 4.10-8
l
O
"
O
"
O
_
O
_
_
0
,
-
-
I
=
=
0
_
u
J
L
U
0
a
.
u
J
Z
u
_
Z 0 Z
5 _
J
U
.
0 _
3
< Z
X
z
'
_
z
=
_
z
o
_
o
'
-
o
_
.
_
z
0
:
_
z
I
=
-
t
J
m Z
_
o
0
_
"
U
i
I
I
I
_
,
u
0 ,
0
Z 0 0 Z
o o
L
_
u
J
o o o
L
u
h
_
u
J
0 u
=
l
o
_
"
-
i
_
Z
-
r
<
o
0
,
.
,
2
Z
/
_
/
/
-
;
0
o
o
_
.
_
,
o
o
=
-
_
z
.
u >
_
z
_
_
Z
o
7
m
0 0
o
-
_
4
0
-
:
l
_
l
f
l
l
V
_
]
d
W
]
l
1
3
V
4
_
1
"
1
S
>
1
.
-
4
C
_
I
0
G
: !
0
(
I
I
(
I
(
ii (
CONFIDEN IIAP
[ FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION [
.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

. ' 3', ,
. \
FIGURE 4.10-9
60
40
...
20
w
0 00:
::>
I-
<I:
00:
-20 w
c.
:E
w
I-
-40
w
u
<I:
...
00: -60
::>
VI
-80
-100
EXTERNAL SKIN TEMPERATURE OF CAPSULE
AVERAGED OVER CONICAL SURFACE
150 NAUTICAL MILE ORBIT
SURFACE EMISSIVITY = 0.8
EARTH-SUN
LINE
SOLAR ABSORPTIVITY = 0.4 EARTH
AVERAGE CABIN AIR TEMPERATURE = 70F
-
....
?-
'""
-
\
--
\
-
,.
'---MIDNIGHT TRAN'
I I I
I"---
NOON TRANSIT
POSITION 8::: 0
I
\

\
NOON TRANSIT ANGLE, /3 = 74 j
/ I

I I
\
/3 = 0
J
\ /
'"
'-
/
/
- -
,
,
o 30
I
VEHICLE NOON
60 90 120 ISO 180 210 240 270 300
VECHICLE1MIDNIGHT
330 360
I
VECHICLE NOON
POSITION IN ORBITAL PLANE, Fl - DEGREES
- --.....
4.10-21
0
I
L
_
_
J
0 _
J
0
!
0
< T
-
'
U
'b
_
,
-
o
Z 0 0 Z
o O
,
0 ,
o
o
0 m -
,
4
Z
<
P _
Z
z
_
,
f
_
o
m
"
,
,
4
_
Q 0 0
m p
b
O
m
-
O
_
Z
0
0 0 Z
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
-
F
J
u
.
_
o
o
o
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CONF'PnfTI ,
EXTERNAL SURFACE TEMPERATURE OF
ADAPTER SKIN HEAT EXCHANGER DURING ORBIT
EART
SOLAR ABSORPTIVITY = .2
SURFACE EMISSIVITY = .9
ARTHSATEllITE
LINE
NOON TRANSIT
POSITION ,= 0
NOON TRANSIT ANGLE, {3 = 74
MIDNIGHT TRANSIT POSITIOH
ISO
r.loo
GAS '-
TEMPERATURE - 0 F
...
,
100
w
0.:
:::>
....
<I:
0.:
w
a..
:E SO
w
....
Irl
o
C
Sloo
j
L
I
w
C)
<I:
0.:
w
>
<I:
0
I
;0
0
,
-SO
I
o 30 60 90 120 ISO 180 210 240 270 300 330 360
,
I I
VEHICLE NOON VEHICLE MIDNIGHT VEHICLE NOON
POSITION IN ORBITAL PLANE, () -DEGREES
4.10-22 FIGURE 4.10-10
... CONFIDENT!' .-- "
l -
I
I',
'\
1,/
,

i ~
III
'I
~ !
II
~ eo", iDE" IIAt
-DAY MISSION
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
EXTERNAL SURFACE TEMPERATURE OF
ADAPTER SKIN HEAT EXCHANGER DURING ORBIT
SOLAR ABSORPTIVITY = .2
SURFACE EMISSIVITY = .9
NOON TRANSIT ANGLE, /3 = 0
o
EARTH-SUN
LINE
NOON TRANSIT
POSITION 8::0 0
HEAT EXCHANGER DESIGN POINT () =30
0
IONIGHT TRANSIT POSITION
150
~
100
(1'50" !NTERNLAS I
TEMPERA TURE - 0 F
-
w
c.::
-
~
....
;100
0
- ~
---
oCt
c.::
w
Q..
~
w
....
w
C>
oCt
c.::
w
>
oCt
FIGURE 4.10-11
50
0
-50
o 30
VEHICLE
NOON
60
;50
0
/,0
0
/
90 120 150 180 210 240
VEHICLE
MIDNIGHT
-
--
--
f...--
270 300 330 360
VEHICLE
NOON
POSITION IN ORBITAL PLANE, () -DEGREES
nE'Dr_ ITI A I
4.10-23
Q i
,
-
,
I
0
I
_
]
o
_
m
_
o
=
=
:
0
t
_
1
1
I
I
I
I
m
_
:
Z
z
_
_
=
o
r
_
O
_
0
t
_
0
_
4
_
I
D
e
D
E
a
0
i
,
-
I
0
(
,
D
_
,
D
o
_
m
S
o
!
b
_
L
_
m Z 0 m
_
Z
_
0
,
,
0
_
0
/
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVrSED 5 OCTOBER
~ n !FIRm wOl
TABLE 4.10-4
SUMMARY OF SUIT AND CABIN CIRCUIT HEAT LOADS
MINIMUM HEAT LOAD AVERAGE HEAT LOAD PEAK OR DESIGN HEAT LOAD
SUIT
CABIN
-
4.10-24
HEAT
BTU/HR. BTU/HR. BTU/HR.
SOURCE
SENSmLE LATENT TOTAL SENSmLE LATENT TOTAL SENSmLE LATENT
HUMAN OCCUPANT 151 149 300 151 249 400 151 449
RECIRCULATING FAN 273 0 273 273 0 273 273 0
LITIDUM OXIDE 177 0 177 236 0 236 354 0
TOTAL 601 149 750 660 249 909 778 449
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 836 0 836 1005 0 1005 2187 0
DISSIPATED THROUGH -440 0 -440 -150 0 -150 -69 0
CABIN WALLS
TOTAL 396 0 396 855 0 855 2118 0
NOTES:
1) MAXIMUM HEAT DISSIPATED THROUGH CABIN WALL BASED ON: j1 = 0
0
e= 2400
2) AVERAGE"" """",, fJ = 74
0
e = 00 thru 3600
3) MINIMUM"" "" tt " " /3 = 00 e= 300
4) MINIMUM, AVERAGE, AND MAXIMUM HEAT REJECTION RATES FROM OCCUPANT ARE BASED
UPON CONDITIONS OF SLEEP, REST, AND LIGHT ACTIVITY, RESPECTIVELY
,..
,ONFIDWII'b
TOTAL
600
273
354
1227
2187
-69
2118
"
0
,
0
O
4
C
O
,
_
"
0
_
-
,
_
-
C
O
(
,
,
1
0
4
0
4
C
_
l
\
\
o
,
,
0
u
'
_
I
-
o r
3
:i
III
N
I-
u..
I
e(
w
0::
e(
w
u
e(
u..
0::
:::l
VI
0::
w
C)
Z
e(
::I:
U
><
W
l-
e(
w
::I:
0
w
0::
:::l
0
w
0::
__ ...,v r.UL P'C.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
HEAT EXCHANGER AREA REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN
50 of CABIN AND SUIT INLET TEMPERATURE
ASSUMPTIONS;
1. BASED UPON MOST CRITICAL SOLAR HEATING RATE (,8=0,8=30)
2. CABIN AIRFLOW RATE OF 35 CFM
3. SUIT AIRFLOW RATE OF 10 CFM
CABIN CIRCUIT
SUIT CIRCUIT

DESIGN POINT DESIGN POINT
........
40 /
METABOLIC HEAT REJECTION = ........... .

600 BTU/HR (LIGHT ACTIVITY) .
36
.'
."
" .'
.'
.'
ii
32 !
I
, ....
., I
28 ................
"'r" 1 ...
METABOLIC HEAT REJECTION = 400 BTU/HR (REST)
__ +-__ __ -+ ____ -+ ____ __ I ,
24
...

... METABOLIC HEAT REJECTION = 300 BTU/HR (SLEEP)
16 ...........
500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1700 2100 2500
HEAT LOAD - BTU/HR
FIGURE 4.10-12
4.10-25
- \..UNrIDe'4' Ii : 4
i
-
i
I
i
.
-
i
c
t
-
H
o
_
)
_
_
-
0
_
,
.
_
.
_
.
_
o
o
o
_
_
I
_
_
_
_
_
o
_
,
_
/
o
_
,
.
.
.
o
I
-
a
o
o
f
:
i
.
i
-
a
o
_
i'_
.
I
_
_
_
I
_
o
I
I
I
-
_
_
,
_
_
o
_
o
o
_
o
o
o
I
-
_
.
0
g
e
l
"
_
.
_
_
.
.
_
_
.
.
_
_
_
_
.
_
i
.
a
,
"
_
'
o
"
,
+
_
_
+
c
_
o
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
.
_
0
I
_
_
"
o
_
o
o
_
_
i
_
!
i
.
.
a
o
_
o
_
I
-
'
0
_
i
-
I
-
_
-
_
N
I
-
a
_
k
-
_
_
g
I
I
1
I
_
.
_
o
o
o
.
_
.
_
1
-
_
H
I
_
_
0
i
_
,
i
.
_
i
,
t
_
1
_
o
_
,
0
_
_
.
_
I
-
'
a
f
D
_
l
.
_
"
.
.
_
o
_
_
_
.
_
'
o
_
0
o
0
_
_
I
!
I
T
I
Z i Z m i
w
Z
m
m 0
n
n
-
-
,
@
,
_
0
_
0
'" CONf'95t" H
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
L .11-1
4.11 AUXILIARY POWER SYSTEM
The electrical load summary is sho'otIl in Table
4 The power break-down and the
load profile for this mission are shown in Table
4.11-2, and Figure 4.ll-1 respectively. The
average power requirement as determlned in this
analysis is 375 watts, with an instantaneous
peak of 1275 watts. The power supply for this
mission consists of a primary hydrogen-oxygen
cell system, shown schematically in Figure
4.ll-2, which is installed in the adapter, and
a secondary silver-zinc battery system,
installed in the capsule. The fuel cells supply
power for the normal mission, except the re-entry
and recovery phases. The batteries
provide power for the emergency mission. The
primary system capacity is 130 kilowatt - hours
and the secondary system capacity is 4500 watt-
hours.
The fuel cell system is one of four power
sources which were studied for this mission:
fuel cell; solar thermoelectric; solar
celis, and nuclear isotope thermoelectric. The
important considerations are weight, volume,
reliability and availability. A comparison of
these is shown in Table 4.11-4. These four
systems are considered the most promising sys-
tems in the power output range required for
this mission. Solar powered and chemically
fueled Rankine and Stirling cycle systems have
also been studied but do not to be ap-
plicable in the range belov two kilowatts con-
tinuous reqUired pover.
The hydrogen-oxygen fuel cell is a very promising
system for provid1ng electrical power with a min-
imum of supporting equipment and with a relative-
ly high energy conversion efficiency. This system
concept is based on cryogenic storage of the hy-
drogen and oxygen, static conversion fran re to
AC pover, and ability to handJ.e peak. loads wi th-
out the aid of secondary batteries.
The veight factor for the fuel cell system
is in the range of 300-350 vatt-hours/pound, in-
cluding fuel and tankage. The fuel cell has the
abili ty to handle peak 10adJ3 up to four times
the average design-load vi th no ill effects and
small loss in efficiency. The conversion effi-
ciency of the fuel cell is approximately 7C11>.
To date most fuel cell development work has been
done with liquid caustic solution as electrolyte.
For this type of cell the effect of a zero "g"
environment requires further research to deter-
mine the nature of the ion transfer process and
the interaction of gaseous :fuel with porous
electrodes. Losses of power and voltage regula-
tion could occur if these processes are affected
by the. lack of gravity. However, there are also
cells under development using semi-solid electro-
lytes Which should not be adversely affected by
the zero gravity environment.
It appears that the fuel cell would be available
in eighteen months if the present experimental
projects are carried on through development of a
CONFiDEIC II a
O
.
O
.
_
.
.
U
_
O
,
O
,
,
0
,
-
-
=
f
.
u
a
0
=
=
=
.
_
.
I
,
M
I
,
M
0 Z
=
=
=
I
,
M
I
,
M
Z
0
Z
.
A
_
_
,
.
_
-
-
.
-
_
II
I,
! I
:(
I
f
I
! J
I 'I
j I
II
I
I t
I
i I
I
!
CIIIPDSNIIAI
""--.. ,
... r
...... -

[OURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
fl.ight article. The fUel cell is tentatively
selected for the auxiliary power system in the
fourteen-day capsule because it shows very good.
potential and requires the minimum changes to
the Mercury capsule configuration 0 Should the
development of the fUel cell not progress as
rapidly as anticipated in the next two years I
the solar thermoelectric system appears to
offer the best solution.
It is seen in the comparison chart in Table
4.11-4 that for this mission, the solar thermo-
electric system is comparable in weight to the
Cl2ftJ2 fuel cell. FurtbFrrmore, there is no fuel
storage problem nor any knO'WIl deleterious
effects of operation in a zero "g" environment.
However, the added complications of st9rage
batteries to handle peak. loads and a solar
collector with its orientation eqUipment;
counter balance the above advantages over the
fuel cell for the subject mission. For missions
of longer duration the solar thermoelectric
system has a definite advantage in that it
weighs less and occupies less voiume. Further
research on solar collector design techniques
including collector orientation, torque can-
cellation, and effects or meteorite bombardment
are required before this system can be utilized
as a primary power source.
Solar cells are currently available at a nominal
ef'f'iciency of 8-10'j(,. are under way to
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
increase ef'f'iciency to' within the next
two years. If the 1510 efficiency goal is
attained, the solar cell system will appear more
attractive than shown in comparison Table 4.11-4.
The need tor peak. load batteries, and the devel-
opment of collector and orientation equipment,
pose the same problems as in the solar thermo-
electric system. Further evaluation and study
of these items are required.
The nuclear isotope thermoelectric system is a
simple system requiring a minimum of supporting
equipment. The decay characteristics of the
isotope dictate the selection of an average
power based on the dUration of the mission and
the half' life or the isotope. This imposes a
weight penalty on the system as rerlected in
Table 4.ll-4. Moreover, the cost of' the nuclear
isotope thermoelectric device appears to be high
compared to the fuel cell and solar devices.
The response of present thermoelectric power
sources to changing load is very slow because
of the thermal lag in the heat input and rad-
iator rejection rate. Thus, secondary batter-
ies are used for peak loads.
In summary" the fuel cell pre-
sents the most attractive interim power source
for the particular mission studied Wile the
other systems show promise and will probably be
more usetul for longer duration missions.
4.11-2
!
(
D
i,
.
lo
(
D
I
-
-
J
.
(
'
D
0
C
_
0 (
D
(
l
q
O O
D
O
0 >
.
o
p
.
,
,
io
c
n
0 C
p
.
_
0 0
_
.
_
o
0
C
_
-
_
o
_
n
u
_
c
o
,
,
-
-
-
1
0
o
.
_
_
1
_
-
,
.
.
]
_
-
.
.
]
o
0
_
O
l
.
,
_
o
c
o
t
_
5
o
_
e
r
_
b
l
t
_
_
u
,
_
,
Z
_
,
-
-
]
0
_
0
.
.
.
_
o
o
o
_
,
_
,
_
m Z 0 i Z m m I
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
_
J
_
t
0
-
a
_
o
n
0
0
o
n
0
0
0
>
.
I
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ITEM
Communication System
Automatic Stabilization and
Control System
Sequential System
Lighting System
Cockpit Instruments
Flight Test Instrumentation
Miscellaneous
TOTAL:
cu, . I"-.; .... I . ~
TABLE 4.11-1
ELECTRICAL LOAD SUMMARY
TOTAL DC EQUIVALENT POWER *
REQUIREMENT - WATT-HRS.
NORMAL EMERGENCY
12,735.0 135.2
6573.0 120.5
235.0 7.4
28.2 5.6
6,174.7 44.6
1,912.1 33.4
85,031.1 507.2
7,633.1 74.9
7,211.0 47.1
127,533 976
* Includes efficiency of converting from D. C. power to A. C.
4.11-3
STAND-BY AND .
ISOLATED POWER
WATT-HOURS
453.4
60.0
5.0
1.5
1857.0
1.7
557.0
2936
1
I
0
"
'
k
i
d
U
L
I
0
a
.
I
,
i
,
I
Z
u
_
E I
.
l
.
I
I
.
l
.
I
z
i
0 z
I
.
l
.
I
I
.
U
o a
.
/
:
3
u
.
J
0
'
-
Z Z Z
0
a
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
i
L
U
I"
Q
Z
_
,
_
o
N
I
I
-
-
]
S
I
/
V
M
(
I
V
0
1
I
I
0 I
,
-
-
I
ill
, I
,
I
, I
I
I
I
I
VI
1
....
....
e:(
3:
I
c
e:(
0
....
1 I
I
I
I
r TPH 'II e"
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1000
800
200
LAUNCH
INITIAL
ORBIT-
CYClE
ELECTRICAL LOAD PROFILE
AVERAGE
MISSION LOAD
375 WATTS
1 TYPICAL '
L--- ------1
1 ORBIT CYCLE 1
1 1
1 1
INSTANTANEOUS
TO 1275 WATTS
--I.. INTERIM ORBIT CYCLES FINAL ORBIT .1. .:. POST-LANDING PERIOD .1
--- C Y Cl E I 7 ;
I. 1
~ 1
RE-ENTRY- i :
1 1
o ' . '1; 'IJ--.... -----...&.---
o 1.0 2.0 3.0 334.0 335.0 336.0 337.0 349.0
TIME - HOURS
FIGURE 4.11-1 4.11-4
UIDIE'DENJlob
I
_
_
_
>
,
t
_
i
c
_
i
_
_
_
_
.
.
.
_
_
_
t
_
_
o
o
o
o
0
_
_
_
.
_
_
N
o
_
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
_
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
_
o
o
o
o
_
o
_
m
,
m Z m Z m m
j
_ m
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
J
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
I T E ~ l WATTS TYPE
POWER
('OMMUNICA TION SYSTEM:
HF Transmitter 60.0 DC
HF Herelver 2.2 DC
UHF Transmitter 5. a DC
UHF Heceiver 6. a DC
Telemetry Power Supply 31. 0 DC
Command Receiver (2) 2. a DC
Decoder (2) 12.0 DC
l\hllltrack 1.0 DC
C Band Transmit 24.0 DC
Standby 11. 0 DC
S Rand Transmit 24. a DC
Standby 11. a DC
AudlO Box Transmlt 7.0 DC
Standby 4.0 DC
HF Recovery 3.38 DC
CHF Back-Up 11.0 DC
STANDBY Al\D ISOLATED
PO\V'I'1'l
HF Rescue Beacon (12V) 3. a DC
UHF Rescue Beacon (BV) 3.2 DC
ASCS
Calibrator 3.9 DC
19.1 AC
Attitude Gyro 42.0 AC
Hate Gyro (3) 36.0 AC
HOrizon Scanner 6.0 DC
HEACTION CONTIlOL SYSTEM: 21. 0 DC
SEQCE:-IT1AL SYSTEMS:
Fl'ght Path Deviation 30.0 DC
Sensor
Thrust Cutoff Sensor 2.0 DC
Loss of Thrust Sensor 4.0 DC
Acceleration Sensor 2.0 DC
Max. Altitude Sensor 2.0 DC
8. a AC
Relavs (Cont rol) 5,0 DC
LIGHTING SYSTEM 27.24 DC
(l\ormal Light)
COCKPIT INSTHUME:-;TS:
Clock 3.0 DC
Periscope .5 DC
Attitude Indicator 21. 0 AC
Angutar Rate Indicator 9.9 AC
Voltmeter DC .006 DC
Voltmeter AC .006 AC
Ammeter DC .09 DC
4.11-5
cOSTSE!!!r
TABLE 4.11-2
ELECTRICAL LOAD BREAK-DOWN
PRE-LAUNCH LAUNCH NORMAL OHmT
0.4 HOllRS 0.1 HOUIlS 14 DAYS - 336 HR.
WATT-HOURS WATT-HOUHS WATT-HOeHS
DC AC DC AC DC AC
6.0 300.0
.8 .2 9.2
1.0 .5 275.0
2.4 .6 2016.0
7. a 3.1 5036.0
B .2 672.0
1.2 16.8
.4 .1 336.0
2.4 2.4 816. a
1.1 1.1 370.0
2.4 2.4 816.0
1.1 1.1 370.0
.7 .7 420. a
1.6 .4 1344.0
2.0 .4 261. 0
7.7 2.0 1273.0
16.0 4.2 2814.0
14.4 3.6 252.0
.6 42.0
235.0
12. 0) 3.0
.8 .2
1.6 .4
.8 .2
.8 .2
3.2 .8
2.0 .5
10.9 2.8 6160. a
1.2 .3 1008.0
.2 .1 67.2
8.4 2. I 93. B
4.0 1.0 445.0
2.8
2.8
36.4
CONFiDEiC it ...
EMERGENCY OHmT RE-ENTRY POST LANDING
1. 6 HOURS 0.5 HOURS PERIOD - 12 Hrs.
WATT-HOURS WATT-HOURS WATT-HOUHS
DC AC DC ,IC DC AC
.4 15.0
1.1
.8 2.0
9.6 3.0
23.9 15.6
3.1 1.0
.1 3.6
.5
3.9 12.0
1.8 5.5
3.9 12. a
1.8 6.5
6.4 2.0
1.2 3.5
40.6
264.0
72.0
76.8
1.3 2.0
6.1 9.6
13.4 21. 0
1.2 18.0
.2 3.0
1.1 6.3
60.0
29.3 12.5 5.0
4.8 1.5
.3 .3
.4 8.5
2.1 4. a
.1
.1
.2 1.1
1
-'--
O
,
O
,
,
0
.
-
_
.
u
.
,
0
'
_
1
4
4
1
,
4
.
1
i
v
,
I
d
.
l
Z a
I
_
'
-
-
1
.
1
4
l
i
d
Z Z I
d
d
1
II
=
,
0
0
o
o
o
L
_
_
....
.
,
.0
r
'q
c
o
0
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
r
_
0
0
......
,,_
0
_
,-
'_
(
:
3
I
i
I
ITEM WATTS TYPE PRE-LAUNCH
POWER 0.4 HOURS
WATT-HOURS
DC AC
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL:
Cabin Fan 1 30/100 AC 12.0
2 57.0 AC
Pi lot Suit Fan 50/70 AC 20.0
Ventilating Fan 150.0 AC
Water Separator 20.0 DC
H2 Boil-Off 10.0 DC
FLIGHT TEST INSTRUMENTATION
Aero-Medical 33.6 DC 8.1
.4 AC .2
Vehicle Measurements 3.0 DC 1.0
.4 AC .2
Operational Measurements .334 DC .3
.034 AC .1
Scientific Measurements 30.8 DC .1
Capsule Environmental 17.3 DC 5.9
.4 AC .2
Relays Camera 15.0 DC 6.0
(Lighting)
I
MISCELLANEOUS:
Relays (Power System) 15.0 AC 6. 0
Retrograde Heaters 1000.0 DC
Squibs 720.0 DC
SUBTOTALS:
1. Primary Source - Normal 81. 4 92.4
MisSion
2. Secondary Source - Emergency
Launch (i) Orbit Re-Entrv
3. Stand-BY and Isolated
Power - Post landing
Period Communications
sm I Z : C i l ~
TABLE 4. 11-2 (Continued)
ELECTRICAL LOAD BREAK-DOWN
LAUNCH NORMAL ORBIT
0.1 HOURS 14 DAYS - 336 HOUR
WATT-HOURS WATT-HOURS
DC AC DC AC
3.0 33600.0
5.0 23520.0
14.0
1.0 3360.0
3.9 3900.0
.2 103.6
.4 765.5
.2 96.6
.1 112.3
.1 114.8
. 1 10.4
1.9 2083.4
.2 96.6
1.5 144.2
1.5 5040.0
.3
30.6 23.9 30900.0 67453.0
30.6 23.9
, 151R&1 lTI.fl
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
EMERGENCY ORBIT RE-ENTRY POST LANDING
1.6 HOURS 0.5 HOURS PERIOD - 12 HRS
WATT-HOURS WATT-HOURS WATT-HOURS
DC AC DC AC DC AC
160.0 15.0
9.5
112.0 25.0 600.0
15.0
.1 .5
16.0
18.6 17.9 1.7
.5 .2
3.7 1.6
.5 .2
.5 .3
.5 .1
.1 .1
9.9 8. 7
.5 .2
.7
24.0 7.5 180.0
123.7 321.2 137.5 133.8
521. 3 780.1
4.11-6
!
i
,
-
-
I
i
-
i
,
!
_
o
-
-
_
_
_
_
_
0
_
0
-
-
-
_
-
-
^
_
.
.
r
_
q
0
-
_
r
M
[
)
_
I
D
r
"
-
.
.
.
.
m
0
_
o
0
<
m
m
7
"
M
m
C m
7
m r
m
F
"
-
,
-
4
m
"
l
"
m
7
m Z m Z m m m
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m -
-
,
(
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
~ CONfIDEI'IIAt
o 2/H 2 FUEL CELL SYSTEM SCHEMATIC
PRESSURE
REGULATOR I ~ PRESSURE RELIEF VALVE
SERVICING VALVE ~ \. ,\;;/;:7 / \. '>/;;/ / ~ SERVICING VALVE
PRESSURE ----' "'"-PRESSURE
RELIEF VALVE RELIEF VALVE
SCHEMATIC OF FUEL CELL
# 1 #2
FUEL CELL FUEL CELL
REGULATOR, CONTROL
AND DC/AC INVERTER
DC LOAD AC LOAD
H20 VAPOR
(OVERBOARD)
4.11-7 FIGURE 4.11-2
, ,aa'C"AL
l
0
'
_
0
,
,
-
,
-
,
0
'
_
1
,
1
,
1
i
,
1
,
1
0
a
.
.
u
,
J
D I
,
L
I
W z n 0 z I
,
l
,
I
O
[
-
4
O
_
_
o
0
o
r
_
0
Z
_
0
_
Z
_
r
_
o
_
o
m
_ o
o
i
o
,
_
i
c
o
m
o
t
-
-
o
o
I
o
_
0
o
o
,
.
_
o o
o
_
I
_
l
o
_
.
,
_
o
0
O
_
z
_
m
m
o
.
,
i
.
o
o
i
_
i
,
-
,
,
4
.
_
,
=
_
,
,
_
_
,
_
I
,
_
,
.
_
,
_
<
_
.
_
0
I
_
o
I
I
1
0
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
1
!.I .{
I! I
[I
I
I !
I \
Estimated Weight
Estimated Volume
Maximum Tempera-
ture
External Torque
Zero "gn Operation
Load Flexibility
Development Status
cONi ili?,!' AI
TABLE 4.11-4
AUXIliARY POWER SYSTEM COMPARISON
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
375 WATTS AVERAGE - 14 DAYS - 1275 WATTS PEAK
2/H2
FUEL CELL SOLAR THERMOELECTRIC
395 Lbs. 400 Lbs.
5 Ft.3 4.75 Ft.3
165
0
F 1100
0
F
No Yes
Further Research No Problem
Required
Excellent Requires Batteries for Peak
Loads and "Shadow"
Operation
Experimental - Pro- Experimental - Production
duction Delivery 1962 Delivery 1962
- In'E'9fNTJN
SOLAR CELLS
420 Lbs.
80
0
F
Yes
No Problem
NUCLEAR ISOTOPE
THERMOELECTRIC
630 Lbs.
4.2 Ft.s
1100
0
F
No
No Problem
Requires Batteries Requires Batteries
for Peak Loads for Peak Loads
and "Shadow"
Operation
Solar Cells Avail-
able - Supporting
Equipment is
Experimental -
Production Deli-
very 1962
Experimental Hardware
Existing - Production
Delivery 1962
4.11-8
0
'
,
0
,
o
I
-
-
t
K
I
,
M
U
_
,
0
m
r
a
L
:
E
_ c
_
Z m 1
(
'
-
-
I
,
L
I
l
U
l
l
z m @ z M
,
I
G
_
p
C
_
E
I
-
r
j
:
c c i 0
1
,
-
4
!
I
_
-
H
"
,
O
I
>
,
-
-
I
,
'
C
I
P
-
-
1
:
I
-
H
_
g
_
.
_
o
_
o
H
"
'
-
'
3
_
,
-
I
0
R
:
_
-
H
-
P
4
.
_
_
o
.
,
-
I
_
.
H
o
_
_
_
;
_
_
o
_
.
_
_
o
(
I
)
;
_
,
.
c
__
-
_
c
_
.
,
-
_
,
.
-
4
I
0
d
,
-
I
.
-
.
4
-
I'
"1
1
I
W'
";\111 .... u ........ .
! FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVI3ED 5 OCTOBER
4.12 CORPUSCULAR RADIATION CONSIDERATIONS
There are several factors, interrelated in var-
ious ways, which contribute to the corpuscular
radiation may be encountered by Earth
ol'bi ting vehicles. They include natural radia-
tion from: 1) the Great Radiation Belts; 2)
Cosmic radiation; 3) Low Altitude Auroral
Radiation; and 4) Solar Flares. In addition,
radiation may result from artificial injection
of radioactive particles in the Earth's mag-
netic field by techniques similar to those
used by Project Arsus.
An estimate is made herein of the radiation en-
vironment which will exist in a Mercury type
capsule due to the natural radiation phenomena,
with emphasis on the contribution of the Great
Radiation Belts. The primary sources of in-
are References 31 through 39, and
discussion with l1r. G. H. Ludwi(1', Department of
Physics, State University of Iowa.
The Great Radiation Belt environment is essen-
tially defined in Figure 4.12-1. The curves on
the left of this Figure show the well lillO.1n iso-
count lines published by Van Allen in Reference
32. These represent the true counting rates
from the detectors carried by Explorer IV and
Pioneer III. It is emphasized that counting
rates are a function of the detector charac-
teristics; hence counting rates from different
detectors cannot be directly compared. It
should also be noted that these rates correspond
to a period of "normal" solar activity.
The curves on the right side of Figure 4.12-1
show energy spectra for the hearts of the inner
and outer zones (Reference 32). These, too, cor-
respond to "normal" periods of solar activity.
Reference 32 indicates that an effect of a solar
flare on the Great Radiation Belts is to increase
the intensity of radiation primarily in the outer
regions of the outer belt for a period of several
days following the flare. Limited data obtained
six days after a solar flare ShO"lS tha.t the in-
tensity increases by a factor of about 250 to 1
at 6 earth radii, whereas at the hearts of the
outer zone 3.5 earth radii and inner zone 1.5
earth radii, the ratios are 10:1 and 3:1,
respectively.
In accordance with Reference 32 and discussions
wi th lftr. g it is hypothesi zed that in the
Great Radiation Belts the low energy particles are
predominantly electrons and the high energy par-
ticles are predominantly protons, and furthermore,
that the preponderance of electrons have
of less than 1 nev. For the p1..11'pOSC: of '-L'1c.lys=-s)
it is assumed that all 'iii th -:..nel"'3h::c;
less thun 1 I,lev, are electrons) and. :':1'1.;;:. t,.:;l' thiill
1 ;,iev are proton;::;. TheE", :'::'1'(; nl;;:2l..::;-
sary beca".Jse the t.cuc
are not l;ncnm.
Refen::n2 e .J,j thd.t the belts
may 6.1.:,C' ne'.Jt,l'C);l..i -,Ihich 'rlould not be
reco:L'ctc.:J. \,i th the 2U'...1.'1i:t.. .. ::::; used. Al thouQ;h neu-
tronCi r;i,...;ht r-lr1.iation dE.:ncity, no effort
is f:JMe: hC.I.'ci.::l to theil' effects because of
of dLl.tLl.,
4.12-1
CU fiDLi AL
I
CONSI?i d' 'AL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
Radiation Intensity Inside Vehicle
In order' to arrive at an estimate of the
tion environment inside thp, vehicle.9 the capsu1p
is idealized into a sphere with a skin of .010=
inch thick cobalt and two layers of titanium
j
.010-inches thick, corresponding to each struc-
ture of the afterbody of the basic Mercury cap-
sule. This idealization results in somewhat
overestimating the over-all radiation since it
ignores the shielding provided by the thick heat
shield and other heavier structure.
Electrons: For electron energies between 0.1
Mev and about 3 Mev, the penetration depth, Ro
(sometimes called. extrapolated range, or prac-
tical range) is given by (Reference 38) as:
Ro
(1)
where:
Ro = f!JIl/
cm2
n :s 1.265 - .0954 In E (2)
E = electron energy in Mev
According to previous assumptions the maximum
energy of electrons in the Great Radiation
Belts is 1. Mev.
For those electroDs, R ...412 f!JIl/ cm
2
.
o
The surface density of the idealized. spherical
structure is:
Cobalt @ 8.8 p/ca
3
x .0254 cm 2235 f!JIl/cm
2
Titanium 8 4.5 p/ cm
3
x .0508 ca ,.. .2286 f!}IJ/ cm
2
Total .. 4521 p/ cm2
4.12-2
I FOURTEEN-DAY MiSSiON I

)0

\
Since this value gre-a"t!:"r than R , all electrons
are assumed to be stopped by the siiin. However,
stopping the electrons leads to the production of
Bremsst.rahlung. The incident electron energy con-
verted. into Bremsstrahlung by a "thick" t.arget is
given by (Reference 38) as:
2
X .... 0001 Z E
where
(3)
X = Bremsstrahlung energy per particle in Mev
Z - Atomic number
E .. Energy of incident particles in Mev
For the idealized. structure, the average Z is
used
:: 1/3 [Z(cobalt) + 2Z (titanium)]
- 1/3 (27 + 22 x 2) - 23.7
The particle intensity per square centimeter of
cross section is I, shown in 4.12-1.
The total Bremsstrahlung energy is given by:
t
el Mev)
Xcr - .0001 Z
I( .02 Mev)

.. 6.32 x 10
6
Mev/second - cm
2
Cross Section
for heart of the inner zone and
4.68 x 10
6
Mev/second - cmf Cross Section
,..n . U:Jnp, IT ,
/-.
a
_
u
J
L
:
E
Z I Z m 0 Z
I
-
I
_
r
Q
_
i-
I
.
r
'l
l
o
_
_
_
4
_
O
+
_
'
H
_
"
_
_
_
_
_
_
,
_
_
o
_
.
.
_
.
o
_
m
0
"
o
_
O
.
r
-
I
?
!
o
o
o
m
o
m
e
*
-
I
O
o
O
H
_
'
.
_
.
.
_
b
O
O
o
o
O
i
1
_
H
M
.
M
0
h
m
m
_
i
@
-
p
o
_
.
_
o
_
o
.
_
.
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
+
_
_
_
O
"
C
I
O
,
,
P
H
-
,
-
I
=
_
,
.
,
-
I
0
,
.
_
O
'
h
q
_
4
.
-
_
l
-
_
o
0
u
_
@
_
_
c
n
o
_
b
D
-
O
_
-
I
_
0
_
o
O
_
o
_
>
@
_
m
-
P
o
.
_ e
J
o
-
_
_
4
a
'
.
r
l
_
o
_
_
.
_
.
_
m
_
H
o
o
,
_
.
.
i
I
_
.
_
P
_
o
0
o
_
0
t
_
O
.
H
"
_
_
_
o
-
,
o
_
l
o
o
,
o
.
_
_
_
.
_
_
1
,
_
-
_
-
-
-
H
H
f
"
,
O
c
,
%
O
_
.
l
_
O
_
H
o
J
_
o
2
.
O
4
_
_
t
q
g
t
o
_
-
_
o
_
_
.
_
b
D
c
_
_
o
r
C
I
_
o
_
_
O
!
o
o
o
9
o
O O
.
M
O
_
.
r
-
t
F
-
-
t
-
O
I
; I
J
I
p.
i"J I:,
il(
r
CONPiS If! a!

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
[fOURTEEN-DAY MISSION i
for the heart of the outer zone without Solar
Flare effects.
The quantum energy that a Brems8trahlung
photon can possess j s equal to the kinetic energy
of' the most energetic incident eler:tron. 'lhis
is assumed to be, as discussed, 1 Mev.
Note that the integcated Bremsstrahlung energy
can be appreciably reduced by the of low Z
nHterials, such as beryllium.
Protons From simrLa:r to thosp for
electrons, it i& found that all protons below
about 13 are stopped by the irlealizerl cal>
sule structure. Sinc;> thf' production of
strahlung energy is inversely proportional to
the square of the mass of particle
(TIp-ference 38) > this effect ft>r protons is neg,>
ligible.
The radiation from the protons is, then,
from those particles having en,=rgis greater
than 13 Mev. This total energy inSide the cap-
sule is given by:
j
I :: 0
(E -13 Mev) dI
I (E :; 13 l-lev)
:: 3.13 x 10
6
Cross
tion for the heart of the inner zune. Proton
energy in the capsul.=> in the heart of the outer
zone is assumed negligible.
In using the electron and protQn energy
tions for the assessment of biological and equip-
ment damage for a particular miSSion, it is nec-
essary to determine energy intensities for points
within the belts other thall at their hearts.
This is accomplished
J
in t.he present analysis, by
multiplying the energy intensity at the heart of
a zone by the ratio of counts per second at the
point to the cuunts per second at the heart of
the zone. From discussion with Mr. Ludwig, it is
believed that this proc.edure some-what overesti-
mates the number of lower energy particles and
SOIDevhat underestimates the number of higher en-
ergy The over-all results, however,
arE> believed to be reasonable. Table 4.12-1
summarized the radiation environment due to the
Great Radiation Belts.
Biological Effects of CCy-puscular Radiation
A prime consideration in the study of corpuscular
radiation is its biologic.al effects upon the hu-
man subject in space.
Physical Effects - In ordEr to determine the
hazards of c.orpuscular radiation to crew members
and IllE:thods by which these hazards may be re-
duced or eliminated, an understanding of its
effects upon irradiated matter is re-
In terms of physical damage, corpus-
cular radiation is into two categories:
(1) Th'? "light" particlts and electromagnetic
radidtioD category, consisting of X .. rays, gamma
rays and electrons. composed
of a continuous of X-rays with a wide
range of energies, is in(:luded in this category).
(2) The heavy particles category, composed of
protons, neutrons and alpha particles.
4.12-3
P
O
I
I
T
I
Z o m Z m m m
I
T
I
.
_
0
I
'
I
'
I
m
m
0
I
rn.,r,cco SF! 7
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.12-4
Probably the most important interaction of high
energy "light" particles or electromagnetic rad-
iation upon matter is the nearly uniform deeply
penetrating ionization. This occurs radia-
tion strikes an electron, in the irradiated mat-
erial, knocking it out of its atomic orbit. The
radi 8+, ion then rebounds th reduced energy.
The excite d electron and the original particle
or vu!l, Ininus the energy imparted to the
electron, collides additional atoms re-
leasing more electrons. These are called sec-
ondaries, are widely scattered and highly
energetic producing further ions before they
lose sufficient energy to be absorbed as thermal
energy. Since the forces linking atoms together
in molecules are contained in the outer layer of
electrons
J
ionization leads to alteration of the
molecular constituents, perhaps producing
harmful chemical reactions.
For heavy particles, the predominent mode of
interaction also comes from collisions
atomic electrons of the irradiated material.
However, since protons are about 1800 times as
heavy as electrons, much less scattering results.
Heavy particles generally produce a more sharply
defined beam than light particles of comparable
velOCity. Because of their large mass, heavy
particles produce very dense ionization tracks.
In their passage through material, they are
characterized by a high energy loss per unit
length of travel as opposed to light particles
which the exponential absorption
Radiation is also classified according to its
"specific ionization". Specific ionization is
defined as the number of ion pairs produced per
"ni t length of path traversed. Heavy particles
which produce large numbers of ion pairs in the
immediate vicinity of their tracks are classified
as having a high "specific ionization".
Biomedical Effects - Ionization occurring within
a cell of tissue produce chromosome damage
or even render cell divi:::>ion impossible; it may
result in mutation; or jf a severe dose is le-
cei ved, it may kiL!.. the cell. (Reference 34)
The difference between the ionization effects
of "light" particles and the "heavy" partic:_es
somewhat explains the variation in severity of
biological reactions to corpuscular radiatinn.
To account for these differences, the Relative
Biological Effect (RBE) is introduced. The X-
ray is the standard unit of 1 referring to
the RBE of a particle. Thus for a particular
biological reaction, an RBE of "k" means that
the radiation is "k" time more efficient in
causing the effect than X-rays. The damf1.ge of
any type radiation, depends upon the
area of the anatomy concerned. For example]
high energy electrons distribute their
effects throughout the body the greater
ionization density of the protons is primarily
concentrated in the surface tissues, which in-
clude the eyes. Proton damage to the eyes is
many times greater than damage to the deep mus-
cular areas, or than electron damage to the
eyes.
Dosage Units - The normal method of measuring
radiation dosage in Roentgens, as used in X-
ray and atomic energy is unSUitable, by
definition, for expressing dose in the case of
corpuscular radiation (Reference 37). The
- nD'S'RO''! I -to
l
O
'
O
'
,
0
-
-
.
I
-
-
i
v w
0
'
_
0
a
.
Z m z m 0 z
o
_
0
4
o 0
0
t
_
,
-
t
4
_
0
4
_
,
r
'
l
_
_
o
r
q
_
,
_
_
1
_
N
.
_
0
-
I
.
)
u
_
o
_
o
_
0
o
0
!
_
o
_
o
_
!
_
_
_
_
_
o
I
a
l
_
4
I
.
J
N
I
I
o
o
o
O
o
_
_
,
_
_
I
_
_
O
'
,
-
I
'
P
_
,
_
.
o
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
O
o
o
_
o
_
_
_
0 _
0
_
o
0
.
_
0
_
o
_
_
,
-
4
_
_
-
_
I
r
il
I
I
f
I !
!
I [
,if..
CONFIDEIC"2 tt
Roentgen is the unit used to measure the energy
absorbed in one gram of air independent of the
type of radiation 0 The absorption properties of
tissue vary with the type of corpuscular
tion considered.
The term REM current-
ly used in expressing corpuscular radiation
dose is defined as the dose which, delivered to
man, is biologically equivalent to the dose of
1 of X-ray or gamma. radiation. The
REM is intended to take into account the relative
biological effect (BEE) of dif:f'erent types of
radiation. Since any consideration of the
primary physical action of ionization radiation
must, be based on energy absorption, the
mental ,concept of physical dose is the energy
absorbed in ergs per gram of irradiated
ial. The absorbed physical dose is expressed
RAD's. Qne RAD == 100 ergs/gram. The REM is
thus obtained as:
REM = RAD x RBE
Calculation of Dosages - The astronaut in the
Mercury capsul;e will be exposed to two primary
types of corpuscular radiation; Bremsstrahlung
and protons that penetrate the capsule. The
different reactions in the human body to these
two types of radiation has been discussed.
Therefore, to determine the dose received in-
side the capsule, these two types must be
calCUlated separately.
The dosage from Bremsstrahlung, being uniform,
is expressed REMs 0 The dose is calculated
by assuming complete energy absorption and
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
assuming a theoretical spherical man, with a
density of one gram per cubic centimeter and a
weight of 70,000 grams.
High energy protons (above 250 mev) can also be
considered as a uniform dose because the protons
essentially penetrate the entire body producing
near uniform damage. The dose is computed from
the cross sectional area of the theoretical man
and the proton energies above 250 mev (Figure
4 Because the dosages from high energy
protons and Bremsstrahlung are uniform and ex-
pressible in HEMs, they can be added directly.
Figure 4.12=2 is a family of curves showing the
total of the two REM dosages in terms of altitude
and time in an 'equatorial orbit for a Mercury
type capsule.
The dose from intermediate energy protons (13
to 250 mev)j with variable penetrations de-
pendent upon the initial energy, is expressed
in RADs. Figure 4 3 is a family of curves
showing the RAD dosages with respect to time,
al ti tude, and penetration. To determine the
REM dose for the organ under conSideration, the
RAD dose is multiplied by the RBE. Represen-
tative RBE values are given at the bottom of
Table 4.12-2.
In many instances in the literature, the whole
body dose from corpuscular radiation at the
heart of the inner radiation belt is expressed
as a Single REM value. For a total dose value,
the REM dosages from Bremsstrahlung and the
high energy protons can be added, but to include
the BAD dose from the intermediate energy pro-
tons, with its variable dosage with respect to

4.12-5
4
_
6
,
,
_
_
o
_
o
o
.
.
o
_
_
o
0
I
_
l
=
s
'
O
0
m _
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
o
o
0
_
_
.
_
.
=
_
o
_
-
_
_
_
_ I
-
_
,
c
t
"
0
,
_
I
-
-
_
-
'
-
_
_
N
N
l
_
m
0
+
_
o
I
-
-
'
0 g
o
_
_
,
,
m Z 0 m z m m I
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m '
,
0
,
0
,
0
'
,
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CONF'RfW"
-
penetration, becomes more difficult. By
garding the implication of the variable
tion dosage, an equivalent total uniform dose
can be computed by di the total damaging
energy absorbed by the mass of the body in grams
and multiplying by 10, the RBE for protons.
(Reference Table 4.12=2)
Using this method, the whole body REM dosage
from the intermediate energy protons at the
heart of the inner belt equals 24 REM per hour.
To this is added the Bremsstralllung and high
energy proton REM dosage of 39.9 giving a total
dosage of 64 REM per hour, which corresponds
in order of magnitude to the value quoted in
much of the current literature.
Dosimetry - The question of acceptable levels
of radiation risk in terms of manned space
flight is not completely resolved. The maxi-
mum permissible whole body dosages adopted by
the atomic energy industry are given in Table
4.12-3. As noted in Reference 35, because of
the uncertainty regarding the exact thresh-
old of ' the curve for deleterious
biological effect of radiation to man, and in
order to insure that jobs involving radiation
exposure will carry no greater average probab-
ility of risk to workers than those involving
no exposure, the values specified can be
sidered as very conservative maximum permissible
exposure levels. They are predicated on the
assumption that a man will be potentially
posed for 45 years, 10 of which will be before
age 30 (the average end of the reproductive
age) The limitation of 50 REN to age 30 is
for genetic reasons.. The lifetime exposure
limitation confines-the statistical average life
4.12-6
.

'\
!>.
.
,
FOURTEENDAY MISSION I
shortening probability to no greater than 3 to 6
years. The maximum allowable combat and training
operational test dosages published by the Navy are
also listed in Table 4.12-3. The allowable oper-
ational test dosages quoted are comparable to the
limits imposed by the atomic energy industry, where-
as the combat dosages permitted are much larger as
might be expected in view of the higher risk which
can be tolerated in combat Although not directly
applicable as acceptable radiation tolerances for
manned space these criteria can serve as
useful guides. In manned space flight, expos-
ures beyond acceptable levels of risk will have
to be avoided. Avoidance may consist of very
short exposure by rapid traversal of the Great
Belts, by ex! t and entry via the magnetic polar
regions, or shielding. The feasibility of
shielding is dependent upon the characteristics
of the radiation which determine the amount and
hence
Jl
the weight of shielding required for a
gi ven allowable dosage.
Different organs and parts of the human body (eyes,
lymph vessels, reproductive cells, etc.) have dif-
ferent radiation sensitivities. Therefore, if the
more sensitive parts of the body are appropriately
Shielded, dose tolerances for the total body can
be increased. It then becomes apparent that by
applying sbielding material to an area proportion-
a.l to the sensitivity, the whole body dose toler=
ance becomes uniform. In this manner, the toler-
ances to radiation might be increased adequately
by "localized" shielding incorporated into the
space suit to reduce or preclude the need for
capsule shielding and its inherent weight
alties.
Primary Cosmic Radiation - The dosages from pri-
mary cosmic radiation are based on information in
I
l-
O
_
O
"
O
_
O
_
*
0
,
-
-
K
u
a
0
m
u
J
u
J
0
o
,
.
I
,
M
Z m I
,
M
u
,
J
Z m 0 z u
,
J
.e
=
0
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
0
g
_
0
_
,
.
_
,
e
l
@
(
3
_
o
_
H
-
M
_
o
o
@
_
'
1
1
.
i
%
o
_
_
o
_
_
_
o
o
,
_
o
_
_
_
_
o
_
I
_
,
_
_
_
I
_
_
o
_
0
0 o
_
.
r
,
l
o
0
_
o
4
j
_
'
3
0
_
_
0
0
t
'
-
- I
,
-
4
)
1
.! I
III
i
It
- co,,: iSEi I.' '"
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Y MISSION
Reference 39. Because of the extremely high ener-
gies, this radiation will pass completely through
the vehicle producing a uniform dose. The esti-
mated dosages in the Mercury capsule for both
polar and equatorial orbits are shown in Figure
4.12-4. These dosages are additive to those
from the other sources, but are so small that
for all practical purposes they are negli gible.
Low .Al ti tude Auroral Radiation - .Although at the
equator, the radiation effects from the Great
Belts are not significant below about 400 nau-
tical as shown in Figures 4.12-2 and
4.12-3, this is not true in the polar regions.
Here the auroral the "leakage areas" from
the Great Belts, dip close to the surface of the
earth. In these regions, the radiation has the
characteristics of and therefore
results in a uniform dosage. Figure 4.12-5 pre-
sents an estimate of the dosage inside the Mer-
cury capsule versus time for a polar orbit at
an aJ, ti tude of 150 nautical miles based upon
data from Reference 31. It will be noted that
even in this low an orbit, the radiation dosage
is significant.
Radiation Hazards for ical S ace Fli ts-
Table .12- presents the estimated radiation
doses including solar flare effects for four typ-
ical space missions: 150 nautical mile equator-
ial and polar orbits, a 19,700 nautical mile
equatorial "24 hour" orbit and a circumlunar
mission. These dosages reflect the contributions
from the several sources represented by Figures
through 4.12-5. Table 4.12-2 shows the
method by which the total absorbed radiation dose
is computed. Solar flare effects were accounted
for by increasing the radiation intensity of the
Great Radiation Belts by the magnitude indicated
in Reference 32.
Although certain of these missions indicate that
precautions may have to be taken to reduce radia-
tion dosages, it is apparent that for the 150
mile equatorial orbit being considered for the
fourteen day version of the Mercury capsule, the
hazard is negligible.
Susceptibility of Electronic Equipment to
Radiation Damage - The current information on
radiation damage to electronic components indi-
cates that semiconductors are more susceptible
CSII"fn7l"
4.12-7
P
O
!
C
o
_
(
_
(
1
)
i
.
_
.
_
r
t
o
_
_
I
_
,
(
_
)
_
_
0
_
I
_
.
!
r
r
l
Z c
)
i r
n
i Z
r
l
.
i
-
.
.
4
r
r
l
r
l
r
l
0
r
n
"
"
O
_
,
0
,
0
4
r
.
n
-
.
,
_
0
_
0
_
_
.
_
i
"
_
'
(
1
)
_
.
.
_
_
,
_
_
_
.
_o
.
o
,
_
_
o
_
_
.
o
_
.
_
o
_
,
_
_
o
_
_
_
_
.
_
o
I
I
(
_
:
_
o
i
-
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
to radiation damage than any other component.
If it \Jere found that the semiconduct.ors are un-
damaged in a specific environmc..1'lt, it can be
assumed that the electronic will
satisfactorily. The effect.s of the
lung and high-energy prc+ .. onH inside the cap-
sule were studied. Nuclear radiation in-i;ro-
duces defects in the crystal lattice of semi-
in the form of interstitial atoms
and vacancies which aff ....;ct the
prop';:rties of the materials. The prOPerties
investigated are the Hall
and minority carrier lifetime. The minori t.y
carrier lifetime is quite radiation sensitive
and most of the work in the field has been
done to determine the effect on this pro-
perty. Table 4.12-5 indicates the sensi ti vi ty
of germanium and silicon semiconductors to
gamma ray induced damage. The data. available
on electrons show that there is li+tle effect
on the semi -conductor until an integrated flux
4.12-8
l"nN&;IDIiNTI A I

'J
6..' -\ ,
,
of 1015 electrons/cm
2
is reached.
there is no material available on the effects of
prcton5 on semiconductorc. However, even
+;he damage from gamma and protons is sig-
nificantly different, the dosage in roentgens
for gamma rays should be useable as a rough ap-
proximation for the proton dose In
roentgens. The radiation from the Great
tion Belts and from cosmic rays is such
even on a pessimistic basis the time
for damage to the electronic equipment is
of magnitude greater than for the fourteen day
mission considered in this report.
For :fut1lre missions, even if the capsule we.t'e
continuously in the heart of the Great Belt .. the
electronic equipment could operate for months
before being damaged. Furthermore, there a1:"e
design techniques and special components
can be used, at reasonable cost, to extend
the life of electronic equipment in a
environment.
CONRrn IIAL
l
O
,
I
l
l
l
l
I
-
-
0 _
L
0 z 1 i
v
i
l
l
1
1
1
z 1 0 z l
l
l
O
,
u
_
O
"
I
,
l
,
I
=
E
h
M
I
-
-
_
L
I
l
l
,
I
l
!
1\
I I
~ I
II
(
II I,ll i
I
(
: I
~ I
i I
! I
FIGURE 4.12-1
CONFiDZi .'1 S I .,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
STRUCTURE OF GREAT RADIATION BELTS
ISO-COUNT LINES
COUNTS PER SECOND
- CONFIDEi4IIM
~ INTENSITY DISTRIBUTION
....
u
UoI
V)
~ 10
12
,
o I I - - - r - ~ ~ ~
(HEART OF ZONE ON THE
GEOMAGNETIC EQUATOR)
/
u
~ 10
10
I r - - ~ ~ - - t - - - - - t - - l -
N
u -c:\ 1
I
u
UoI
'"
....... lOBI 1\ "
,. 1
'"
UoI
....
U
.... ,.
/ 6 \ 1 "
~ 10 I
Q,
I
>-
....
V)
INNER ZONE
~ 10
4
I ~ ~ 1
....
Z
....
~ 21 OUTER ZON E I'" I l
o 10 I I ~
....
U
UoI
/
Q
Z
~
o
.01 0.1 10 100 1000
PARTiCLE ENERGY -MEV.
.
4.12-9
!
m Z 0 Z m m I
u
s
Z
m .
_
0
m
m
m
0
m -
-
*
O
,
,
0
,
0
,
d
O
,
0
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CO,,, IBI" 'M:
TABLE 4.12-1
. ...

!II
... ,
\
I FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION]
CALCULATED RADIATION ENVIRONMENT INSIDE CAPSULE
DUETO
GREAT RADIATION BELTS
;, '"\ T
ElECTRONS NEUTRONS, HEAVY PARTICLES
ENERGY PER PARTICLE 1 Mev
ALL ELECTRONS STOPPED BY STRUCTURE
fl
BREMSSTRAHLUNG
MAXIMUM ENERGY PER PHOTON = 1 Mev
4.12-10
TOTAL BREMSSTRAHLUNG ENERGY
= 6.32 x 10
6
Mev / SEC. - CM
2
CROSS SECTION
FOR THE HEART OF THE INNER ZONE
= 4.68 x 10
6
Mev / SEC. - CM 2 CROSS SECTION
FOR THE HEART OF THE OUTER ZONE
EFFECTS NEGLECTED
DUE TO LACK OF DATA
,...:, ''!.'
? ''DUm 0, ...
PROTONS
NO PROTONS IN OUTER BELT
ENERGY PER PARTICLE 1 Mev
ALL PROTONS WITH ENERGIES < 13 Mev
STOPPED BY CAPSULE STRUCTURE
TOTAL ENERGY INSIDE CAPSULE IN HEART
OF INNER ZONE
= 3.13 x 10
6
Mev / CM 2 - CROSS SECTION
)
l
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
:
I
I
I
W
I
V
3
1
1
F
I
V
N
-
3
O
N
I
I
I
I
V
C
k
J
I
,
-
4
F
_
H
I \
I
{
I
II
I
,1
(
I
II ') ;::;,
W!
,
:, (
: (
'I I
I
I (
1400
1200
In
LLI
.....
1000
-
~
.....

u
800
~
=>

z
I
LLI
600
0
=>
~
-
~
.....
400

200
o
FIGURE 4.12-2
.1
SW'5'95t1Tl 0'
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
UNIFORM*BIOLOGICAL DOSE
FROM GREAT RADIATION BELTS
MERCURY CAPSULE IN EQUATORIAL ORBIT
I
e14 DAY MISSION
MISSION
10
DURATION-DAYS
*NOTE: UNIFORM DOSE COMPUTED FROM BREMSSTRAHLUNG
PLUS HIGH ENERGY (E>250MEV) PROTONS
" ' ~ ' I e
100
4.12-11
i
=
-
I
L
_
I
Dec:" :oe;: .. "Al:
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.12-12
.1
VARIABLE BIOLOGICAL DOSE
MERCURY CAPSULE IN EQUATORIAL ORBIT
10
DEPTH OF PROTON PENETRATION
IN 'THE HUMAN BODY' (INCHES)'
SAMPLE:
10 DA YS '@ 600 MILES FOR
0.7 INCH PENETRATION
THE DOSE IS I 1 RAD.
100 10-
6
10-
5
10
4
10
3
10-
2
10-
1
1 10
1
10
2
10
3
10
4
lOS 10'
DURATION-DAYS DOSE-RADS
.NOTE: VARIABLE DOSE ASSUMED TO RESULT FROM INTERMEDIATE ENERGY
("E" BETWEEN 13 AND 250 MEV) P R O T O N ~
COblP :IL
FIGURE 4. 12-3
I
1 -
_
'
0
'
,
I
-
-
i
v
O
"
'
1
4
4
L
U
E
L
I
Z I
X
"
-
-
L
U
1
4
J
Z O z 1
4
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
(
(
: I
AI
I
'I
I
I I
, I
I
I (
I
i l

-DAY MISSION
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 4.12-2
METHOD OF CALCULATING
BIOLOGICAL DOSE
TOTAL ABSORBED RADIATION DOSE EQUALS:
UNIFORM DOSE FROM PRIMARY COSMIC RAYS ____________ REM
PLUS
UNIFORM DOSE FROM RADIATION BELTS _______________ REM
PLUS
VARIABLE DOSE FROM RADIATION BELTS (RAD X RBE) ________ REM
E REM
RBE VALUES-
PART OF BODY mRADIATED RBE
Skin at basal layer of epidermis __ - ____ - - ____ 5
Blood forming organs, Gonads and lens of the eye _____ 10
Reference 37
iOLi.IIAL
4.12-13
-
-
(
3
t
'_
(
'1
f
'l
_
r
n
_
C
C
C
:
_
,
.
_
_
_
m
m
_
_
-
,
.
.
.
4
.
.
_
-
_
m
"
"
_
;
;
;
_
"
-
_
L
n
t
,
_
m
r
n
m
"
0
_
s
,
-
-
I
'm
_
-
-
,
-
_
:
>
c
v
,
_
_
M
r
M
_
,
_
m
_
m
x
x
_
m
_
-
-
_
i
,
_
_
_
v
=
.
:
p
0
0
-
-
0
_
_
_
-
-
m
-
-
"
o
"
i
:
_
_
_
-
_
Z
m
_
_
m
"
<
_
-
"
_
;
_
;
_
,
-
n
Z
0
:
:
m
m
-
.
0
_
,
_
,
m
-
-
_
-
,
Z
0
1
X
m
_
.
m
m
m
"
"
Z
_
m
i
U
0
_
m
,
'
-
;
-
-
_
0
:
_
0
m
_
m
:
m
C
;
m
_
m
_
4
_
m
m
_
:
:
.
:
0
m
m
c
_
m
u
,
_
,
_
-
<
_
m
_
i
i
i
u
.
,
c
c
;
_
c
"
_
'
m
m
=
0
"
m
m
_
_
_
o
,
,
:
:
_
,
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
>
m
_
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
,
c
o
'
,
_
o
o
o
o
_
,
_
o
_
_
_
_
=
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
m
Z
-
-
I
-
=
_
_
,
o
o
'
O
0
.
_
-
_
-
r
_
_
o
=
_
_
o
>
Z
0
)
.
'
I
"
P
r
-
r
-
p
p
m
0
p
p
0
P
_
o
o
_
,
o
-
5
5
>
-
,
_
i
.
_
0
.
_
_
o
o
_
"
z
"
_
C -
-
I
_
6
-
_
Z
_
o
w
"
r
z
0 m
E
-
r
_
_ 0
5
_
=
=
i
_
1
"
1
9
_
m
0
m
m
Z
in
r
-
r
m
[
3
X m
_
m
0
u
_
_
0
0 m
o m "
M
m
m Z 0 m Z m m m
m
Z
m ,
,
,
4
m
m
m
0
m
,
.
=
l
-
-
'
O
,
,
0
,
0
,
0
_
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.. iii::L;
.

4.12-14
(!>'--
... ,
TABLE 4.12-3
RADIATION EXPOSURE TOLERANCES AND BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
ATOMIC ENERGY INDUSTRY#
WEEKLY MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE ..
YEARLY MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE
PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE TO AGE 30
MAX IMUM PERMISSIBLE LIFE-TIME EXPOSURE
ACCEPTABLE EMERGENCY EXPOSURE
ACUTE MINIMUM SICKNESS DOSE
0.3 REM'
S REM
50 REM
225 REM
25 REM
150 REM
30 .,
ACUTE LD50 ........... 450 REM
ACUTE INCAPACITATING D05E .. 5000 REM
MILITARY##
COMBAT
ALLOWABLE SINGLE ONE TIME EXPOSURE
ALLOWABLE REPETITIVE WEEKLY DOSE
( NOT TO EXCEED 8 WEEKS
ALLOWABLE 8 WEEK DOSE
TEST OPERATION
,
75 REM
25 REM
............................. 200 REM
STATISTICAL LIFE SHORTENING (PER REM)... . ... 5-10 DAYS ALLOWABLE ACCUMULATED CAREER DOSL.. . .......... 30 REM
STATISTICAL LEUKEMIA INCIDENCE ( PER REM) ... 1-2Xl0-
6
jyEAR ALLOWABLE DOSE ACCUMULATED IN 3 MONTHS... .. IS REM
GENETIC MUTATION DOUBLING DOSE 30-50 REM DOSE LIMIT EACH FLIGHT.
DOSE IN REM=DOSE IN RAD X RBE; 1 REM IS THAT AMOUNT OF
ANY RADIATION REQUIRED TO PRODUCE THE SAME DEGREE OF
BIOLGICAL EFFECT AS 1 ROENTGEN OF HARD X OR GAMMA RADIATION .
LD = LETHAL DOSE FOR 50 PERCENT OF THE EXPOSED SUBJECTS IN 30 DAYS
# REF (36)
# # BUREAU OF AERONAUTICS, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY INSTRUCTION 03401.1
"NUCLEAR WEAPONS EFFECTS CRITERIA FOR NAVAL AIRCRAFT," DATED 10 MARCH 1959.
...... """
-
S REM
l
_
0
.
,
-
0
'
_
i
_
i
u
a
K
0
a
.
Z
u
u
J
w z n 0 z u
J
I
_
I
_
I
I
/
)
.
_
J
0 0
_
m 0 l
a
_
m Z
(
/
)
I
J
i I
/
)
0 l
J
m a
.
0 u
_
i
-
r
a
0
l
l
1
L l
l
l
l
!
l
I
1
I
\
k
I
k
I
l
\
m
0 i 0 F
-
-
0
.
J
\
\
\
S
W
:
I
_
I
-
_
I
S
O
C
i
0 0 0
>
- !
Z
0 i i
i
i
v
L
e
_
I
1
-
-
I
I [
I (
I
, I
f
'"
:e
'" D::
I
'"
'"
o
o
1.0
.1
.01
.001
.0001
FIGURE 4.12-4
CONf'CU' n
Y MISSION
t----- ..
~ - .
UNIFORM BIOLOGICAL DOSE
FROM PRIMARY COSMIC RAYS
NEAR EARTH ORBITS
,.
.._- --
- _ ... , ...
- -- """"""
--- ._----_.--
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.......
.....
... ...
......
........
......
, .. --=--
-_._.
..----
~ - - = - - -
_._ T"
~ .. -. ,-
. ~ ." " .. - . ~ .. _-
.-
~
---
...... - -- -. ~
. ~ -
POLAR ORBIT,
......
~ fIII!'"
.. ~
........
...... -
~
... -.. "."'" -
_ ....
fIII!-
~ ~
..
~ .. -.-..
.....
..
........
~ \
. '
~ - " " - - - r - '
\.... EQUATORIAL ORBIT
~
- .... . ..
I
.1 1 10 100
DURA TlON-DAYS
4.12-15
c. t ,r.ftr. ft
I
b
zo
0
o
t
_
Q
t
_ I
_
a
D
O
S
E
-
R
E
M
S
0
\
0 0
m C
:
:
:
1
>
Z )
>
0 m
"
1
'
!
0 0
.
-
-
I
0 Z m
C Z 0
m Z 0 Z
m m m Z
m -
w
0
-
-
4
m
m
m
0
m
,
-
4
J
:
1
o o
0 m
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
..................... -r
100
10
UNIFORM BIOLOGICAL DOSE
MERCURY CAPSULE IN POLAR ORBIT
- - ~
FOURTEEN-DAYMISSION I
---
/
"" ~ ~
... --
J'
~
4.12-16
vt
:E
w
CI::
I
W
VI
o
c
- ~ ~ ~ . ~ " .... - - ~
~ ~
. 1
--
.-
~
.JII'
-- ~
~
.01
.1
J1III'
~
/
~
..
../"
..... -. /-
- ~ -
.. ~
/
~
L 150 NAUTICAL MILES ORBIT ALTITUM
------ - - - ~
1 10 100
DURA TlON-DAYS
FIGURE 4.12-5
GflPfW,,'
I
l
I {
I
I
AI
I
(
i I
i I
II
1;1
! I
I
I t
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 4.12-4
RADIATION HAZARD FOR TYPICAL SPACE FLIGHTS
150 NAUTICAL MILES EQUATORIAL ORBIT
NORMAL DOSAGE __________________ 0.016 REM PER WEEK
SOLAR FLARE DOSAGE ______________ 0.016 REM PER WEEK
150 NAUTICAL MILES POLAR ORBIT
NORMAL DOSAGE __________________ 1.12 REM PER WEEK
SOLAR FLARE DOSAGE _______________ 1.12 REM PER WEEK
19,700 NAUTICAL MILES !l24-HOUR" CIRCULAR EQUATORIAL ORBIT
NORMAL DOSAGE ____________________ 1.5 REM PER WEEK
SOLAR FLARE DOSAGE _________________ 375 REM PER WEEK
CIRCUMLUNAR FLIGHT (EQUATORIAL LAUNCH AND RE-ENTRY)
NORMAL DOSAGE ___________________ 30 REM
SOLAR FLARE DOSAGE . _______________ 55 REM
NOTES:
1. DATA INCLUDES EFFECT OF VARIABLE RADIATION AS AN EQUIVALENT
UNIFORM DOSE WITH THE SAME TOTAL ENERGY ABSORBED.
2. DATA ASSUMES MERCURY TYPE STRUCTURE.
3. SOLAR FLARE DATA BASED ON REFERENCE 32.
CU,.,
4.12-17
I
C
o
c
_
_
0
0
r
_
J m m ,
0
m z m z m m u z m 0 ,
,
,
,
4
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 4.12-5
SENSITIVITY OF SEMICONDUCTORS TO GAMMA RAYS
4.12-18
Material
Germanium
Thick Base
Medium Base
Thin Base
Silicon
Thick Base
Medium Base
Thick Base
Dose (Roentgens) for
Noticeable Changes
in Minority Carrier
Lifetime
1()6
10
7
loa
1()6
10
7
10
7
Y'" II aWN
Dose (Roentgens) to
Seriously Affect
Circuit
Operation
~ 0 8
10
7
10
10
10
7
10
8
10
8
l -
O
"
O
,
0
"
O
,
u
,
J
0
'
_
a
.
,
v
I
-
-
0
a
.
Z
u
.
,
m I
.
I
J
z m
0 z
,
D o
0 u
"
x
t
_
-
,
-
4
:
>
)
.
-
I
o
o
_
_
o
+
_
.
_
o
0
_
_
+
-
_
.
.
,
-
I
_
o
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
0
_
0
.
.
1
_
_
t
,
.t
.
,
-
I
I
C
_
0
o
g
_
!

e
l
%
4
.
_
0
0
_
,
,
o
,
_
0
0
-
_
_
_
_
+
_
_
_
o
_
_
_
o
_
_
O
_
o
o
o
_
+
_
.
,
_
_
_
o
_
_
o
o
_
?
!
-
.
-
-
"
_
.
r
4
.
_
I
I
0
_
.
_
.
_
_
_
"
-
'
_
_
_
.
,
-
,
_
,
,
_
o
o
_
,
.
,
_
r
.
,
i
o
_
,
_
o
,
.
_
"
_
o
_
_
_
=
I
_
o
.
_
_
_
o
.
,
o
_
.
-
_
,
-
-
t
l
a
l
t
_
'
.
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
_
+
_
_
O
_
_
o
_
|
0
h
_
I
.
_
I
I
,
-
t
-
0
_
_
,
'
_
1
_
_
_
_
1
0
_
o
o
=
o
o
o
o
_
o
_
r
d
'
_
0
"
_
-
_
_
0
o
_
>
:
:
_
_
)
-
_
_
_
o
_
_
_
,
_
O
:
_
.
,
-
I
_
1
o
_
m
0
_
o
_
.
_
!
I
hi
"
\
COl !FIE n ITI 0 ,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Revised 5 October
4.13 HUMAN FACTORS
This section presents a discussion of the fac-
tors that are particularly applicable for the
extention of the Mercury capsule orbital capa-
bili ties to fourteen days. The pertinent areas
of study are psychological factors, physiologi-
cal factors, and safety-survival.
Psychological Factors
Crews of space vehicles will function in en-
vironments involving drastic alterations in
normal patterns of behavior and sensation.
The stress arising from physical and psycholo-
gical isolation, extreme restriction and re-
duced or repetitive sensory inputs will be
magnified by long duration flights.
In technical literature the stress associated
with isolation has been categorized into two
problem areas. The first is physical or geo-
graphic separation which has been referred to as
"aloneness" and results in a sensation of de-
tachment or "break-off." 'nle individual feels
he has severed his ties with Earth and e x ~
periences difficulty in correlating the events of
the mission with past experience. Related to
geographic aloneness, but felt to be essentially
distinct, is psychological or social isolation.
Absence of social "feeaback" prevents consensual
validation of perception and thought and thus dis-
rupts reality testing. Another area closely re-
lated to isolation is "sensory deprivation."
This subject has received wide attention since
the appearance of reports (Reference 40) from
Hebb's laboratory, which indicate that dramatic
changes in behavior follow changes in the sensory
environment and suggest that the roost important
aspect of sensory deprivation is reduced informa-
tion input rather than reduced sensory input.
The feeling of aloneness, of complete isolation
in space can never be completely simulated
in the laboratory. However, much can be done to
minimize this source of stress.
(A) The activity necessary for performance of
the miSSion, proper work/rest cycle and contin-
uous communication should provide relief.
(B) A structural setting with ties to familiar
customs and surroundings and the maximum possible
duplication of the diversity of sensory exper-
ience available on Earth should be incorporated.
(C) Through preliminary training, measurable
adaptooillty can be obtained, and psychological
indoctrination could provide a certain degree of
immunity.
(D) The use of drugs may reduce anxiety and
combat fatigue. However, extreme care should
be utilized in their administration. Long term.
decrement of performance and undesirable physio-
logical consequences may often be the price of
the inmediate and specific gains.
CODin EIQ I IAt
4.13-1
!
D
O
m Z 0 m z m m i
_
Z
m -
-
4
_
m
m 0
n
n
,
0
_
0
_
n
J
,
0
,
0
111l! ISZII",L
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.13-2
Physical restriction will not only intensify
the of isolation, but poses ad.di tional
problems. Muscular fatigue develops wi thin the
confines of the space eabin I:Uld some atrophy
of the muscles can be expec ted. be:;12.use of
sedeutary position of the subject. A cont.mlled
and systematic experiIl1P.nt, (Reference 41) using
a specifie configuration (Mercury Capsule) has
been performed and further studies are planned.
Possibly the most important reason for a pro-
longed orbital flight will be the opportunity
to observe man's functional capabilities in
space. 'nlerefore, an organized program should
be fornrulated which will provide the lIDst
information on human Suggested
parameters to be investigated include compen-
tracking, computation, pattern discrimi-
nation, auditory vigilance, scale position
m.mi toring, warning light lIDni toring, probability
and varioua psycho-physiological
measurements. Studies ar.= now being carried out
in with Mercury project, the
results or. which are applicable to prolonged
missions.
The psychological considerations of this
mission are summarized in Table 4.13-1.
..... I!I!!I
I
.
-
-
0 _
L
_
U
@ z m z i @ Z I
,
M
O
_
:
E
M
.
I
L
!
o
_
B
.
'
0
!
'
0
0
o
i
.
4
o
r
)
o
r
.
.
)
o
_
0
"
4
!
t
_
1
_
_
o
I
I
~
'
i.
1
1 : ~ t 1,
ii "
:It
'!'
:1 I
II
\:1
I' I
ill
II
II
I 1
i
I
CONSIDERA nON
ISOLATION
RESTRICTION
PERFORMANCE
CONFiDEt 1'\61;
TABLE 4.13-1
PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSIDERA nONS
RECOMMENDA nON
Extensive simulation of conditions,
displays and control of conditions
and systems of space flight, for
maximum adaptability.
Cabin arranged for maximum
man-capsule compatibility
Initiate and organized program to
determine man's capability to
perform accurately and effectively
in space.
-- ","u rIULi4 i IAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REMARKS
Provide the crewman with
confidence in the total system
and familiarity with isolation
effects. Training will provide
a ce rtain degree of immunity.
Conduct controlled and systematic
experiments to determine effects
of sedentary position. Correlate
laboratory results with actual
results obtained from missions
in space under weightlessness
state.
In order to determine the appli-
cablllty of man as a functional
unit in a space system, indexes
of performance. must be estab-
lished. Indexes can be established
by comparing results obtained in
laboratory tests, with those
obtained in flight.
4.13-3
o
o !
o
_
,
_
_
_
_
'
_
_
_
_
,
o_
i
i
:
0
10
0
_
_
I
_
-
P
.
,
o
-
_
_
m
0
c
+
_
_
_
o
o
_
.
_
-
_
-
-
_
o
_
-
_
o
_
.
_
o
o
_
_
,
_
_
5
_
.
_
i
_
_
.
_
_
_
_
0
_
O
0
_
,
_
.
_
_
_
'
_
_
_
o
_
_
o
o
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
I
_
0
I
-
_
1
_
_
o
_
o
_
o d
-
O
o
_
_
-
-
_
.
_
o
e
_
,
o
,
_
o
I
_
0
_
0
_
I
_
c
_
,
m
_
0
_
o
o
_
g
_
m Z 0 i Z m m m
_
Z
m .
_
0
m
m
_
=
-
.
_
=
0
-
-
'
O
,
,
0
'
,
0
,
o
,
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
sm'l I"l
Physiological Factors
Particular emphasis must be placed upon physical
comfort and body functions. Preliminary studies
have been conducted in the Mercury capsule
IOOck up to investigate adaptation to 9.
pressure suit and to obtain neasures of
formance in a restricted area. The results of
this initial study showed the pressure suit to
be both comfortable and IOObile , although for an
extended mission it is recommended that helmet
pressure points be reduced. For a. work station,
body position in the contoured seat appears to
be optimum at least under normal gravity
ditions.
Rest or muscle exercise csn be by
fUlly extending both legs from the hips, cross-
ing the legs; assuming a kneeling
position or Shifting body positions slightly.
M:>bili ty of the left leg was found to be
what restricted by the left instrument panel.
Therefore, for the sub,ject mission the panel has
been modified to improve comfort. No difficulty
was encountered in sleeping in the capsule.
However, considerable difficulty was encountered
in urinating, indicating a need for improvements
in the waste elimination area. 'lli.e optimum
method for the removal of urine with respect to
task difficulty, frequency and pressure suit
reliabili ty appears to be the integral suit
urinal with relief hose routed externally to
4.13-4

'\J
'.-
" r/"'r-_

,
a container located in the cabin. By the use of
pre-latUlch enema and low residue diet the normal
daily solid waste elimination is reduced by 82
percent. During a 14 day orbit, approximately
three to four bowel IWvements will be required.
Because of undesirable odors and the rather
frequent eliminations, the system of a separate
waste disposal unit and suit opening seal appears
the mst promising. A vacuum line from the
waste chamber to activated charcoal can be used
for innnediate remval, of noxious odors.
Food is an important consideration, both from
the viewpoint of adequate body nourishment and
as a diversion during the relative lengthy con-
finement period. Therefore, the :food must be
appetizing and easy to consume in addition to
supplying the proper balanced diet. From the
preliminary confinement studies, it was found
that the consumption of solid food (small sand-
wiches) in the pressure suit was easily accom-
plished. Air Force studies on weightlessness
has demonstrated that consumption of solid food
can be accomplished prOviding the subject does
not inhale food particles. The food should be
a highly concentrated low fibre solid form, in
bi te sizes. It can be properly sealed, marked
and stored for ease of access and selection.
Drinking water can be stored in anti-vaporization
tanks and through a siphon tube.
The phYSiological considerations of this mission
are summarized in Table 4.13-2.
CONfIDe., I It?
l
,
,
0
I
,
-
-
0 Q
.
0 z n Z D 0 X
O
_
:
E
a
.
!
1
!
C
O
_
J
r
_
1
0
I
1
I ;11
t I
{
t
I
i ,]
II
!
J
I
FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION
CONSIDERATION
COMFORT
FOOD
WATER
URINE
SOLID WASTE
cONFiDE! i i "-
TABLE 4.13-2
PHYSIOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
RECOMM"ENDA TION
Minor suit and cabin modification.
Pure food (no fibre)
Solid form, sealed in meal
packages.
Cabin mounted antivaporization
tank with siphon tube.
Urinal integral with pressure
suit. Plumbing from suit to
cabin container.
Separate disposal containers
with recessed vented container
receptacle in couch seat. Suit
opening for elimination.
c:e"i ISZ: ii' 0 ,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
REMARKS
Reduce helmet pressure points and
modify left console for improved leg
mobility.
Minimum weight, waste, least
complexity. Eliminate bulky storage
facilities. Individual meals wrapped in
bite sizes. Variety of food flavors for
greater appeal. Marking on packages
to help regulate proper nourishment.
Ease of storage and consumption with
minimum complexity. Pressure
sealed to prevent loss in the event of
cabin decompression.
Minimum task difficulty for frequently
repeated cycles. Improved suit
reliability. Reduce exposure to
c a b ~ n decompression.
Maximum cleanliness and elimination
of noxious odors. Frequency reduced
by low residue diet. Improved
psychological aspect by completely
removing waste from crewman.
4.13-5
t
_
I
C
_
_
0
I
_
c
t
-
@
o I
m
_
e
_
l
_
I
'
_
@
l
I
D
g
g
g
_
o
o
_
o
_
-
_
_
"
_
_
.
_
_
_
.
_
_
0
0
_
t
-
_
_
o
_
_
.
_
g
e
t
-
i
@
0
I
-
"
.
o
f
"
_
-
_
I
'
a
"
i
_
.
i
_
0
_
0
e
+
I
.
a
.
0
_
-
_
'
0
c
'
_
"
b
"
_
0
e
l
-
_
=
1
0
c
_
-
o
o
_
_
_
t
b
e
o
*
o
"
o
I
-
-
_
o
_
_
o
o
N
,
.
_
0
_
.
_
_
g
m Z 0 i Z m m
_
Z
m -
_
0
m
m 0
m
I
o
_
_
o
_
_
0
_
o
_
o
_
g
o
_
o
l
a
.
o
0
m
_
_
m
o
o
o
_
h
a
=
0
_
i
=
_
_
-
_
'
[
o
_
g
_
0
+
_
I
"
-
a
o
c
l
-
O
_
'
_
.
_
_
g
.
g
_
.
_
_
o
.
_
_
g
g
0
=
0
@
1
3
g
_
"
o
0
!
1
"
_
M
m
Z
J
_
_
o
0
o
_
'
o
_
g
"
_
_
_
_
o
i
:
_
o
I
-
a
o
I
_
0
o
_
,
_
"
_
o o
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
0
@
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
_
o
o
o
o
_
o
0
I
t
"
_
_
"
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Safety and Survival
If a 100% reliability factor for the entire
vehicle and its components could be obtained, the
need for a safety system such as a pressure suit
would be eliminated. However, since the "state-
of-the-art" has continued to exhibit a relia-
bility factor of less than and because of
the almost instantaneous collapse of a human at
zero pressure, a redundant system must be pro-
vided. In terms of complexity, reliability, and
man-vehicle compatibility, the full pressure
suit appears to be the optimum redundant system.
Tests conducted to date (Reference 42) have
demonstrated that a human subject can withstand,
in one type pressure suit, without deleterious
effects three days at suit differential pressures
from zero to 3.4 psi. For extended durations in
a pressure suit, however, comfort is of paramount
importance. Points of Rtress, which are not
evident by relatively short periods of use, must
be investigated and eliminated. This will
reqUire additional development of present pressure
suits. In addition to comfort, the suits must be
provided with waste elimination facilities.
The curves in Figure 4.13-1, accompanied by the
notes in Table 4.13-4, present a comparison
between the maximum expected emergency abort and
re-entry deceleration and demonstrated human
4.13-6
"'O"flPfNJ! AI
tolerance. Tests have demonstrated man's ability
to operate a hand control while subjected to
accelerations well in excess of that expected
for emergency aborts.
In order to insure the well being of the crew-
member while in orbit a means of monitoring
must be provided. The instrumentation provided
is intended to give maximum information to the
crewmember and to the ground personnel on the
physiological and psychological condition of the
crewman. The bio-medical observations of the
crewman and the possible diagnoses appear in
Table 4.13-3 . Such measures as electroenceph-
alograph, galvanic skin response, electrocardio-
graph and deep body temperature have been
omitted for the extended mission, because of
the difficulty of obtaining accurate information
and because of the stress caused by the "pick-
ups." Experience gained on the Mercury Capsule
will provide information on the appli-
cability and reliability of such instrumentation.
A summary of safety and survival considerations
for this mission appears in Table 4.13-5. A
discussion of corpuscular radiation and its
biological effects is presented in Section
4.12 of this report. Briefly, it is concluded
that for the subject mission the radiation
dosage will be well within human tolerances.
,ot'PP5t1T! 0 ,
l
O
,
0
.
.
,
0
0
I
I
,
.
L
L
I
I
X
0 z m 1
4
J
L
U
z m 0 z L
i
d
0
_
,
L
U
I
d
d
I
-
-
'
D
.
0 0
0
_
_
e
_
_
0
0
_
0 0
0
_
h
_
o
_
0
_
o 0 8
"
_ s
_
b
-
-
-
!
,
-
4
Z
0 .
<
0
I
0 I
,
,
-
-
I
Z .
<
0 0 .
<
0 .
<
Z
0 o 0
!
i
=
_
E
o
_
o
u
_
!
I
_
-
_
_
_
I
_
.
_
_
_
r
.
.
.
_
I
I
I
I
I
I
_
l
I
I
I
1
_
J
r
,
-
,
o
!
!
I
I
t
,I'
I".M
!!,
: 'f
I
t: I
,il
,

t
!i I
I
I
I
I' I

TABLE 4.13-3
BIO-MEDICAL OBSERVATION
INDICATION OF THE CREWMAN'S WELL BEING
TO mMSELF
TO GROUND STATION
INSTRUMENTATION REQUIRED
Environmental Condition
- Pressure-Cabin and Suit
- CO
2
Partial Pressure
- Temperature
Crewman's self diagnosis training required to
analyze symptoms resulting from presented
information
Environmental Conditions
- CO
2
Partial Pressure
- O
2
Partial Pressure
- Pressure - Cabin and Suit
- Humidity
- Temperature - Cabin and Suit
Gas
Physiological Conditions
- Voice
- Respiration Rate
- Heart Rate
Psychological Conditions
- Voice
- Task Performance
Sot'E1pEt'JI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
POSSIBLE DIAGNOSIS
Hypoxia
Hypercapnia
Hyperthermia or Hypothermia
Hypercapnia
Hypoxia
Hypoxia
Hyperthermia
Hyperthermia or Hypothermia
Overall Conditions of Crewman
Hyperventilation
Physiological or
Psychological Stress
Overall condition of crewman
PhYSiological and
Psychological Stress
4.13-7
m ,
,
,
,
4
m m J ,
,
0
Z 0 m Z m m n Z 0 m
o -
,
,
4
'
,
0
_ rn.'P1nr, sm
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.13-8
TABLE 4.13-3
HUMAN TOLERANCE TO EMERGENCY ABORT AND RE-ENTRY ACCELERATION
CURVES
(1) Maximum predicted abort acceleration from escape rocket initiated 25 seconds after staging.
(2) Maximum predicted abort deceleration (into harness) from escape rocket burnout.
(3) Maximum predicted re-entry aerodynamic deceleration.
(4) Demonstrated maximum tolerance to transverse applied acceleration, WADC TR 58-156, 'Human
Tolerance to Some of the Accelerations Anticipated in Space Flight'
(5) Maximum demonstrated tolerance to acceleration, WADC TR 58-156, 'Human Tolerance to Some
of the Acceleration Anticipated in Space Flight'
(6) 20.7 G Acceleration Data. Navy-Johnsville 1958. Project TED ADC AE-l412. 'Pilot's
Performance and Tolerance Studies of Orbital He-Entry Acceleration'
(7) 25 G Acceleration Data. Navy-Johnsville 1959, Unpublished, 'Restraint and Protection of the
Human Experiencing the Smooth and OscUlating Acceleration of Proposed Space Vehicles'
DISCUSSION
Recent data obtained by the Navy indicate man's ability to remain alert at 25 G's acceleration
using a molded couch with optimum back angle. The couch in the Mercury Capsule incorporates
the critical back angle and contour required for this high acceleration.
WADC studies on man's tolerance to negative transverse acceleration indicate that man can
tolerate the maximum expected deceleration following escape rocket burnout.
Tests performed by McDonnell personnel at NADC and WADC have successfully demonstrated the
ability of the Mercury capsule restraint harness to provide satisfactory support at 9 G's
negative transverse acceleration.
S" !RaWAl
--
I
l
n
.
.
:
.
d
-
J
"
,
_
,
_
'
-
_
.
,
,
,
o
:
_
.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
_
I
I
"
S
,
9
N
O
I
/
V
_
I
:
I
I
:
I
:
)
:
)
V
i
c
_
H
II
i

f:
I
I
I
.,
, I
i
" (
!
: I
i I
I (

C>
Z
0
....
e:(

w
.....
w
u
u
e:(
FIGURE 4.13-1
CUI'FIDt:liIIAI:"
Y MISSION
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
HUMAN TOLERANCE TO EMERGENCY ABORT
AND RE-ENTRY ACCELERATION
MAXIMUM DEMONSTRATED HUMAN TOLERANCE-USAF
._._._._. RECENT DATA OBTAINED WITH MOLDED COUCHES -USN
...................... PREDICTED MAXIMUM ABORT AND RE-ENTRY DECELERATION
28
24
20
16
12
OF G< " "t
6
... POSITIVE '.
ACCELERA1TlON \
I I i ,"'Si -
1--- I I I _ " .. ,:-1:,-+1 --t----+----+--+----j
.' < '\
!"'l,ll "\,,'\
.. - 'oi I (4)
/i// \..\i\ P
8
4

il
I in
I i ./, ' .
------+-----+-- I ! ..... -j r""
l
,. i \ \"""""
.... ''':'''' I / \. \. "'l'''''''''' .... I' .... , ...
.. ,
0
-4
I
r" I I I
2 I 5
I I I I I . 1[,('2 I I I
-
"j---...J
-8
-J I I NIl I I I I I
60 50 40 30 20 10 o 10 20
TIME IN SECONDS
FROM PEAK ACCELERATION
30 40 50 60
4.13-9
m
-
-
M
o
_
'
_
"
_
.
o I
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CONSIDERATION
Cabin Decompression
Acceleration
Crewman well being
Training
4.13-10
- cON5'Qnrzr"
FOURTEEN-DAY MISS!:<iciJ
TABLE 4.13-5
SAFETY AND SURvrv AL CONSIDERATIONS
RECOMMENDATION
Modified Pressure
Suit
Me rcury Capsule
Couch
Bio-Medical Instrumentation
Extensive simulation of
condition in actual capsule
simulator
~ cm'IRlitl1,1 S If"
REMARKS
Immediate protection. Present
pressure suits modified to improve
helmet comfort, and to provide for
waste elimination.
Semi-supine position optimum for
acceleration tolerance. Subject
supported by seat requiring minimal
restraint. Energy absorbing couch
material attenuates peak accelerations
upon impact.
Maximum number of sources without
compromising crewman condition.
See Table 4.13-4
Establish program for extensive
training in adaptability to prolonged
confinement and obtain measures of
performance.
J
I
I -
O
_
O
_
O
_
O
_
0
"
'
.
-
I
,
I
d
u
u
0
" 1
,
1
,
1
Z m I
X
'
-
-
I
d
d
u
J
z m 0 z I
,
,
M
,
-
4 I
! I
I
I
1,,(
I

I
AI
{
,(
I
(
III
au 'L
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
4.14 RELIABILITY
The reliability essential for a satellite
has been attained on Project Mercury by a thor-
ough reliability program. This attainment pro-
vides an excellent basis for a 14 day manned
satellite since most of the equipment can be re-
tained. New equipment required for the extanded
mission will be developed with the support of
a relis-bili ty program comparable to that of
Project Mercury, the salient features of which
are shown on Table 4.14-1.
The variation of mission reliability for the
fourteen day vehicle is shown graphically in
Figure 4.14-1 as a function of mission time.
The slightly reduced reliability from the pre-
sent Mercury for the Mercury mission time is a
result of the additional boost sequence (posi-
grade) necessary to achieve the higher orbit.
For the full fourteen days the vehicle has a
mission reliability of .56. A breakdown of the
mission reliability in Table 4.14-2, shows that
the lowest reliability occurs during the boost
and the orbit phases of the missicn.
The relatively low boost phase reliability of
TT is based upon data for the present Atlas
booster. It is predicted that future develop-
ment will raise the Atlas reliability to .92.
This will raise the entire of reliability
versus mission time, and result in an increase
from .56 to .66 for the fourteen day mission.
With a perfect booster an additional improve-
ment to .12 would be obtained.
The orbit phase reliability of .73 is the pro-
duct of the reliab111 ties of the systems show
in Table 4.14-3_ This value is attainable by
a minimum modification of the present Mercury as
described in Section 4.2. The reliability esti-
mates do not take into account the system devel-
expected as a result of the in-
formation obtained from the Mercury Malfunction
Reporting System. This development coupled with
the achievements of a reliability program, such
as Mercury's and that planned for the 14 day
mission system, warrants confidence that the ex-
tended mission can be satisfactorily accomplished.
Should it become apparent that significantly
higher predicted orbit phase reliability is nec-
essary. Incorporation of the items listed in
Table 4.14-3 would raise the miss10n reliability
to .61. If the improved booster were also
included, the final value would be .19 for the
fou:;:teen days. However, it is felt that the
penalties of additional weight and space do not
juatify these redundancies initially when it is
as shown in Table 4.14-2, that they
are not required for the attainment of high
safety reliability, and that many of the mission
o-bjectives can be achieved even though it might
be necessary to terminate the time in orbit at
somewhat less than fourteen days
The actual redundancies provided for the 14 day
mission are shown on the reliability diagrams
on Figure 4.14-2 and 4.14-3. These diagrams
show the possible combinations of eqUipment
which WIst function for a successfUl mission
or successful abort. Aborts after staging with
or without retrograde rocket firing, are Dot
presented. since they are 8imilar to the 1I1881on
diagram less the orbit phase.
4.14-1
COle: ILII ill ' L
m
.
.
.
<
o
l
i
U
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
gilt'S:?_. "I'"
4.14-2
TABLE 4.14-1
RELIABILITY PROGRAM SALIENT FEATURES
RELIABILITY IS SPECIFIED AS:
A.) A DESIGN REQUIREMENT
B.) A PERMISSIBLE NUMBER OF FAILURES
RELIABILITY IS IMPLEMENTED BY:
A.) RELIABILITY EV ALU ATIONS
B.) RELIABILITY STRESS ANALYSES
C.) DESIGN REVIEWS
D.) COMPREHENSIVE FAILURE REPORTING
E.) ANALYSES OF ALL FAILURES
RELIABILITY IS DEMONSTRATED BY:
A.) QUALIFICATION TESTING
B.) RELIABILITY TESTING
cpt's:
C _nllML
l
0
'
,
,
O
,
I
,
,
-
0 a
,
,
l
.
.
u
0 z
m
u
.
l
u
J
z
m
0 z
l
U
l
l
m
l
U
L
l
L W p
E
-
I
f
.
.
.
'
4
r
.
_
I
.
-
I
A
/
I
I
I
_
V
I
I
:
I
_
I
I
I
/1
CO,,, :nWtAL
.

[fOURTEEN-DA YMISSION .
--..
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

RELIABILITY VS MISSION TIME
1.00 I d i
.901
14 DAY VEHICLE
(BOOST RELIABILlTY=1.0)
(------
.80 I ,'i J-"""::::
>-
I-
.....
.....
UoI
0::
a:I
.70

14 DAY CAPSULE
& PRESENT A HAS BOOSTER
.601

FIGURE 4. 14-1
iI
I 2
I
28 HOURS
(MERCURY)
4 6 8 10 12 14
MISSION TIME(DAYS)
"'z ?!5'pn'TIAl
REVISED 5 OCTOBER
4.14-3
s
_
a
!
L
_
J m m
g
m 3 U
l
m J ,
,
O
_
O
m Z G
_
m Z m f
f
l
_
O
i
m
Z _
D
1
1
'
I
0 _
D
0
_
_
O
_
0
r
_
!
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
PHASE
Boost
Orbit
Retrograde
Re-Entry
Over-all
4.14-4
COl SP'DF'NTIAL
TABLE 4. 14-2
ESTIMATED RELIABIlJTIES
MERCURY CAPSULE
28 HOUR MISSION
MISSION SAFETY
.7917 .9964
.9890 .9999
.9946 .9946
.9998 .9998
.7786 .9907

.

.
MERCURY CAPSULE
14 DAY MISSION
MISSION SAFETY
.7734 .9960
.7302 .9990
.9924 .9924
.9995 .9995
.5601 .9897
O
,
O
,
_
'
=
U
"
I
I
,
-
_
'
e
_
u
d
0
'
_
-
.
:
E
I
d
d
I
,
I
.
I
0
a
.
1
,
1
d
Z D
g
'
-
I
,
M
u
J
z m
m
0 Z 1
4
4
!
@
C
O
C
O
L
_
C
O
L
'
-
I
_
C
_
m
0
E
_
m
!
I
i
q
3
I,ll
System
Alternating Current Power
Direct Current Power
Controls
Communications
Over-all Orbit Phase
Over-all Mission
with Present Atlas
with Improved Atlas
----
Basic
COl iFnnm 0 ,
TABLE 4. 14-3
ORBIT PHASE REUABILITY
14 DAY MISSION
Possible Changes to
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Improved
14 Day Capsule Improve Reliab1l1ty 14 Day Capsule
.9155 Add the following items in parallel with .9728
the present units: Liquid Oxygen bottle,
converter, flow control valve and
pressure reducer.
.9070 This is the same as present Mercury. .9649
Studies indicate the inverter can be
improved during development
9332 Duplicate the liquid hydrogen and .9896
liquid oxygen plumbing.
.9551 .9551
I
.9866 .9866
.7302 .8753
.5601 .6714
.66 .79
4.14-5
s,,'E'9f
NY1
A'
I
I
I
) |
?
-
it
r
f
I
I
'
I
"
jl
.
J
'
-
_
"
I
_
I
i
i
-
-
_
,
.
-
-
_
-
.
-
-
_
I
I
.
a
,
-
.
.
,
I
I
=
I
-
"
_
_
.
.
.
.
"
.
4
i
.
_
.
.
i
.
_
.
-
"
i
,
=
:
t
t
:
.
t
"
u
_
.
,
"
7
-
"
,
.
"
-
-
"
-
'
,
,
"
I
,
"
"
-
I
"
t
.
.
_
i
i
I
F
A
'
'
,
I .
I
"
3
"
-
-
s
-
-
r
.
!
I
:
-
r
-
_
_
, I
!
I I I
I I
,
,
_
_
L
-
I
'
i i
.
"
i
i
"
I
'
M
w
I
Z
b
.
_
_
'
_
I
, II' " :au .'" L
I
I
,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
RKl::8BD 5 OCTO"".c;R
GIIIIII lllICIL_
IIOSH

S.&Hll-IISUUECI
SlneM
I FOURTEEN-DAY MISSION
RELIABILITY DIAGRAM
HeJe!1'
IIIUIIII ESCaPE
Sf'IIIIIII-lItlfl
cl .. m Ii l:slI::[1 1111 IIlfl
mum mlllllil _Sf'lIIlIll _ SfPUIJlII -1IT"ltlf
Hml SEmi 11111
CI.... I IIIIS IlmllCl Ifltjl"
mflm 1 II SUI[ * r HfmlC CUlIIS *
UTlff SISIAlin-TlIlS' -J1S1ClU['Tllfl J-'IUT--Lml PU"UIE-...&.
111 II STllf CIT If( SISIIII! mlls \ 'UIII IIClm --..
HISII Sf'llIlIlI PflISCIPf lEW III
CIITIIlS
,
,
I
1flf.HI. CI..... 1flf.HI' C".III THf'HI. CI.. 1I1
, rllllllllTEi'> '111IS.lIl[n rmEIIl"\ ,-IIIIS'l1Ifj\ rmulfI"\
I ,< 1flf'HI' c"lm
J
r< Im.HI' r< c ... m )-, ,'"" 1flf.HI' t-< c ... m '>-1
" I \'IIIISIlITEI" '-mul! \ I \'11111.1111"' '-mlllJ \ I \'III1S.l1Ifl.l '-lfCflm..J ,
'---, ---""\ j----, ,-" ..... , I \ I \
, I \,' \ ifIlVIIOUlUUl'" I \ CAPUtE ESCAPE I tArSIL( uaml \ mil IIClET \ 11.1 IIIC I ,
L -(u C PO'li HI [ POWEA r -< CO-TROt ;-t -A -- I'" - -IIU \ - - -Slr&UBU SEISII- -- t - -- liXlI.I AlTHIlE SflSlI- - - -1111 II.' UPAIIIIII $(1111- --I-nlu ImIS .. IIClff- - - - - - - - - --(D
\ \ _____ -I' \ ......... __ ..J' \ .... S'SHflI _/ \L--liWlJ.I!..../ SEPlUTlU H \ I \ I \ I
\ --- PIlIT- \._PIlII _____ SIIICIJ \-PIlIT---- __ SIITCI-' ,-PllIT-------IIIICI-
1
\
1I0lTAllAUICM
\
\
\
\
\ ,--'1111'-""",\
HlrIUIY_ nl... THElnll CI.... '",-,
,'1I11SI1111 \ I IICflllI \ IrllllSllrni-\ ,rlCflYll, ,1I11S.nrfi\ ,mum,
r,- THIIIITIl /-\ CIIIIII f"1., THfIHl' /-\ CI"1I1 /-\ I""' TElf'flIT ,\--{.. CIIIIII In
I 11lIS II 1111- -l[Cflll- I I '-11111111111-' -l[tIIlfI - \ I \ I IIIS.11 lit' '-IfCUII- \
\ ,,---""\, ,,----\ I IWMICTIn \ enSilE
.... --(DC '01(1)..... - - -- -<.- -U",.IIC -.,. III' -
\,- __ . ../ 'L,. ___ / \ ,mCTl1i ,'SEPUlTlIl
\... -m,r--'
1St1'1' ClPSilf 11IP11 \ ITTII mm \ Illfl 1111 , \
IICm-- -t- -- -mlllll!! SfISII----}--mlllllll -+- --.I1I1I1III1T11f SlPUITIII S11S11--71"1I ilIIISIIIOCIII- ------42")
\ / \ I, ..
\"l.I-- -----iIIH.... \.-mlf-------SlHCI-' '-'UII SII1U
.. IUISIl1 ....
r< )--,
rOWE. 101(1 I \ UUSTn.l
- - SEpn", .. _. H'lUIIOI-I- iura'llDh UTo.me r -<, 'IUTU \
/ HIS.. AlIII,_mLnl ,....UtTl......,' ".lllIlml-Pllll. iIITC ..1 ,
(i'H tullllS >_-<, r---'
,---____ '1111 -- -< lUlL _/ \
. IUCIIII-
e'IIIIIS
rIlTlPILIT-, U"I.llIC /
, lCTlIt )IUCTlII. /
'--{"'UIH'SHU C:,TLllS \---'
\... -1(1t1l'"
ClllIllS
(1)------------------------------------/
* UlAS .Ill
4.14-6
/
/
rt'tlSUl-,
r..( ).... ----,
I '-1&1I51&T.... ).
r-< ,
\ ... AlTllnU mll -SIITt.,J

unll' r -I(PL"IUT-----'"""'\
IISIII[ CUl[ 'r---------------------------
PIlIT_ - - '"ICI--lfPllI.flT"'
U{cDIDlI
{
Ill'}
I[IIIIUT nmll
1111
01flllillCifS 111111 STSIf.
I .. IU IIUIII
- - - - - - IIIIT
Figure 4.14-2
I.a au La E Ii II.
m
u
J
0
.
.
,
Z
i
M
,
i
u
J
z m 0 z
i
.
u
!
t
m
,

Ilf"

,1

, '
-------... -.. -.......
.

J .... _
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
.
, ,
51111
1'IIS,.I'EI
RELIABILITY DIAGRAM
mDI
REVISED 5 OCTODER
IIIMWm -J)----------------------,
I'lnuu
mUla'.
II!
11111111111 1II1111111111S111111 --('H'" lICum
'IliT nlis.mEl
-({
HUla,. In. THfinU -{tt AlIUnltE.
IF IIllmlll') CIII", mum
lIIIP'lIt --=:::yUllllm
IUC:?'"
"Ill" IClII(I-.IT11T1I( UI'"lS
_
___ I_"_IC_IT_"-J} mil SlIC' """1
,ulsn" IUCIII.
'If IlImlllll ""'" lICum
"flu,seU"t J
eNn,lS
IiJI,IiW:.Ii:.l" 10li0..... 11:'::::11 S "I' THElnll UI.AlI ( t 1&11
111I1I1I.. .. lImlT 1Illlillt
\.cIHIlI nIlS \'lIItl1l1 1111111111111111"'1 1I111U'!1I1111l11
'1.l1un 11111111111 mum mtllIC/tII:>IILS _IICIET -liun r lEt ''',"mu c, .....
e
Tin
filii' SE,II.H.. 'nll If IECEI1(1
-
CLltIIlIIl
Y
_______________ -I ..... 1
IEltTlll PIlIT
'llIl 'lulStUn t111I1lS 111::111111
IfTlAISCUU

UIIS lum.r
HITtlE HECTllt tlll.llS
'lI,e5-
111
'e
ml
'ILIT I'IUL
'Ulst., lum.'
CI.fIIH

SUlI

'TllISllTfll It"'
\!HElnlY UI .. II,
TIlISIITH utmn
UltPIl" ,cmUtlml SIITU
- SIITt
IIIIUTII
mISPllIII\ ________ ---,
C"I, _ \ 1
' .. IS,.I.E!!
1IIlIICl Ilemu
1I11111'LlIlllnll
r III 11111111111 CIII'"
PIlIT If IHUIlI

PIl'
IIltPIU':)"ltIITiC
IUCIII'
HUIllt CIITlflS
(
liU
"lIT IlIlll
IUClI,.
U'flILS

Allllml--PILIT-SIITU
IIltPlltl-:::::J"I m
IUtTl ..
11",(
CUH'
... nl

IAIiSTU .IIII'C
II
tllH;)---\r
fllIllS
(J(CllIl usun
PIlITSI"U tllTE
Illllnn-PIlII-SIl1n IE'LlJ'UT
IIF
1I111t11t11
mCTtlC '''TlfLS
[
SHU
Illl Itll
IUCTltl----'
'"TlilS
Figure 4.14-5
4.14-7
COt'E'PfD'ZIAl
0
'
,
O
_
,
0
,
-
-
N
0
,
,
n
I
,
L
l
I
,
I
,
I
0
a
.
l
.
u
Z
,
.
n
m
I
,
I
,
I
I
.
I
,
I
z m 0 z I
,
I
,
I
0 L
f
_
4
J
-
t
_
C
U
.
,
,
0
0
0
4
J
.
t
_
_
r
-
-
I
O
_
_
_
:
_
.
_
_
0
_
:
_ .
_
I
I
)
"
_
H
,
'
-
t
,
M
_
'
1
_
_
o
_
_
o
0
0
4
0
_
O
_
0 0
'
_
_
.
_
_
-
I
_
_
o
.
.
C
o
_
t
.
_
.
1
=
1
4
,
a
o
_
.
_
.
_
_
o
o
_
_
,
_
I
I
L
l
-
_
.
_
0
.
_
0
_
o
_
_
.
r
.
o
o
0
l
x
:
l
o
o
i
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
,
_
o
o
.
_
'
_
"
_
[
_
.
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
,
-
I
I
_
,
.
0
0
I
_
.
_
g
_
_
]
_
_
o
_
0
o
o
_
.
_
_
.
_
,
-
-
4
I
r
-
4
I (
t
..---
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
MANNED RECONNAISSANCE
5.0 INTRODUCTION: Considerable emphasis is currently being upon the utili-
zation of man made satellites for photographic reconnaissance in such fields
as me-teo"t'ology, astronomy, and geodetics, as well as military observations.
Many of the development problems have been extensively in theory,
but. only slight.ly in actual experimentation. Some of these are the effects of
the atmosphere on distortion, apparent contrast reduction, image diffusion,
infra-red and filter effectiveness. It is important to establish
fundamental parameters if rapid and efficient exploitation of photographic
techniques is to be realized. The Mercury can serve as a useful test
vehicle for the solution of many of 'these problems at a relatively early date
and moderate cost. Particular advantages accrue through the capability of
the Astronaut to select targets, avoid cloud cover, perform camera adjust-
ments, change film, and in general to monitor the program and insure that the
maximum amount of useful data is obtained. The objective of this section is
to describe how the Mercury capsule can be utilized as a photo-reconnaissance
test vehicle.
5.1 BASIC CONCEPI'
No complex equipment is necessary to adapt the
Mercury capsule to the investigation of the
basic concept of manned reconnaissance from
space. By utilizing components of available
cameras, modified to tie into part of the exis-
ting periscope it is possible for the
Mercury Astronaut to photograph targets of
opportunity over various terrains. Such photo-
graphs can be interpreted, evaluated, and com-
pared against available geodedic, cartographic,
or meteorological data.
The Mercury vehicle (capsule and booster) can
be used as presently programmed with the
exceptions of adding the modified camera to the
periscope, and making minor modification to the
attitude control system. The launch, abort,
orbit, retrograde, and landing phases will be
the same as the present Mercury system.
Such capabilities as touchdown control and man-
euvering in orbit, as discussed in Sections 1
and 2 of this report, would enhance the '.ltility
of the Mercury as a photo-reconnaissance vehicle.
However, these are refinements which are not
essential to the basic concept of using the
capsule as a reconnaissance test vehicle
iDLi'iiAL
5.1-1
_
q
I
"
(
I
)
0
_
(
1
)
_
.
_
_
_
.
o
_
_
_
.
_
'
"
"
o
_
_
o
_
_
_
_
_
'
"
_
_
+
o
_
.
c
+
_
_
.
t
I
-
J
-
t
i
p
0
!
0
c
l
-
a
n
_
_.
_
.
o
_
.
_
_
o
o
_
.
o
_
_
.
I
-
_
I
-
_
o
_
0
_ c
+
_
+
o
_
y
0
t
_
.
_
.
_
-
_
em IF'. II d I IAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
-
MANNED RECONNAISSANCE I
5.2-1
Figures 5.2-1 and 5 ~ 2 - 2 indicate the method of
installing a suitable camera in the Mercury
capsule as an integral part of the periscope,
thus eliminating any additional break in the
satellite outer shell.
This combination of periscope and camera is es-
pecially well adapted to the present Mercury
since space required is available without a
rearrangement of basic eqUipment. The roll film
container and spring drive mechanism have ex-
cellent accessibility, and may be removed as d
unit to reload in night.
The camera is fixed to the capsule to simplify
the installation. Therefore aiming at specific
targets is accomplished by re-orienting the
vehicle by means of the reaction control. This
requires slight modification of the Automatic sta-
bilizat:lon and Control System from that of the
present Mercury in two respects: (A) provision
for insertion of roll and pitch attitude com-
mands; and (B) revision of switching boundaries
to provide a low-deadband mode. The latter
l
revision could consist of a switch by which the
inner boundary of the present orbit mode is
changed from + 3 degrees to some lower value
such as + .5 degrees just prior to taking pic-
tures. This would then provide attitude hold to
within .5 degree deviation with angular rates
of less than .1 degree per second, which is ex-
pected to be adequate for photographic mapping
and charting. If necessary, rates less than
this can be obtained either with different jets
of reduced impulse, or with a decreased moment
arm for the present .2 pound-second impulse jets.
Between picture taking runs, the orbit mode inner
boundary would revert to the present + 3 degrees
to conserve reaction control fuel.
The weight added by the foregOing modifications
is compensated by removing biomedical instru-
mentation and recording eqUipment which is car-
ried for the basic Mercury mission. A complete
weight and balance comparison of the modified
capsule with the basic Mercury capsule is shown
in Tables 5.2-1 and 5.2-2 and Figure 5.2-3.
iSl F'BI ___ DCi' i IML .,.
I
l -
O
,
O
,
O
,
O
_
_
0
,
.
-
I
x
U
J
0
m
L
U
L
U
o
_
I
-
-
0
a
.
u
J
Z
u
_
l
U
L
l
l
U
L
l
Z
0 z M
J
I
I
-
-
Z L
U
L
U
0
_
_
,
q
-
0
"
r
-
-
U Z
-
-
Z
-
-
< U
i
-
-
I I
I
:
:
)
i l
I
I
{
I
(
I
(
, l
r
,
,
C9Nf'Rftmd
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

AUTO CONTROL FUEl
PRESSURIZATION HELIUM
/
H2 02 AUTO CONTROL
/

I' ,
\ 1
I I II . +-:,ij'l-----c-I-. I;
.'f-Llr--- I

PERISCOPE CAMERA. /
18 IN. FOCAL LENGTH L A
5 IN. FILM
MANUAL CONTROLS
FIGURE 5.2-1
'-AI)IFIDENTIAL.
"
I
:1 :
-- .'
o 20 40
L II Ii,! "I I I
SCALE IN INCHES
5.2-2
o
I
i
,
,
4
0
I
o
I
i
I
m m Z ,
-
-
I
U
l
r
l
"
r
1
7
1
}
>
-
-
I
m r
_
m Z
i Z m m B
w
Z
m m
r
f
l
0
r
n
,
0
,
0
,
0
,
0
_
1
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
. 'QNf'9f
NTIA
'
PERISCOPE CAMERA ARRANGEMENT & SCHEMATIC
REFLEX
MIRROR ~
5.2-3
+- +-
3 TIMES SCALE
FOCAL PLANE
MODIFIED
KA30 AERIAL
CAMERA
!.ISCOPE CAMERA
\:IlTER
o 20 40 A - A
II II I II II I I I I
SCALE IN INCHES
FIGURE 5.2-2
Sot 'PRO 171 rr
I
l
w
0
w
I
,
U
m
l
J
0
a
.
l
.
i
.
i
Z i l
.
m
l
Z I 0 z L
L
I
[
Q

;
"
0
_
o
_
o
I
L
t
_
C
O
I
structure
{
Adapter
Escape System
Heat Shield
Automatic Control System
Reaction Controls
Posigrade
Retrograde
Landing System
Instruments and Nav. Eq.
Electrical Group
Communications
Telemetry, Recording and
Photography
I I
Recovery Gear
Crew and Survival
Gross Launch Weight
i
I
;1 (
il
~
~ !
eSllFlSP IJtL
TABLE 5.2-1
Mercury Manned
(Ref. 20) Reconnaissance
485 485
142 142
932 932
347 347
63 63
132 142
21 21
231 231
155 155
91 105
274 274
109 109
134 134
92 56
57 57
229 229
3494 3482
EONfiBbN'IA,
ENGINEERING REP-ORT 6919
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Remarks
Increased Capacity for Capsule Orientation
Modified Periscope to Accommodate Camera
Removed Data Instrumentation, Mercury
Cameras and Telemetry. Added Modified
KA 30 Camera with 18" Lens Cone.
5.2-4
I
I
T
I
Z 0 m Z I
T
!
r
l
'
l
i Z
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
o
=
0
m
'
,
0
'
,
0
'
,
0
'
,
0
1
A
o
.
,
0
,
o
,
-
"
L
,
,
-
-
_
.
o
o
"
.
o
_
o
o
'
'
,
.
_
B
_
_
=
=
.
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Gross Weight - Launch Vehicle
Less:
EScape Tower
Less:
Adapter
Posigrade Fuel
Orbit Weight
Less:
Water - Cooling
Hydrogen Peroxide
Retrograde Weight
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
Retrograde Installation
Re-Entry weight
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
Water - Cooling
Ablated Material
End of Re-Entry
Less:
Nose Cone
Equipment
Drogue Chute
Less:
Main Chute
Impact Weight
LesS!
Reserve Chute
Pilot Chute
Hydrogen Peroxide
Dye Markers
SOFAR Bombs
Flotation Weight
,
TABLE 5.2-2
Mercury
(Ref. 20)
(3494)
-932
(2562)
-142
-7
(2413)
-27
-7
(2379)
-10
-245
(2124)
-5
-3
-146 (1)
(1970)
-39
-12
-8
(1911)
-60
(1851)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1744)
5.2-5
..., SOtlflPfNr 0 ..
Manned
Reconnaissance
(3482)
-932
(2550)
-142
-7
(2401)
-27
-15
(2359)
-10
-245
(2099)
-5
-3
-50 (2)
(2046)
-39
-12
-8
(1987)
-60
(1927)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1820)
-----
l
8
O
,
O
,
0
w
0
a
.
z m z m 0 z
a
.
0 Z I
i
m o L
L
o I
i
Z U
-
-
I
-
N
_
_
L
_
0
_
Z
_
U
z
U
z
_
O
O
w
_
_
/
/
u
J
o
,
,
0
o o
_ N
!
_
d
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
"
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
,
,
0
o
l
_
'
_
"
o
,
,
o
,
_
-
t
,
,
'
)
e
_
(
N
,
,
i
_
,
-
"
S
O
N
n
O
d
-
I
H
O
I
_
I
M
!
0
, {
[
CON F10EN hAt,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959

MERCURY
.. J,

MANNED
RECONNAISSANCE
o ..
C;- 28001
....
::I:
<.!)
1. GROSS WEIGHT-LAUNCH
2. GROSS WEIGHT -IN ORBIT
w I 41 2400 3. ORBIT WEIGHT
3
5. RE-ENTRY WEIGHT
5
I 6. END OF RE-ENTRY
2000 1_ 7. MAIN CHUTE DESIGN WEIGHT
9
8. IMPACT WEIGHT
9. FLOTATION WEIGHT

.0 .10 .20
FIGURE 5.2-3
.30 .40 .50
I/O
______ .. Ir" ......... '- _
.60 .70 .80 .90 1.00
5.2-6
_
u
'
_
.
!
l
o
_
I
.
.
.
J
0
o
_
_
o
.
_
!
o
_
I
-
_
I
.
-
J
.
I
-
_
I
"
_
-
c
'
f
"
_
o
_
_
.
_
_
_
o
_
"
,
_
I
-
,
-
0
,
_
o
_
m
o
f
"
d
-
o
_
g
'
_
d
-
_
.
o
_
_
0
!
I
"
t
I
-
-
'
'
0
1
O
0
Q
m Z 0 m Z
m m
u
_
Z
m
0
"
0
m
0
m
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
- CUI'UIUI:N11JIa

...

(1)>'--
. 0../'\',
,
[MANNED RECONNAISSANCE I
5.3 LAUNCR, ABORT AND RE-ENTRY CONSIDERATIONS
5.3-1
As shown in Table 5.2-2 the weights throughout
the various phases the mission for the re-
connaissance vehicle are not
different those the basic Mercury cap-
sule. Consequently no changes are required in
the basic Mercury launch, abort, re-entry, or
recovery equipment or techniques. Table 5.3-1
presents a summary of the Atlas ltD" booster
perlormance characteristics, together with a
stage weight breakdown for the subject mission.
CONFiDE" I IAto
-------------
I
l
I
I
{
(
; (
II
:t1:\;KLI ..
i MANNED RECONNAISSANCE I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 5.3-1
ATLAS "D" BOOSTER SUMMARY
Empty Atlas 1tl}t' (Booster Stage)
Usable Propellants
ToW Booster Stage Weight
Empty Atlas ltD" (Sustainer stage)
Usable Propellants
Payload
Capsule
Tower
Adapter
PROPULSION SYSTEM
Atlas uD" (LOX/RP-l)
(Booste r + Sustainer)
Atlas uDu (LOX/RP-1)
(Sustainer)
6,547
390
202,730
6,754
391
43,500
2,408
932
142
209, 667 Ibs.
50,645 Lbs.
3,482 Lbs.
263,794 Lbs.
THRUST BURNING TIME SPECIFIC IMPULSE
368, 000 Lbs. at S. L. 134 Sec. 244. 0 Sec.
84,724 Lbs. at Alt. 294 Sec. 309.7 Sec.
~
-------l
5.3-2
,
-
-
u
_
'
O
,
-
-
I
-
-
i
v
,
,
w
u
u
0
m
L
M
i
l
l
Z
_
I
X
'
-
-
M
J
Z Z
,
-
-
t
r
)
.m A
_
.
_
_
o
0
0
0
_
_
o
_
.
_
_
,
,
_
_
,
,
0
-
H
.
.
q
l,
c
_
_
_
o
_
g
,
0
0
o
H
-
i_
H
C
_
,
O
h O
_
g
.
I
.
-_
.
H
4
-
_
O
m
O
O
t
V
t
D
,
,
9
.
H
o
_
+
)
4
-
:
'
m
_
U
"
X
H
_
-
_
_
.
_
-
H
_
0
!
u
-
x
, I
1-\1
1
CONflpENTIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
5 < h. PHOT<XiRAPHlC TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
A study (Ref, 6) conducted by Chicago Aerial
Industries at t.he request of MAC indicates that
a s ui yet s camera for this experi-
mental misslon can be improvised using the
basic lens cone body casting components of
the KA-30 camera, This requires modification
of the camera to include fixed-rate image-motion
compensation
j
manual lens"aperture control and
mechanical film indexing. A manually-tripped
reflex mirror coupled to a between-the-lens
shutter will be added the existing
pl."'ri5cope) thus utilizing its narrow angle
imaging system as a part of the camera's equiv-
18 inch focal-length optics, as indicated
on Figure 5.2-2.
Eastman Kodak S.O, 124:3 film, currently avail-
able) can be ex-pected to yield approximately 63
lines/mm test resolution with this camera con-
figuration. Translating resolution to "recog-
nizable object" size indicates that a 77 foot
object will be recognizable from an orbital
altitude of 110 nautical miles. Coverage at
this altitude would be a 27.7 mile square field
of view.
Since this installation can be available con-
currently with the Mercury capsule, and requires
no external synchronization, command triggering,
data transmission, or other complex automatic
control systems, early experiments in photo-
reconnaissance from near space may be made with
high assurance of success. This program will
permit the first orbital photography where a
man is available to view the photographic con-
\IIUI'tFIDL'" IAL
ditions. This is especially valuable since the
experiments can be accomplished with a minimum
of special equipment. Sufficient data can be
obtained so that photography of the Earth beyond
its atmosphere can be evaluated.
The information resulting from these studies
should offer a sound basis for the estimation of
the effects of the at,mosphere and. surface
brightness on phqtography from very high alti-
tudes. This can result in the determination of
useful angles of photography, information con-
tent) and of film and equipment that should
be useful for orbital photography.
Figure 5. 4-1 represents the antic ipate d res ul. ts
of this program. The 5 inch circle shown on
Figure 5.4-1 represents the Astronaut's field of
view through the narrow-angle periscope presently
provided in the Mercury capsule. The square
photograph is typical of the coverage recorded
on 4 1/2 inch x 4 1/2 inch film. This sample
format shows a medium contrast photograph (image
enhanced during ground processing), yielding
excellent resolution of runways, and taxiways,
city blocks, roads, bridges, and prominent land-
marks. This photograph is part of a mosaic
aerial photograph of the San Francisco area pre-
pared by the Aeronautical Chart and Information
Center, St. Louis, specifically for this report.
Contrast has been reduced materially and reso-
lution intentionally degraded from the original
to give a realistic representation of what might
be obtained from Mercury orbit altitudes.
5.4-1
O
_
0
_
'
I
-
-
t
v w
0
"
_
L h
U
h
i
2
0
a
.
h
i
.
I
Z i N
'
-
-
W 1
2
2
7 m 0 z
k
l
8 I
.
I
.
'
7
a t
_
o U
U o F
,
,
,
,
,
,
o "
1
-
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
!
.
-
.
-
t
"
t
_
I
,
M
I
,
,
,
1
_
0
u
0
_
-
-
,
r
_
i
,
,
,
,
,
_
_
u
_
v
I
i
h
l
,
,
,
,
,
,
a
I
"
"
_
Z
U
u
,
i
B
I
t
_
11
,
I II
I ,I
i ill
II
:1
ill
I!: :1
i I

:I
Ii I

. .... .
. '. . -; .. ',
'. .;
1
. . <, .....
, \i; ..... -1Il!' ' ,"
,,"t,' ..

.. .
'{l" '
.,'
CONFIDEiC I "
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA
FROM
MERCURY CAPSULE
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TYPICAL VIEW THROUGH THE
PRESENT MERCURY PERISCOPE
TYPICAL PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD
Figure 5.4-1
.- fOblCFIbHlIlA
5.4-2
p
l
0
L 0 z
m u
u
Z
1
0
z u
J
u
J
m _
J
p
.
.
L
u
J
!
C
x
O
0
ii'
I .
! I
II
A.
l
{
1
I !
'ONF'RfNf'C
I LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
LUNAR ORBIT RE-ERTRY
6.0 INTRODUCTION: A maJor objective after initial manned space experiments
in near Earth orbits will be flight to the Moon. Imlar miSsions will
require acceleration into highly eccentric orbits with periods of several
days and perigee velocities of about 36,000 feet per second, as compared to
25,000 feet per second for near Earth orbits. A number of problems must
be solved before these manned lunar missions are feasible, not the least of
which is re-entry and recovery of the vehicle from such high vel.ocity orbits.
Examination of the problem indicates that for the earli.er families of
manned space vehicles at least, there is little chance of absorbing the
vehicle t s energy except by direct re-entry into the atmosphere. The often
discussed technique of decelerating by successive passes through the edge of
the atmosphere leads to excessive periods of time in the "Van Allen Belts"
of high intensity radiation which surround the Earth. Any thrust deceleration
provisions likely to be ava.1.lable during earlier space exploration years will
consume an inordinate amount of fuel. Consequently, it is felt that the
Mercury capsule with the ballistic or lif1; re-entry technique is represen-
tative of re-entry vehicles which will be used for extended space missions
88 well as near Earth orbits. Therefore, the Mercury capsule offers an
ideal test Vehicle for evaluation of the heating problems encountered in
high energy re-entries.
It is the objective of this study to show how an unmanned Mercury capsule
may be utilized for this purpose.
'LSI JJ :zENfIAL
6.0-1
O
_
!
(
'
2
i
.
_
_
+
F
'
J
0
H
H
(
_
H
_
0
m
0
_
,
.
_
o
m
o
_
D
_
;
:
a
-
o
_
q
o
0
_
c
_
_
E
l
O
O
_
c
t
.
0
M
_
_
'
_
'
g
;
.
g
_
.
_
_
'
o
_
_
0
_
'
_
.
:
_
_
,
-m
_
o
_
&
.
_
m
o
O
_
_
e
F
*
_
c
+
_
4
'
-
4
_
-
_
+
_
o
_
_
'
_
o
_
_
.
s
_
_
c
]
=
S
O
o
0
_
_
,
_
,
_
'
,
!
M
t
_
m Z
Q
X m
m
m
_
Z
m
_
m
m
m
0
m
"
-
"
O
_
,
0
'
0
.
n
-
"
0
,
,
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
A I
LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRll
6.1 BASIC CONCEPT
6.1-1
This section presents the results of a study of
a method for simulating re-entry into the
Earth's atmosphere from a lunar-type, high
energy orbit by boosting art l1nmanned Mercury
capsule to lunar characteristic velocity prior
to re-entry from a near Earth orbit.
The Centaur Booster will accelerate the capsule
plus a third stage into an eccentric earth orbit,
with an apogee of approximately 1.200 mile&, such
that it will re-enter at an angle to
that which is required for a from a
lunar orbit. The third stage is fired and then
separated iJIlDediately prior to re-entry after
boosting the capsule to approximately 36,000
feet per second.
This technique duplicates in all respects the
lunar re-entry without the need for the sophis-
ticated guidance and control eqUipment necessary
for an actual lunar mission. The use or an un-
manned capsule simplifies the vehicle configur-
ation over that of the basic since it
eliminates the need for escape and abort equip-
ment as well as much of the environmental equip-
ment and, of course, the pilot comfort gear.
Weight allowance is thereby provided for ade-
quately instrumenting the vehicle.

I
l
,
4
)
_
-
i
.
.
-
a
.
M
,
I
u
J
0
a
.
M
.
I
Z
m I
,
&
l
z m 0 z 1
,
1
.
1
o O
J
m
.
,
-
I
_
o
o
I
O
J
,
g
I r
I
I

I, I
I
I
I !
i I
I !
[I
2
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Since for the lunar orbit re-entry the capsule
is unmanned and the escape tower is not required,
it is permissible to attach the capsule upside
down from its normal installation on the Atlas
booster, and launch it with heat shield up as
shown in Figure 6.2-1. This arrangement is de-
sirable because it eliminates the need to turn
the capsule 180
0
just prior to after
the vehicle is accelerated to lunar
velocity by the final stage booster.
The Mercury escape tower attachment proYi=
sions are used to connect the JPL final stage
and the capsule. The adapter structure is a
standard aluminum stringer and corrugated
skin arrangemen t. Aluminum structure can be
used because adapter is not exposed to
aerodynamic heating during launch.
The adapter structure covering the capsule
antenna consists of four aluminum stringers
and a fiberglass skin. This "radome" allows
communication transmission after jettison of
the fairing.
The capsule and third stage are protected on
launch by a jettisonable titanium fairing illus-
trated in Figurm6.2-2 and 6.2-3. The fairing
clears the capsule sufficiently so that no
air loads are transmitted to the capsule.
This two-piece clam-shell type fairing attaches
to the adapter in a socket-fitting ring as shown
in View D, Figure 6.2-3. Local restraint lugs
prohibit forward movement; however, angular
movement of approximately 20
0
releases the
fairing. A jettisonable tension strap at the
aft end of the fairing and around the socket
fitting ring provides a structural load path.
An additional jettisonable tension strap located
midway between the nose cone and trailing edge
holds the half-shells together. Shear pins at
the half-shell edges provide shear carrying
ability. Between shear pins, bleed gaps relieve
internal pressure during ascent. This aero-
dynamic fairing is jettisoned 155 seconds after
launch. Jettisoning is accomplished by sep-
arating the two tension straps and igniting the
jettison rockets. The rocket lateral thrust
component rotates the fairing until it disen-
gages. The fairings are then carried clear of
the vehicle.
After firing the third-stage booster and attain-
ing lunar re-entry velocity, but prior to re-
entry (approximately 400,000 feet), the capsule
and adapter are separated by an explosive bolt
in the capsule attach ring. The adapter is
slowed and driven to the side by a retrograde
rocket. This precludes post-separation
colliSion.
-=: IIt's,?U'VJ]
6.2-l
O
_
I
r
O
em 'ibM' IIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
The capsule interior is stripped of all eq,uip-
ment and systems pertinent only to the Astronaut
such as instruments, navigation equipment, mauual
stabilization system, voice communications, suit
environmental system, and survival eq,uipment. The
basic Mercury automatic stabilization and control
system (ASCS) and recovery systetn.b are retained and
addi tional test instruIIlentation and eq,uipment is
provided for recording and telemetering heat-
ing rates, temperatures, pressures, loading, vi-
brations, accelerations, radiation, and so forth.
6.2-2

,J
,.-

"
\
LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
Proper balance of the capsule is accomplished
by re-arranging the remaining equipment as
shown in Figures 6.2-4 and 6.2-5. The weight
and center of gravity envelope comparison of
the basic Mercury capsule versus the lunar
orbit re-entry configuration are given in
Tables 6.2-1 and 6.2-2 and Figure 6.2-6. The
weight breakdown, Table 6.2-1, indicates the
in eq,uipment required for this
mission.
l -
O
,
@
,
,
0
I
-
-
0 i
,
v
o z m N z m 0 Z
O
,
N
l
-
,
-
a
.
L
U
Z Z w c
_
f
J
L
_
W I
-
-
I
Z
.
.
J
W
L
I
J
_
I
m
l
-
-
-
.
-
-
1
I
'-
-
-
-
-
J
w
_
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
c
_
C
_
I
,
,
.
4
r
,
,
I
e
v
.
I
.
.
-
f
_
o
i
.
k
4
I
.
-
-
(
#
)
c
=
I
-
-
Q
-
/
/
_
,
_
1
.
_
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
]
_
,
Z
I
Z
_
J
-
-
Z
_
'Z
_
1
"
z
_
,
v
_
_
[
I I
I
I
11111( FAIRING JETTISON ROCKETS
(
I
[
, I
! I
I
J E TT I SO NA B L E F A I R I N G
(B-120 VCA TITANIUM)
ANTENNA
ADAPTER STRUCTURE
(2020- T6 ALUMINUM)
FIGURE 6.2-1

\
'PN
f
'95tJr r'
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
VEHICLE AND BOOSTER
o 200 400 600
SCALE IN INCHES

, , i \

..
, I ,
Ij
...r:'--" I)
.) (
\ \
I \ r'o.. \
/"
. .-;-/
Yyr.
. ./
/
/ I \
...
. 4 TIMES SCALE
UNMANNED CAPSULE
FIBERGLAS SKIN
-THIRD STAGE ADAPTER
RETROGRADE ROCKET
'. "'-.... 1 LP.l. THIRD STAGE BOOSTER
/
i..--HORIZON SCANNER I PITCH 1
HORIZON SCANNER I ROLL I
\
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
"--CENTAUR SECOND
STAGE BOOSTER
ATlAS
"A
6.2-3
C
_
\
i
i!
-
,
[
i
/
j
/
/
/
/
/
I
T
I
\
\
-
-
,
4
Z
jPt'f'PP I It
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
JETTISONABLE FAIRING AND SEPARATION
CONCEPT
FAIRING JETTISON ROCKETS
\
\
, \
\ \
\ \
->y
\\,,'

"
UNMANNED CAPSULE7
JETTISONABLE
\ .","
';i , , I
,1,,1
1
,: I i
/I'r/ :; .-_'L-
:,11_ E E " "
!Tr . - . . ,= \
{II i
I 11]-'< - ---- LO NG E RO N HAT SECTI ON
. hO)
l
ilt .+. 'IFRAME RING
---- l'
, , ' \
I : ' I
, ,,\< \\,
" , " \,
" ,',\(0
\ '-'"
, ' '
ADAPTER STRUCTURE--,

: d
l
, = _ " _ _ - _ c " ,.' \
1
11
1' 'I I
'I"
FAIRING RETAINED BY FITTING
THRU 20 ROTATION"
1,1 I
idi ,', . -
1III I I
.
D -

6.2-4

-JETTISONABLE TENSION STRAP
..... a, "".,..
,
I /
/
;
I
1 I
; /
..... " '
" ,-/.

/"'1/
1
/
,'(;/,1
/. ;,; ;
/1/11 /1
//1/ ,'/
////>//
/ / / /
! 1/ I
;
JETTISONABLE
FAIRING
FIGURE 6.2-2
I
l
C
_
_
C
0 L
U
J
0 z m
I
d
,
I
z m 0 z
C
_
u
_
C
_
_
n
Q Z
_ m
m u
_
I
.
Z
,
I
Z
_ I
-
-
0
u
m I
-
-
e
_
,
c
_
Z
Q
_
L
_
Z 0
r
_
L
I
.
I
.
_
Z 0
I
I
II
" I
I

l
i I
I'
/'---
l

I
/ i I(
Ii \ .,
NOSE 1117-,-0:';, I
I( I I ........ I
/ I , '"'}.,
I I
!
/ / 'I
/
I "
/' I II
/
;,' j : I
FRAME - (( I:: r
/' r ---'- I ,.,-
LONGERON
A
.... 1&
JETTISONABLE FAIRING
STRUCTURAL DETAILS
FIXED FILLER-"
SHEAR PIN AND SPACER
JETTISONABLE TENSION STRAP
CORRUGATED SKIN
I
\ n

0 I
1t.ni\1
F
L_
F
_J
B
SHEAR PIN AND SPACER [4 IN. SPACING] I
I
PRESSURE BLEED GAP
UNMANNED CAPSULE
ADAPTER STRUCTURE J
(2020-T6 ALUMINUM)
FIGURE 6.2-3
F-F
CAPSULE ATTACH RING
c
r'
{
\
FRAME
E-E
RELEASE POSITION /\
JETTISONABLE TENSION STRAP
D

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
FRAME RING
CONTINUOUS LONGERON
JETTISON ABLE FAIRING
IB-12o YCA TITANIUM)
ADAPTER STRUCTURE
12020-T6 ALUMINUMI
LOCAL RESTRAINT LUG
6.2-5
1
0
_
L
_
I
0
_
0
_
I
C
_
4
_
I
[
i
m
m
m
z ,
-
-
I
m _
o
_
0
}
>
_
o
}
>
Z Q m 3
=
m Z
m Z O m Z m m m
v
,
Z
m -
u
Q
-
I
_
0
m
m
0
n
n
(
.
,
n
,
o
_
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
OOt!fl?n IYlAt!
6.2-6
___ L,
I
I
I
I
I
I
-_=---L
RECORDING & TELEMETERING EQUIPMENT
-4
-------1
'- EQUIPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM
'OtiS? It IIAt
o 20
SCALE IN INCHES
luNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
40
FIGURE 6.2-4
I
I
l
O
,
O
,
O
,
O
,
I
-
n
,
,
0
'
_
a
.
_
E
L
U
U
J
I
d
J
Z n u
J
L
U
z m z u
J
z I
.
L
I
=
E
1
d
.
I
0 z
t
v
< ,
,
v
0 m r
v
L
U
I
-
,
,
Z m
I
1
I
Z
l
-
-
"
1
-
Z Z t
.
/
!
!
I
I
(
I
l
II
o 20 40
I1111I11111 I I
SCALE IN INCHES
FIGURE 6.2-5
cONFibi IS' 0 ,
RECORDING & TELEMETERING EQUIPMENT

... " " " i I
,
I I L j _ \
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
,I
I ' 'ill' \
I Q ,
---,-r--C_c I --t 11------
.-:--=:::t'"f -I-

",_.J ..
____
t'\ __
1 I __ ....J!

'--'- -----,
EQUIPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM
COId!:Z " '4
l
6.2-7
Q
I
O
o
m
_
_
5
_
o
0
C
o
e
_
!
I
,
-
.
,
1
0
g
_
_
g
n
.
N
m
_
N
f
f
l
I
_
_
g
m Z m Z m m
j
_ m
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
I
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
-CONii nm.,
TABLE 6.2-1
Mercury Lunar Orbit
(Ref. 20)
Re-EntE!......- Remarks
Structure 485 472 Removed Seat; Added Insulation
Adapter & Clamp Ring 142 177 Revised Launch Position
Fairing 843 Added
Escape System 932 Removed
Heat Shield 347 427 Added
Automatic Control System and Guidance 63 68 Reversing
Reaction Controls 132 78 Removed Manual Control System
Posigrade 21 Removed
Retrograde 231 Removed
Landing System 155 155
Instruments and Navigation 91 Removed
Electrical Group 274 129 Decreased Electrical Required
Communications 109 88 Removed Voice Communication and Microphone
Control
Environmental Control 134 35 Removed Personnei Environment Equipment
Telemetry and Recording 92 317 Removed Personnel Data Instrumentation, Added
Thermodynamic and Structural Instrumentation
Final Stage 6000
Recovery Gear 57 57
Crew and Survival 229 Removed
Gross Launch Weight 3494 8846
6.2-8
CO"" nmAL
l
_
.
u
l
,
i
0
'
_
1
,
1
,
1
I
,
l
,
I
_
=
.
L I
,
i
,
I
Z
u
_
m I
J
i
,
I
I
J
i
,
I
z m z I
J
i
,
I
o
!
l
.
I
o
J
'
,
0
c
_
_
_
o
o
_
o
_
v
v
_
v
e
_
o
o
i l
j
I
1
I
(
I I
I
Gross Launch Weight
Less:
Escape Tower
Fairing
LeIlS:
Adapter & Clamp Ring
Injection Weight
Less:
Posigrade Propellant
.v.uer - Coolin ...
Retrograde Weight
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
Retrograde Installation
'.IIEII.pm e.
TABLE 6.2-2
Mercury
(Ref. 20)
(3494)
-932
(2562)
-142
(2420)
-7
-27
(2379)
-10
-245
Final stage (Including Adapter) and Fuel
Re-Entry Weight
Less:
Hydrogen Peroxide
Water - Cooling
Ablated Material
End of Re-Entry Weight
Less:
Nose Cone
Equipment
Drogue Chute
Less:
Main Chute
Impact Weight
Le88:
Reserve Chute
Pilot Chute
Hydrogen Peroxide
Dye Markers
SOFAR Bombs
Flotation Weight
(2124)
-5
-3
-146 (1)
(1970)
-39
-12
-8
(1911)
-60
(1851)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1744)
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Lunar Orbit
He-Entry
(8846)
-843
(8003)
-48
(7955)
(7928) Final Stage
Ignition Weight
-6129
(1799)
-5
-3
-120 (2)
(1671)
-39
-12
-8
(1612)
-60
(1552)
-60
-2
-37
-1
-7
(1482)
6.2-9
~ " " " I
_
o
I
I
-
'
0
I
,
-
I
Q C
_
!
W
E
I
G
H
T
-
P
O
U
N
D
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
\
\
/
m z -
'
-
4
m 0 m m
Z m 0 m
m Z u Z m m i
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
-
-
i
-
"
O
,
,
,
,
O
,
,
O
U
'
l
,
J
,
,
o
,
,
o
t
I
"
T '" WEN II'AL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
on
0
Z
::l
0
a..
,
....
:I:
C)
w
;:
6.2-10
8800
8400

. "" 1

8000
7600
3600
3200
2800
2400
2000
1600
3"",

A .---""

MERCURY .............
\ .............................. 1../""""
1-----+---+---+---1--.. -.... -..... -.... -.... +- .... -.... -.... -..... -.... -.... -+ ... -.... -.... ....... /' V LUNAR RE _ ENTRY
.,.......... ./"'
............. ". V
0"""""""""""'" V
'.
n
1'-.......... V 1. GROSS LAUNCH WEIGHT
...... q ./ 2. GROSS WEIGHT IN ORBIT
./" 3. INJECTION WEIGHT I

... O"" ,... - 4. FINAL STAGE IGNITION WEIGHT
7" d 5 5. RE-ENTRY WEIGHT
8 .... !'-. . 6. END OF RE-ENTRY ,
'6 7. MAIN CHUTE DESIGN WEIGHT I
-. 8. IMPACT WEIGHT I
'-__ .....I.. ___ 1..f'..._9_ --'i
HOT
A T1N _
1200
o .10 .20 .30 .40 .50 .60 .70 .80 .90 1.00 1.90 2.00 2.10
I/O
FIGURE 6.2-6
'""''' .... nuLI , Ii "
I
l
I
O
"
O
"
_
0
,
"
0
_
t
J
4
U
4
a
,
,
0
u
J
Z
u
,
l
u
,
l
Z
0
Z
U
4
J
1
4
4
I
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
CO,,, IS P m At
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.3 MISSION PROFILE
Figure 6.3-1 presents a mission profile
for the simulated lunar re-entry mission. '!he
sequence of operation is the same as Mercury
until the Atlas booster engines are jettisoned,
146 seconds after launch.
The fairing over the capsule and JPL stage is
jettisoned about nine seconds later, at which
time the dynamic pressure has fallen to a
point where the drag penalty without the fairing
is less than the penalty incurred by continuing
to accelerate it. At 107.2 nautical miles al-
titude and a velocity of 14,240 feet per second
the Atlas sustainer engine is shut down and
separated. '!he Centaur stage is
igni ted and it boosts the remaining stages to
25,391 feet per second at 265 nautical miles.
......" IIU_'
'!he Centaur stage is then shut down, the re-
lease mechanism actuated and the Centaur stage
retrograde rocket fired to separate this stage
from the capsule and JPL stage. '!he remaining
vehicle coasts on a ballistic trajectory,being
attitude stabilized by the capsule automatic
control system until it reaches an al ti tude
of 278 nautical miles on the re-entry phase.
At this time the JPL stage is fired, accelerating
the capsul.e to 36,000 feet per second at 57
nautical miles. Attitude stabilization during
this period is provided by the JPL stabilization
system. At 57 nautical mil.es altitude the JPL
stage is shut down and separated from the cap-
sule. From this point the re-entry and recovery
sequences are the Salll! as for M!rcury.
6.3-1
I
J
O
_
_
,
o
_
o
z m
_
m z 0 i z m m
j
_ I
_
Z
m -
u
0
m
m
3 w
0
m
c
5 Z "
0
o =
n
m
z
O
_
o
_
z
z
J
,
/
/
H 0
_
&
I
_
0
_
0
o
z
z
!
z o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1200 N M
,0
26S N. M.-

CENTAUR STAGE
t!
d
FAIRING
ATlAS
B00tj
63-2
,..,... ,.'
:UL'.'I","
MISSION PROFILE
[:xl
COAST
STABILIZED BY CAPSULE SYSTEM
IIfISZpF
'-

278 N. M
BURNING JPl STAGE
<

DROGUE CHUTE Y
DEPLOYMENT -1
\
'
DROGUE CHUTE &
ANTENNA FAIRING---
MAIN CHUTE
DEPLOYMENT
BALLOON
ANTENNA _0\
'.
"
r),
FIGURE 6.3-1
l
l
L
u
0
=
I
,
M
I
,
M
a
_
0
.
.
Z
u
_
B 0
1
_
'
-
l
a
d
l
a
d
Z m 0 Z I
&
l
o
,
.
P
-
p
a
_
u
_
.
.
o
o
o
_
g
_
g
r
.
t
t
)
o
o
r
.
I
_
r
"
t
-
p
4
3
o
o
i
M
3
, I
,.1
I
f
I
1
1
oeP1nc: .... TIAI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.4 LAUNCH AND ORBIT CHARACTERISTICS
Orbit
A near-eastward launch Cape Canaveral is
presented for this mission partly because the
speed advantage but mainly because such a launch
gives a wide range suitable touchdown loca-
tions. Southward launches from Vandenberg were
studied briefly and rejected because they
duce touchdown areas mostly in the Soviet Union
or in the Arctic Ocean. With near-eastward
la.unches Cape Canaveral the touchdown can
be either on a large land mass, Australia, or in
water areas to the north or south of Australia,
as shown by Figure 6.4-1. The particular orbit
shown on this map is one minimum time, i. e. J
all the speed increment the JPL stage is
applied just re-entry. Other suitable
choices touchdown areas are possible by
part of the JPL stage imme1iately after
Centaur staging using re-ignition later
in the trajectory. This produces higher speeds
and altitude during the ballistic coasting
portion the trajectory which in turn increases
time and range of the mission.
Launch Trajectory
Figure 6.4-2 presents the launch trajectory se-
lected to place the Mercury capsule in
the orbit discussed above. The particular tra-
jectory shown is selected on the basis
high injection altitude to allow ourn-
ing the JPL stage before high
climb angle (13 degrees) at injection to achieve
a re-entry angle approximately -7 degrees;
and a gravity turn to minimize thrust losses.
Pre-Re-Entry Trajectory
Mter burnout of the second boost (Centaur) stage
and a ballistic coast with a gravity
turn of approximately twenty-six degrees, t: ' JPL
storable stage is to supply the fina 'ooost
to lunar re-entry inertial velocity. The pre-
trajectory is shown in Figure 6.4-3.
Booster Characteristics
The Centaur booster vehicle will be the first
of the high energy class. The booster is
scheduled for first. flight in mid-1961 with an
operational date of late 1962. The vehicle is
composed of the Atla.s "D" first stage, a Pratt-
Whi tney dual engine second stage and a JPL stor-
able final stage. The Atlas will have a struc-
tural modification incorporating a constant ten
foot diameter forward section for mating with
the second (Centaur) stage. Typical perform-
ance curves for the Centaur booster are pre-
sented in Figure 4.5-4. The booster summary
along with the weight breakdown for this par-
ticular mission is presented in Table 6.4-1.
CONFiDElIfI a "
6.4-J
d
_
I
L
_
c
_
L
'
z
J
d
_
I
O r
-
,
_
m
c
z
_
,
I
.
,
_
,
_
Q
Z
.
_
m
.
7
:
m
0 L
_ 0 r
-
-
"
I
"
1
-
-
o
o
Z
'
,
"
'
_
o
O
n
-
S
O
U
T
H
L
A
T
.
-
D
E
G
.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i
N
O
R
T
H
L
A
T
.
-
D
E
G
.
<
E
m Z
0
m
Z m m i
_
Z
m -
-
4
_
1
o
m
m
m
0
m
.
-
I
,
,
O
,
,
O
,
,
O
,
O
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
'PNf'pft'JH'
6.4-2
TRAJECTORY FOR SIMU LA TlNG RE-ENTRY FROM LUNAR ORBIT
BOOSTER STAGE
ATLAS SUSTAINER STAGE
0..,lGCENTAUR STAGE V APOGEE JPL STAGE
II ' ' ,......... ,
i-<D:-0 BALLISTIC TRAJECTORY :'
60,-- _ _II 1 '---fs\ "'-' 1
, 1 - I
II 1 ' ..' \
/ RE-ENTRY
:..- TOUCHDOWN
1

It
, '
- :;" "F' --,.,... _ &0 1]\-_'
C> ' ,f '1\ I 1 ,
w 50 ' 11), 1 '
."'-
I II I - n ---- r;t- .-
....: 111'
40 \' \! l R I \::: - 1 -
-' U I >-
, ....
:;;; 30 - ,-_ 11:'--
o ., -
z 20,
1 0 f------.a

.
c> I
20i ' -1""',14"
..:: I ' f

30
1
,
;: 40
1
-
::::I I
o 1
'" 501 1 'il'
100 40
20--0---20
SPACE
HT. PATH
ALTITUDE TIME
SYMBOL VELOCITY
NA.MILES
ANGLE
SECONDS
FPS DEGREES
CD
LAUNCH POINT 0
(2) 9660 38.8 32.1 146
(3)
14,240 107.2 17.3 249
0
25,391 265.0 13.1 501
CD
19,796 1204.0 0 2322
CD
25,305 278.0 -13.1 3727
(j) 36,003 57.2 -7.2 3977
CD -
0 -- 4160
1
..
I
,
_____ A.
40 60 80
EAST LONG.-DEG
SYMBOL
0

0
-L------J:= . __, __
10
, I

100 120 140
LAUNCH
HEADING
75
0
90
0
lOS 0
)
.. J
l
FIGURE 6.4-1
z
z
0
0
u
u
_
t
u
z
z
"
:
)
:
I
S
/
'
I
:
I
0
0
0
[
-
A
-
A
I
I
:
)
O
I
:
I
A
1
V
I
I
_
I
:
I
N
I
'
I
I
t
I
I
I
i
i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
i
3
3
-
1
0
0
0
'
0
0
0
'
[
-
q
-
3
(
]
1
1
1
1
1
1
V
I
.
-
-
m
_
m
m
m
m
m
m
_
m
m
p
_
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
_
_
_
_
I
J
,
I
1
I
I

w
w
u..
0
0
0
0
0
0
,
....
I
..c
I
W
0

....
4(
FIGURE 6.4-2
1.80 -
1.60
1.40 28
In
w
w
a:
u
(!)
w
1.20
In
24
w
""'-
0

u..

I
1.00
0
20 w
0
0
....
(!)
I Z
.80 > 16
4(
>-
:J:

4(
.60
u
12
I:L.
0
....
:J:
w
(!)
>
.40
....
8
....
4(
u..

a:
.20[ 4
o 0
.....
..
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
LAUNCH TRAJECTORY
CENTAUR BOOSTER
90
\
INJECTION POINT \
'\
1;- FLIGHT PATH ANGLE
nz
=3.07
,-
,'-
.
V ALTITUDE, ,.,.,.'\
,.
80
70
60
,,- "
, ,
",
, .L
I.'
i\ ./ ",
, "

n, ,,-;;.,. INERTIAL VELOCITY
LONGITUDINAL
LOAD FACTOR
I !,'
I
,.

,
"
,
"

, ,
,
_L'
,
"
50
40
30
20
10
"
"
1----- "
,
o
o
.-'

100 200 300 400 500
TIME -t- SECONDS
6.4-3
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
--=,
PRE-RE-ENTRY BOOST TRAJECTORY
JPl FINAL STAGE
1.80
1.60
36[
-18
32 -16
U
w
I/)
1.40
I-
w
W
I/)
28
w
-14
.......
w
a::
l-
e>
...
w
...
0
1.20
0
24
c
-12
0 ,
0
0
0
?-
,
0
1.00 0
0
,
>
w
20
.....
-10 ,
e>
,
~
z
I-

..s::.
.80 ,
w
C
:::J
I- .60
u
16 -8
0
:I:
.....
I-
W
>
0...
..... 12
I-
-6
I-
.....

:I:
l-
e>
a:: .....
.40
w
8
...
-4
Z
.20 4 -2
0
..... --0 .... '--
IGNITION WEIGHT = 7928 POUNDS
BURNOUT WEIGHT = 2928 POUNDS
,
IGNITION OF JPl STAGE BURNOUT OF JPl STAGE
~
INERTIAL JElOCITY ,
,,-
"
, ...
", .. " ...
"' ...
_ ........
", _l, .- .. -
",
...... .,.. ...
.. ...
",
.. ... ...
' .. ~ .........
'.. ...--
-----
::-,};.: ... --
''', r fliGHT PATH ANGLE
......
~
",
~ ' ..
~ ''',
' ..
' ..
' ..
''',
.............
~ 1",
''''''2
'"
"
''',
A lTiTUDE--.I
' ..
"
"'"
' ..
-.--
"'.
luNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
o
o 50 100 150 200 250
TIME -t- SECONDS
6.4-4 FIGURE 6.4-3
~ ~ 1 : " T
l
0 L Z n m
J
J
Z m z m
u
J
k
!
J
J
d
J
m
A
'
I
m_
@
@
I
"'I

TABLE 6.4-1
CENTAUR BOOSTER SUMMARY
Empty Atlas "0" (Booster Stage)
Usable Propellants
Empty Atlas "0" (Sustainer stage)
Usable Propellants
Total SuBtainer stage Weight
Empty Centaur (Second stage)
Usable Propellants
Total Second stage Weight
Empty JPL Storable (Third Stage)
Usable Propellants
Total Third stage Weight
Capsule
Capsule Fairing
Adapter
TOTAL TAKE-0FF WEIGHT
PROPULSION SYSTEM
Atlas "0" (LOX/RP-1)
Atlas "0" (LOX/RP-l)
(Sustainer)
Centaur (H
2
/0.2)
(Second Stager
JPL Storable (N20VN2H4)
(Third Stage)

6,547
390
220,000
6,754
391
28,200
3,060
70
18,370
900
70
5,030
1,826
843
177
226, 937 lbs.
35,345 lbs.
21,500 Lbs.
6,000 Lbs.
2,846 lbs.
292,628 lbs.
THRUST BURNING TIME
368,000 lbs. at S. L. 146 Sec.
84,724 lbs. at Alt. 249 Sec.
30,000 lbs. at Alt. 252 Sec.
6,OOOLbs. at Alt. 250 Sec.
___
SPECIFIC IMPULSE
244.0 Sec.
309.7 Sec.
412.0 Sec.
304.0 Sec.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.4-5
_
0
,
-
-
0
"
_
I
,
A
I
L
u
u
l
Z n I
L
l
I
L
l
z n z I
,
I
J
!
o
l
,
L
I
"
X
_
0
_
I
_
_
.
_
o
r
q
o
_
_
o
I
n
,
-
.
4
_
.
,
.
4
_
:
_
m
.
_
.
O
4
.
_
.
_
n
c
_
_
_
0
_
o
o
+
_
_
_
.
,
_
_
,
,
-
I
4
_
_
o
_
0
.
_
0
'
H
0
I
_
!
u
r
_
1
~
I
I I
I
c] r 'flDENTlAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.5 LUNAR RE-ENTRY CONSIDERATIONS
The results of an extensive study to det:;I"lnine
the characteristics of re-entries from high
eccentricity, lunar, type orbits are presented.
Re-Entry Trajectories
For manned vehicles human tolerance limitations
r2quire that the initial re-entry be shallow
enough that the maximum longitudinal load fac-
tor does not exceed about twenty, and steep
enough to prevent a "skip" to an altitude of
more than about 7,000,000 feet. The latter
restriction is imposed by the condition that
a menned capsule should avoid protracted per-
iods in the belts of high radioactivity which
surround the Earth.
Several typical trajectories for the m o s ~ likely
re-entry conmtlons are shown in Figure 6.5-l.
Effects of initial rp-entry angle at 400;000 feet,
ho' the reference re-entry altitude, and frontal
loading on post re-entry altitude for grazing
re-entries are sbown in Figure 6.5-2. Figure
6,5-3 shows the effect of these variableR on max-
imum longitudinal load factor.
Re -Entry Load Factors
Hore detailed load factor profiles are gi yen
in figure 6.5-4. The most severe case shown
approaches the limits of a healthy indi vtdual
adequately supported in an optimum position.
= I.t IFlllt III 0 I
b5-l
0
'
,
O
_
_
0
'
,
,
,
0
,
-
I
,
,
-
I
v
_
,
U
L
,
0
w
I
,
M
I
,
M
I
,
M
Z
L
n
i lJ
.
l
1
,
4
4
z m 0 Z I
,
M
l
,
n
L
U
m 0 I
-
-
1
,
3
L
U
>
-
i
n
z I
J
J
I
I
,
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
,
,
,
0
_
o
w
0
o
_
'
_
"
_
0
'
I
'
I
0
0
0
'
[
-
-
]
(
]
n
l
l
J
.
l
V
i
G
0
,
,
0
(
,
,
,
)
e
'
)
,
,
}
0 a
o
(
'
N
{
N
d I
,
M
s
,
n
,
I
N
1
4
.
0
0 0 0
w
I
-
-
0 ,
.
.
I
0 0
0
I
I
o
I
I
I
I
II
I
.1
...:
u..
- CUI ..
RE-ENTRY TRAJECTORIES
,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
300 r I I----,-T--' YO (OA 11.:.:l TO' 3,333,80,0
: I -6.0 41.3 . I 1- TO 12,045,000 FT.
260
240
280 J--- : -- --1
T I -------- -6.5 41.3
I _. _ _ _ _. -7.0 41.3 -t---t---+--'---i/- --\-
I
---- -5.05 37.5 j I
. "J i - ...
o 220
--1--- -----5.10 37.5 -r-
I-----+----r---+--t---- -- - - -6.5 37.5 __ --L. <0 I
I / /'. .,/"
0
0,
200
-6.5 61.4 !"Y i "
I-----,----;---t---+---t-- -,
I
w 180
0
I
:>
....
160
!
....
-'

140
120 ---t--+-
.L
100
80
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38
VELOCITY -1000 FT./SEC.
FIGURE 6.5-1
6.5-2
C
_
j
1
I
G
O
M
A
X
I
M
U
M
A
L
T
I
T
U
D
E
-
1
0
6
F
E
E
T
3
:
_
,
,
X
m
5
2 m
_
-
-
I
m Z m
,
m
i
n
i
m =
=
4
m m ,
0
m Z m Z m m i Z
m
o
J
0
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CONF'PS'II 7 k
MAXIMUM POST RE-ENTRY ALTITUDE ATTAINED
Vo = 36,045 FT,/SEC, L/D=O
ALTITUDE SHOWN IS MAXIMUM AT
.
WHICH h=O AFTER INITIAL ENTRY
20,0
...
10,0
w
w
8,0
u.
..0
6,0
0
4,0
I I I I
<W/CDA= 37,5 LB/FT.2
, 1 1
,-"" .. - ~ ..
~ /" W/COA
41,3
_1_1_ ..
._.,l.,_,
~ - ; - " ' -
._,_,_.i_._,_., I ~ _ I - _1_,_-
~ I _ ' _ I -
_1_._' . _1_1-
\ \ I\, \
,
\ \'-- APPROXIMATE LOWER_
\ \
LIMIT OF INNER
UrI
0
:::)
2,0
...
\
, RADIA TlON BELT
I I
I
,
I I
...
.."

1,0
,/
rW/CDA= 61,41
~
,8
:::)
~
,6
><
,4
<C
~
,2
\ \ \
'"
\.
,
'"
~ ~
"---
...
-5,0 -5.1 -5.2 -5.3 -5,4 -5,5
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, Y
O
- DEGREES
6.5-3
CQNfloo;r r
l -
FIGURE 6.5-2
p
-
U
_
O
_
O
_
_
-
-
t
v
w
0
m
L u
_
L
u
0
u
J
Z u
J
u
J
z 0 z u
J
r
v
0 h
-
U M
.
a Z m m Z 0
I
,
-
:
_
"
_
%
,
'
_
,
%
%
%
_
%
,
%
%
_
%
%
% N
,
S
,
o
-
Z
u
'
_
l
O
J
.
_
)
V
-
I
Q
V
O
]
W
I
'
I
W
I
X
V
W
0
I
_
0
L
U
) I
>
-
e
l
o
>
Z
I
,
M
L
U
,
I
-
-
Z
I
0 I
.
n
,
o
I
I
I
U
"
)
c
_
I
.
-
-
4
I
I
.. '-VAriOC.' , IA'
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
FIGURE 6.5-3
\I)
(!)
I
N
C
!:II:
o
l-
V

LL.
Q

o
-'
:E
::J
:E
><

:E
LONGITUDINAL LOAD FACTORS
l/D=O V
O
=36,045 Fl./SEC.

181 I
/. '
41.3
' ,
14 I I 37 . 5 .'
:!r' ,
10 I ,"
',' I"
" ,
.,' i
, ,
.,' "
... '
6
1
1
-5.0 -5.4 -5.8 -6.2 -6.6
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE. a'O-DEG.
CONFIDE! .fl n ,
-7.0
6.5-4
c
_
I
c
_
n
O
_
I
O o
0 o 0 o 0
L
O
N
G
I
T
U
D
I
N
A
L
L
O
A
D
F
A
C
T
O
R
,
n
Z
-
-
G
'
s
U
_
o
o
o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
0
0
o
o
o
o
I
_
"
C m -
.
4
m .
,
,
,
q
m C 0 m
t
l
"
M
0
"
o
0 0 ',
,
,
4
0 C m 0 Z
0 6 Z Q m ,
.
.
.
q
C 0
m
Z
1
6
0 .
-
,
4
0
_
m
m
-
.
4
m m
J ,
,
0
,
,
0
m Z I Z m m Z
0
m
0 ENGINEERING REPORT 6919
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
co, 'Fl. ZI 4 I IAt
DURATION OF lONGITUDINAL lOAD FACTORS
6.5-5
CURVES TERMINATE AT ALTITUDE = 70,000 FT.
25.
~ 201 I l
N I
C A , I
W/CDA = 41.3
ell::
o
~
u 15

....
o

o
Yo = -7.00
.... 101-- I ti' ' \ ' / - - ~ YO = -6.50
I I r /,./y-Y
O
= -6.00
Z .
....
o
::>
~
C> 51
Z
" I
o
....
0' FE'"!
~ 4IL: " '.:
o 50 100 150 200 250 0 50
TIME FROM 400,000 FT. - SECONDS
CQ?IPlSEi4iiAt
Yo = -6.50
W/CDA
I 61.4
\" .,I'-A.- 41. 3
100 150 200
FIGURE 6.5-4
I
1
l
l
e
J
O
g
L
U
0
m
o
.
a
E
i
.
u
L
U
o
g
_
-
0
o
.
.
u
.
i
Z
u
_
m
m
e
i
-
-
-
L
U
U
J
Z m 0 Z u
.
J
u
'
%
1
I
,.- CUi.rrul:'.'IPC'C"
LUNAR ORBIT
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Aerodynamic Heating
This section presents and discusses the methods
of analysis used to obtain vehicle heating rates
and temperatures during re-entry from lunar
missions and to correlate the results of these
analyses in terms of parameters affecting
vehicle design. The results and analyses pre-
sented in this section are divided into three
categories: stagnation point heating; front
face heatingjand afterbody heating, each of
which is discussed separately.
All major phases of heat transfer are considered
in the analysis. The external heating rates
include heat transfered by convection, diffU-
Symbols
a Speed of sound, ft./sec.
A Projected frontal area, ft.2
c
p
Specific heat at constant pressure, BTU/lb.-oR
Co Drag coefficient
C
L
Lift coefficient
D Projected frontal diameter, ft.
sion and gaseous radiation. In addition to the
effects of external heat inputs, the surface
temperatures presented in this section include
the effects of surface radiation, heat capa-
cities, and internal heat transfer phenomena.
The ARDC Model Atmosphere, 1956 (Reference 10)
modified by M.A.C. (Reference 11) above
280,000 feet, is used to define ambient
pressures, temperatures, and densities as a
fUnction of altitude. The M.A.C. MOdified
Atmosphere is based on recent satellite measure-
ments (Reference 12).
A list of symbols applicable to this section
and Section 6.6 are presented below.
H Geopotential altitude, ft.
HE "Effective heat of ablation, BTU/lb.
i Enthalpy, BTU/lb.
k Thermal conductivity, BTU/hr._ft
O
R
L Characteristic length
I.e Lewis number
m Pressure gradient parameter
g Gravitational constant, 32.2 ft/sec
2
M Mach number
c
h Convection coefficient, Nu Nusselt number
COt'F1pFtIJ! O!
6.5-6
O
_
6
,
I
-
4
_
o
,
<
_
_
_
,
.
,
.
_
o
_
_
'
_
.
_
_
.
_
o
_
,
.
-
,
_
,
_
.
m
.
_
.
_
.
_
_
.
,
.
L
_
J
l
_
0
_
'
-
_
t
_
'
(
'
D
_
_
c
_
-
0
F
_
_
o
m
0
o
_
.
o
_
.
.
_
o
_
_
_
l
_
.
_
_
_
o
o
_
_
_
o
_
_
o
_
m
0
_
,
_
,
-
_
_
c
_
o
_ 0
0 N
o o
_
0 @ _
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
o
o
_
_
m
_
0
_
g
t
-
_
N o 0
m x 0 i x m m i
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
o
p
o
-
,
I
-
-
'
O
,
,
0
,
0
I
,
n
-
-
,
,
,
0
,
,
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
,
.

,-
, l ;,-,_
6.5-1
P Pressure, lb/ft
2
Pr Prandtl number 2
q Heat t
2
ansfer rate, BTU/sec.ft or BTU/hr.
ft 2
Q Total heat transfer, Jqdt, BTU/ft
r Radial distance from axis as a fUnction of
s, ft.
R 53.3 ft.lb./lb.oR
RN Nose radius of curvature on front face, ft.
Re Reynolds number
s Distance along surface from stagnation
point, ft.
t Time, sec. 0
T Temperature, R
V VelOCity, ft/sec. 2
W Weight, lb., lb/ft
X Axial distance, or thicm.s8, ft.
& Re-entry angle, degrees at 400,000 ft.
Ratio of specific heats
Accommodation coefficient
pynamic viscos
3
ty, lb/ft. sec.
p Density, lb/ft 12
.471 x 10-
BTU/sec. ft
A Dimensionless parameter
. ,
,
Subscripts
AW Local adiabatic wall, or recovery
D Diesociation
l"R }Pay-Riddell
G Gas (Shock Layer)
K Conducted heat
KR Kemp-Riddell
o Initial
R Due to gaseous radiation
RR Re-radiated
S Stagnation
SA Satellite orbital
SL Sea Level
T Free-stream total
W Wall or surface
1 Behind normal shock wave
6 Edge of boundary layer
d) Free stream ambient
Superscripts
* Evaluate at reference temperature
Two-dimensional compressible
Tvo-Dimensional incompressible
CONEr;
-
l
O
_
O
_
O
_
O
_
'
,
0
,
-
-
0
'
_
L I
,
L
l
I
,
,
I
,
I
0
a
.
I
,
I
,
I
Z i I
,
L
l
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
z m 0 z I
,
L
l
W d
.
,
-
I
_
o
_
,
.
_
.
,
.
_
0
1
.
4
4
_
,
,
,
.
4
_

I
1
t
I
I
I
,
co,,, II 5'7'AL
LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY 1
Stagnation Point Heating
Initial parametric studies of stagnation point
heating during lunar re-entries were made using
simplified methods of analysis to determine
critical conditions. Detailed studies of
heating during these re-entries were then made
using more exact methods of analysis. Only the
results of the detailed studies are shown in
this section.
The initial parametriC studies used the simplified
equation for heating in free molecule (Equation I,
Table 6.5-1), with an accommodation coefficient
of one for the heating above 330,000 feet. Below
330,000 feet only heating due to convection and
diffusion, using the simplified equation of Kemp
and Riddell (Equation (2), Table 6.5-1), was
considered.
The detailed stagnation point heating studies
were made using the same equation for heating
in free molecule flow as the parametric studies,
since the total effect of heating in free mole-
cule flow is small. Heating due to convection
and diffusion was calculated by the more
accurate equation of Fay and Riddell (Equation
(3), Table 6.5-1). In addition, the heating due
to gaseous radiation was taken into account
using Equation (4), Table 6.5-1, and accounting
for air properties in equilibrium
behind a normal shock wave, air emissivity as
a function of density and temperature (Reference
8) and gas layer thickness.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
The simplified eqUation of Kemp and Riddell
7) for beating due to convection
plus diffusion (Equation (2), Table 6.5-1)
is a correlation of numerical results of the
theoretical equation of Fay and Riddell
(Reference 9) at velocities below satellitic.
A comparison of the simplified and theoretical
calculation methods is given in Figure 6.5-5.
This comparison is based on the following
assumptions, which are discussed in the next
paragraph: the shock layer reaches thermo-
chemical equilibrium; the boundary layer is
cooled to a surface temperature of 1000
0
R:
Lewis number equals 1.4; modified Newtonian flow
for the stagnation point velocity gradient. As
seen from the comparison on Figure 6.5-5, the
simplified method overestimates the heating
rate due to convection plus diffusion by at
peak heating conditions during lunar re-entry.
The assumptions made in the use of Fay and
Riddell's equation are similar to those for the
Simpler Kemp and Riddell equation.
Little information is available regarding the
application of the equation of stagnation heat
transfer rates when ionization is present: One
report of its use does correlate test data in
the flow of ionized argon (Reference 19). Non-
equilibrium conditions in the boundary layer
have little effect on heating rates, excluding
gaseous radiation heating, unless a surface
which is non-catalytic to atom recombination
is present. Based on ttte limited data avail-
able at present, use of non-catalytic surfaces
is not contemplated.
6.5-8
- eCilF.rn'liM
.........
O
_
)
'
,
0
o
'
-
f
l
)
_
0
_
_
_
0
.
_
_
0
0
_
O
_
_
_
o
_
.
o
_
.
_
'
_
1
.
_
w
_
e
?
o
_
_
F
-
_
o
_
+
C
o
c
o
_
-
_
-
0
o
}
-
_
0
0
o
m
0
_
o
_
<
_
I
-
_
C
O
_
O
_
l
-
_
e
f
!
\
0
0
_
,
-
'
-_
_
-
_
_
k
J
-
_
_
+
_
0
_
_
0
O
q
_
a
_
m
_
m
0
_
'
_
_
_
_
o
_
,
:
+
u
_
0
o
_
o
_
!
_
'
_
_
-
_
0
_
_
)
[
_
c
_
_
r
a
0
0
_
'
_
c
+
-
c
-
_
(
"
0
_
_
.
_
_
_
I
_
_
o
_
m
m
m ,
0
,
0
m z 0
z m m m
Z 0
m =
o
0
O
_
,
,
0
_
0
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
gN5!? d' fJft..
6.5-9
The effect of surface on the enthalpy
potential, and hence the heat transfer rate, is
small, unless a high temperature heat shield
surface Is considered. The surface temperature
eff'e3t of the P/I term in Fay and Riddell's
.11)2 thod is larger than the enthalpy potential
effect in regions of maximum heating considered
herein.
The heat input effect of atom diffusion is in-
cluded by the use of enthalpy potential and a
Lewis number equal to 1.4. This yields a
servative heating rate for atom diffusion when
a highly dissociated or ionized boundary layer is
present.
Thermal radiation heating from the high tempera-
region behind the bow shock, in addition
to that due to .convection plus diffusion, must
be considered for lunar trajectories.
Limi ted theoretical. a...nd expe:r1mente,1 data. i.s
available un the emissi vi ty of high temperature
air (Reference 8). The radiation to the
stagnation point from a plane layer of air is a
function of the gas density, temperature, and
thickness. The thickness is taken to be the
shock wave standoff distance. The shock wave
standoff distance is approximately proportional
to the body radius of curvature and density
ratio across the shock wave. The density and
temperature of the hot air behind the shock
wave are determined from the equilibrium pro-
perties of air as a real gas. The gaseous
radiation heating rate (Equation (4), Table
6.5-1 is based on negligible absorptivity by
the shock layer of radiation emitted from the
heat shield surface. Typical gaseous radiation
heating rates are shown on Figure 6.5-6. Also
shown on this figure are a typical Earth orbit
re-entry trajectory and simulated lunar re-entry
trajectory, indicating the extent to which
gaseous radiation to a lunar vehicle is present.
A comparison of the stagnation point heating
rates due to convection plus diffusion and
gaseous radiation is shown on Figures 6.5-7
through 6.5-9. On Figure 6.5-7 the ratio of
the gaseous radiation heating rate to the
convection plus diffusion is shown tor three
simulated lunar re-entry trajectories. A
vehicle whien re-enters at the steeper initial
re-entry angles encounters higher gaseous radia-
tion heating rates, but passes through the
"gaseous radiation band" faster. The effect of
initial re-entry angle on maximum heating rate
due to convection plusaiffUsion and gaseous
radiation is shown on Figure 6.5-8.
yrThe maximum heating rate due to both heat trans-
fer mechanisms is not the sum of the values on
Figure 6.5-8, since the maximum heating rates do
not occur at the same time. The total heat to
be absorbed or radiated to space by a heat
shield at the stagnation point is shown on
Figure 6.5-9. 'Ihe total heating due to con-
vection plus diffusion, is greater at the
shallower initial re-entry angles.

-
1
I
o ,
-
4 !
t
_
)
I
I
I (
CONi IE P IT! AL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.
TABLE 6.5-1
STAGNATION POINT HEATING RATE CALCULATION METHODS
Free Molecule Flow, Simplified(Reference 7) q
(Above 330,000 ft.)
7 3
= 2.69 x 10 TJ (':0/ PSL)(VGO/V SA)
2. Convection plus Diffusion, Simplified,
Kemp and Riddel (Reference 7)
q = 20 800(R_(1/2(p /p )1/2(V /V )3.25
, - ~ GO SL co SA
3.
(Below 330,000 ft., Wall enthalpy
negligible, Initial parametric
studies)
Convection plus Dittusion Fay and
Riddell (Reference 9)
(Below 330,000 ft., Detailed analysis
presented herein)
4. Gaseous Radiation from Shock Layer
(Emissivity of air, E
G
, from Reference 8)
q = 0.94 (R J1 )O.l(p /1 )0.4
s,ws,w slsl , ,
( ~ N ~ gc(P 8; i-Pool 2 ) 1/2
8,1
[1 + (LeO. 52 -1)(Vis)] [is - iw]
4
qR = UEG TG
""" ....... wu" .....
6.5-10
I
I
,iI
L
'
z
'
J
C
l
'
a
J
1
!
U
1
q
R
C
O
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
R
A
T
I
O
'
q
F
"
_
-
0
0
0
0
;
1
N
"
<
>
[
]
N
-
-
_
_
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
.
O
_
m
o
o
r
_
_
I
o
O
o
o
_
o 0
t
_
0
O
_
0
m
m
m _
o
_
0
m
m t
_
0 C
_
-
-
i
m Z
eSln iDENIIAfG
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1.40
1.30
COMPARISON OF METHODS USED IN COMPUTING
STAGNATION POINT HEAT TRANSFER RATES'
ALTITUDE RANGE: 100,000 -250,000 FT.
CALCULATED POINTS
o = 250,000 FT.
o = 200,000 FT.
o = 150,000 FT .
= 100,000 FT.
I I I .l
q KR = KEMP - RIDDELL SIMPLIFIED METOD
q FR = FAY - RIDDELL METHOD
I I
qKR I I I I
B
Ql:IQI:
LL.
0" 0"
q- = 0.8SI1 + 0.0173IM-

FR (LEAST SQUARES FIT)

0
,
0
l-
e(
QI:
Z
0
Colt
QI:
e(
11.

0
v
6.5-11
1.20
1.10
1.00
.90
. 80
o
/

S<'
to!

4 8
0

'd
0
0
R

/
12 16 20 24 28 32 36
FLIGHT MACH NUMBER, M
c
-
(
40
FIGURE 6. 5-5
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
o
,
_
.
e
0
c
_
\
0
"
l
:
l
0
0
0
[
-
4
-
-
3
0
C
I
1
1
1
1
V
0
,
o
(
.
-
)
o
r
)
o
4
o ,
o
I
:
N
0
L
L
0 o 0
I
>
,
.
U 0 ,
.
J
u
l
I
_
d
I
r
_
l
I
I
400
300
~
u..
0
0
0
I
~
200
w
c
=>
~
~
.....
<t
100
o
o
FIGURE 6.5-6
CONf'nstZ
J
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
GENERALIZED PLOT OF GASEOUS RADIATION
AT STAGNATION POINT
SHOCK LAYER IN EQUILIBRIUM
~ , BTU/(SEC.)(FT.
2
)(FT. RADIUS)
RN
R
N
, NOSE RADIUS IN FEET
TYPICAL EARTH ORBIT RE-ENTRY
W /CDA=50.8
2
LB./FT.
YO = -1.0
CL =0
TYPICAL LUNAR RE-ENTRY
W /CDA = 37.5 LB./FT.
2
:
Yo = -6.00
C
L
= 0
4 8 12 16 20 24
VELOCITY-lOOO FPS
CONFIDFNTI 0 I -r
qR .1
R,:"-
.5
1.0
5.0
RN
50
100
28 32 36 40
6.5-12
8
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
cQt"5'cn I'IAL
COMPARISON OF GASEOUS RADIATION AND
CONVECTION PLUS DIFFUSION AT STAGNATION POINT
1.0
z
0
.9
z Vi
O::::l
- LL
.8
l-
LL

-
c
c
+
.7

z
c.::
0
Vl -
VO= 36,045 FPS
- hO=400,000 FT.
W/C
O
A=37.S LB/FT.2

f--
CL=O
(\
/YO=-7.00
__ RN= 6.67 FT.
,
I-
::::lu:::;
.6 o w....l
W > w
Vl Z c
.5
0 c
(!) u
001
.4
I- I- >-

W W LL
::::l::::l_
C C
.3
.2
. 1 I-

W
:::I:

rYo= -6.00
,
V
I
,
! /
I
\Y
j
"
"
I I \"'J'"
" ....... , ........ rYo= -5.13
J,' "'\ ' .......
1$' ...
I .......... , ..... ,
I..... #,
,.. ...... ........
........... ,,'"
, .............. ,'r
II
' 1
, .. , .. ,,, ....... 11"",
r..'.,,'" - - - _ _ '""'I.u. m ......
o
o 20 140 160 180
6.5-13
FIGURE 6.5-7
O
,
O
,
w
D
,
-
J
.
_
u
J
O
a
.
_
E
u
u
I
.
M
e
.
_
I
-
-
M
.
I
Z
B M
,
I
i
J
U
Z m Z I
,
M
C
_
Z m
(
M
J
-
1
-
I
-
-
.
Z Z O n
(
Z
t
.
-
-
I
.
.
.
I
I
.
M
r
_
e
l
)
-
-
I
L
Z O i
.
n
U
L
_
M
.
r
_
+ z O U M
.
I
Z
-
O U
O h
, t
,
O
I
,
,
O
,
O
I
I
.
n
M
J
,
o
C
9
I
w
I
_
.
o
I
.
,
,
.
.
I
C
9
9
z
I
)
-
_
.
z
I
I
u
J
i
z
_
I
-
-
I
m
\
I
N
u
r
_
I
O
O
O
O
O
u
_
O
u
'
_
O
_
n
t
_
l
t
_
l
'
-
'
-
o
o
?
"
3
:
:
i
S
_
'
l
J
/
A
l
g
-
3
/
V
a
O
N
I
I
V
3
H
W
A
W
I
X
V
W
I
1
3
c
O
I
I
.
t
3
1
J
1
j
J
1
J
I
co,.r'DC .. 'TIAI
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
u 250
w
V)
N
I-
u..
........ 200
::J
I-
al
I
W
I-

a:
C)
Z
I-

w
:x:
:E
::J
:E
><

150
100
50
o
TYPICAL MAX IMUM HEATI NG RATES
AT STAGNATION POINT
V
O
=36,045 FPS
h
o
=400,OOO FT.
W/C
D
A=37.S LB/FT.2
CL=O
R N =6.67FT.
--------

!

t

+ DIFFUSION (FAY & RIDD ElL)
I
.,.".
I
-

RADIATION

"..

-
:E
-5.0 -5.2 -5.4 -5.6 -5.8 -6.0 -6.2 -6.4 -6.6 -6.8 -7.0
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE YO - DEGREES
fiGURE 6.5-8
en sc'Or:.'TI Al
6.5-14
e
c
j
l
I
e
j
1
m
Z
m
I
'
I
'
1
I
r
i
l
l
Z .
<
Z Q P m
0
I
m Q m m
f
f
l
I
I I
l
.
n
b
,
&
i
= I
I
b
,
I
I
"
4
\
T
O
T
A
L
H
E
A
T
I
N
P
U
T
,
1
0
0
0
B
T
U
/
F
T
.
2
_
H
.
.
;
_
!
1
I
.
.
j
j
_
O
0
I
,
0
_
I
I
I
I
_
,
o
0
"
'
_
I
I
I
0
(
_
)
"
!
,
_
"
,
.
.
,
,
.
_
I
,
I
I
)
!
"
I
'
I
m
l
r
r
l
,
,
-
I
m Z E
)
}
>
-
.
-
I
(
,
/
1
-
-
I
_
>
Q Z _
>
,
-
-
I
m
m
0 Z
I
T
I
Z
I Z m m
.
,
_
1
=
m
w
Z
m m
m
m
0
m _
0
.
-
_
-
-
'
O
,
,
0
_
0
_
n
.
d
_
0
_
0
1
_
J
I
CONFIDFtr:r S I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.5-15
N
l-
LL.
........
TYPICAL TOTAL HEATING AT STAGNATION POINT
V
O
=36,045 FPSv
hO= 400,000FT. 2
35 r W / C D A = 37 .S L B / FT. ---,---,----,-----r----,-----,------,
CL=O
RN = 6.67FT.
301 i

I-
r:lIl
o
o

,
I-

Q.
Z
I-

w
::I:
.....

I-
o
I-

I CON,ECTlOj+DIFFUjION +GASEOUS RADIATION
I
CONVECTlON+DIFFUSION (FAY -RIDDELL) I I I I
5 I I I I I / I GASEOUS RADIATION
-

-5.0 -5.2 -5.4 -5.6 -5.8 -6.0 -6.2 -6.4 -6.6 -6.8 -7.0
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE YO-DEGREES
FIGURE 6.5-9
co 11 ibtNTIAL-
--1 -
L 0
a
.
Z i z i 0 z U
L
I
0
_
_
.
_
.
M
o
f
l
l
.
r
-
t
O
_
_
o
_
0
_
0
_
1
0
4
_
"
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
_
O
_
"
H
O
o
_
o
_
0
_
o
_
o
_
"
_
"
_
.
_
o
$
_
,
-
t
E
l
_
,
_
u
o
.
,
4
_
_
,
_
o
_
_
0 I
4
a
o
%
)
o
_
-
_
q
.
_
_
.
_
_
0
_
_
o
o
,
1
-
1
_
o
_
o
m
I
.
.
i
o
H
0
o
.
_
o
0
-
i
_
0
0
0
_
I
_
_
.
,
-
I
.
H
0
_
O
%
N
_
o
0
.
H
H
.
_
%
o
m
0
I
,
_
b
O
_
_
l
0
0
-
-
'
-
l
_
.
H
,
-
-
I
_
_
0
_
,
'
_
o
_
.
_
l
_
o
"
o
"
_
o
o
_
.
_
I
_
l
0
i
m
o
,
_
_
o
_
,
_
_
_
,
,
_
,
_
o
_
_
o
U
I
_
O
_
-
.
,
-
I
,
.
-
I
,
-
I
o
_
'
_
,
_
_
1
_
'
_
.
_
o
_
_
_
"
,
_
o
_
O
o
o
_
o
"
_
_
At
..... l:ONfIDEI'IIAE
Front Face Heating
The present basic vehicle a front
face radius of curvature to 6.67 feet.
This size is a total neat
absorbed and vehicle loads during water impact;
a larger radius being more desirable from the
heating standpoint.
Since the gaseous radiation heating is directly
proportional to the nose radius and convection
plus diffusion heating is invergely proportional
to the nose radius, a study was initiated to
determine if the optimum nose radius might be
less than 6.67 feet.
The convection plus diffusion heating distribu-
tion over three different front faces was com-
puted at a re-entry condition for peak heating.
The results (shown on Figure 6.5-10) are for a
laminar boundary layer over a bighly cooled sur-
face. The method is based on a modified New-
tonian pressure distribution and standard equa-
tions, using an applicable specific heat ratio,
to determine temperature and velocity distribu-
tion over the faces.
The method used to compute the heating distribu-
tion (described in Reference 15 and outlined in
Table 6.5-2) is based on the solutions in Ref-
erence 16, which presents the effects of strong
pressure gradients; along with Mangler's trans-
formation (Reference 17) for laminar axisymmetric
boundary layers and Stewartson's transformation
(Reference 18) for the compressible laminar boun-
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
iary layers. Preliminary test data have indi-
cated laminar flow over the front face. The
method used for computing convection plus
diffusion heating distributions agrees with
available test data when the test data scatter
is considered. The variation with Mach number
of computed heating rate distribution, as a
ratio of the stagnation values, is small for the
regime of important heating.
Since a limited amount of basic data on radia-
tion from high temperature air is available,
and no model test data exists, an estimate of
radiation heating distribution on the front
faces considered herein was made.
The emissivity of hot air over the front face
is assumed constant. The heating rate dis-
tribution is then a function of the fourth
power of the shock layer mean temperature.
The above described heating rate distributions
are used to compare the heat input to the front
faces of a Simulated lunar re-entry vehicle
having 5.0 foot and 6.67 foot radii of curva-
ture. Figure 6.5 -11 shows that the heat input
to the 5.0 foot radius of curvature heat shield
is somewhat greater than the 6.67 foot radius
of curvature front face. Therefore, the 6.67
foot radius of curvature is still the better
compromise between total heat input, water
impact loads, and minimum change to the basic
Mercury capsule.
6.5-16
C
T
I
I
,
.
L
O
C
A
L
H
E
A
T
I
N
G
R
A
T
E
S
T
,
_
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
P
O
I
N
T
H
E
A
T
I
N
G
R
A
T
E
Z
_
,
,
l
-
r
-
_
r
_
1
o
o
.
I
[
h

/
7
I
_
o
o
"
Z
,
/
[
(
I
:
,
;
/
/
I
m Z I Z m m i
_
Z
m -
o
0
m
m
3
:
-
u
m
0
m J ,
,
o
,
,
o
1
I
CCI j .... bNflAL --
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
--
"" ....

c.::
EFFECT OF NOSE RADIUS ON HEAT SHIELD
HEATING RATE DISTRIBUTIONS
1.2 1-
1.0 I d: __ 1 ---"""'1 ,r' L=====4----=-
""<!) 81 ... -'
. ,..
-
c.:: ....

<!)""
ZJ:
Z .61 ,.1 /1
""0
J:o..
...I
Z
uO
0- 4 ,.
...I:t . LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER "-
Z HIGHLY COOLED SURFACE
<!) D=6.2FT. I I
[iUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
SHOULDER
SHOULDER
NO GASEOUS RADIATION "

6.5-17

o .1 .2 .3 .4
SID
.S
.6 .7 .8
FIGURE 6.5-10
""""1
c
O
I
1

}
1
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TABLE 6.5-2
METHOD OF CALCULATING CONVECTIVE HEATING
DISTRmUTION SUBJECT TO A PRESSURE GRADIENT
1. Compressible (Velocity) Gradient
2. Mangler's Transformation (Relates
axisymmetric compressible flow to
two-dimensional compressible flow,
Reference 17)
3. Stewartson's Transformation (Relates
two-dimenSional compressible flow to
two-dimensional incompressible flow,
Reference 18)
4. Heat Transfer Parameter
(Reference 16)
m = dV6 (s )
-as--- ""V()
1
s
s 2 2
11 J rt
s
; iii =0 'ads
o L mrs
3'Y -1
(8 a() p 6 dB. m =
S=J,. ,_
o aTPT m
- c
'Yc-
I
aT
3 y -1

ds
Nu (-
jRe' = f m, 1w!I
T
, T6/
T
T, pr)
5. Heat Transfer Rate
q = )fPwVOS)I/2 (i -i )
sCpO \ /1 w JRe
l
aw w
COIC: :&lr rn 0 ,
'Y c -1
M6
2
)
(1+
2
6.5-l8
_
n
i
I
-
,
,
L
_
D
I I
I
1
'9
'1
x iI
)
.
z
)
P
m
I
0 m
I
0
I
i
m I I
I
"
,
4
!
i
i
!
i !
i
i
i
i
I
!
T
O
T
A
L
H
E
A
T
I
N
P
U
T
F
R
O
N
T
A
L
A
R
E
A
1
0
0
0
B
T
U
/
F
T
2
0
0
0
0
t
/
,
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
I I I I
Z
Z
I
I
I
I
1
O
0
I
I
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
I
_
'
_
0
m
m =
1
"
1
"
1
"
1
r
r
l
i
I
0 Z 0 r
n
_
o
0 Z m i Z "
0
C -
.
I
t
#
l
m .
.
_
i
i
m 3 m ,
,
0
,
o
m X 0 I X m
m
I X m 0 J
f
f
l
I
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
Cot r I EiC "AL

EFFECT OF NOSE RADIUS ON HEAT INPUT
6.5-19
N
ti: 50
.......
;:)
....
110
o
o
o
....
;:)
A...

40
.... e:(
e:("" 30
we:(
::r: ....
.".Z
e:(O
.... 0.:
OY.
....
20
10
-5.0
-,
, .
- ,
, .
,
,
'\
A\\
\:
.. ...
' ..
i'...,.
...... -., ....
h
O
= 400,000 FT.
VO=36,045 FT./SEC.
C
L
= 0
W /A=56.3 LB/FT.
2
I
I
. RN 1= _
RN

... r
.-.........
.. ... , ..

--.. -......
-.-... -.-.-...
-5.4 -5.B -6.2 -6.6 -7.0
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE. r'O -DEG.

-;
FIGURE 6.5-11
O
_
O
_
O
,
O
_
0
"
*
L 0
a
.
Z i o
a
z I 0 z w
,
I
!
-
c
_
i
_
"
_
_
.
_
;
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
,
_
o
_
o
_
_
o
o
o
_
_
_
o
_
:
>
o
_
o
o
0
0
_
_
o
_
_
_
.
_
,
-
_
D
-
_
r
-
-
I
.
_
0
0
.
I
o
_
I
_
o
o
u
,
.
_
0
?
o
_
.
_
4
o
_
.
_
_
_
_
.
,
.
_
_
l
l
:
l
0
'
-
_
b
O
_
0
_
r
"
l
-
P
0
-
e
l
_
_
,
_
"
g
_
.
_
,
_
_
.
_
o
4
0
)
0 C
u
I
,
,
6
)
,I
:1
1
Afterbody Heating
Afterbody heating rate cOOlputations are based
on Eckert's reference temperature method
(Reference 13), two dimensional incompressible
boundary layer solutions (Reference 14) and
transformation. Beginning with the
solution of the two dimensional compressible
boundary layer with the shear stress equal to
zero, the two dimensional case is related to the
axi-symmetric case by Mangler's transformation.
Compressibility effects are included by using
Eckert's reference temperature method. A
summary of the equations used is presented in
Table 6.5-3.
The described method of computation appears
justified since preliminary test data from the
Project Mercury program indicates separated
laminar flow with only a slight pressure grad-
ient at Mach numbers where appreciable heating
occurs. These data indicate that this method
of computation is conservative during peak
heating conditions. Gaseous radiation to the
afterbody is calculated to be negligible.
The afterbody dimensionless heat transfer para-
meter for the re-entry orientation is presented
in Figure 6.5-12. This parameter is used in
all afterbody temperature computations.
effects of trajectory initial re-entry
angle, vehicle weight, afterbody shape, and
surface finish for the simulated lunar
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
re-entry vehicle have been investigated. The
results presented are based on a few represen-
tative detailed calculations solved on the IBM
709 digital computer. The distribution of
maximum surface temperature occuring over the
afterbody during a typical lunar re-entry tra-
jectory is shown in Figure 6.5-13. The tem-
perature variation with time for several lunar
re-entry trajectories is shown in Figure 6.5-14.
Higher maximum temperatures occur during
traJectories with the steeper initial re-entry
aneJ.es; however, the time during which a given
temperature is encountered increases as the
re-entry angle is decreased. The effect of
W ICnA ratio and re-entry angle on afterbody
surface temperature at a reference point is
The effect an the afterbody temperature of
several types of surface coatings is shown on
Figure 6.5-16. The results presented in
Figures 6.5-14 through 6.5-16 are representa-
tive of relatively high emissivities on the
internnl surface of the heat and meteoroid
shingle and on the insulation covering,
the heat radiated inward influences the
external surface temperature to a small extent.
Superalloys, such as Rene 41, Udimet 500, or
L-6c5, are limited in use to approximately
1800
0
F. Surface emissivities up to .9 can
be obtained by oxidation applied chemically
or by heating. Somewhat higher emissivities
can be obtained with the use of special
paints such as pyromark or heat resistant
6.5-20
COllfllstmAl
"
(
_ I
o
_
_
f
D
c
t
-
c
'
t
"
c
'
t
"
.
-
-
t
"
f
f
O
_
_
,
_
_
:
_
"
I
-
-
J
r
f
"
_
_
_
j
_
"
@
_
.
-
_
c
.
t
-
t
n
N
t
_
o
N
N
m
_
g
o

'
g
_
_
I
_
o g
m Z 0 i Z m m
j
_
U
i
_
Z
m m
m 0
n
n
_
U
,
0
,
0
t
.
n
-
=
_
,
0
,
0
i
-
.
I
_
0
_
-
_
1
"
_
0
_
I
_
0
,
_
H
_
_
.
<
_
_
,
_
.
_
_
0
_
o
_
F
-
_
_
_
_
"
c
r
'
I
-
-
'
o
o
c
-
I
-
@
_
_
e
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.5-21
paint. Refractory metals such as
molybdenum or niobium, for use up to approxi-
mately 2400
0
F generally require coatings
for oxidation prevention. The maximum ex-
pected emissivity of the oxidation preven-
tion coating is .1. This lower emissivity
results in hilSher surface temperatures than would
be obtained with the superalloys under similar
and therefore tend to reduce the
advantage of the higher allowable temperature
of the refractory metals.
coem? 2: :AL
LUNAR ORBIT I
Kno\.ledge of whet.her a high emissivity paint
can be applied to the oxidation prevention coat-
ing is not available. If the maximum surface
temperature is above 1800
0
F. based on an
emissivity of .9 a refractory metal will be used.
The oxidation on a niobium alloy will be rela-
tively small since high afterbody temperatures
will exist for short periods of time.
1-
Q
_
v
.
u
0
m
I
,
u
1
,
1
,
1
1
,
1
,
1
Z
m
z z L
L
I
=
o
o
_
,
r
_
0
"
_
_
1
_
"
!
_
o
_
o
o
o
_
o
8
o
o
"
_
l
.
_
_
q
!
L
O
I
I
J
I
I
I
J
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
CONFIDEN IIAE P
TABLE 6.5-3
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
AFTERBODY HEATING RATE CALCULATION METHODS
Heating Rate
q = h(T AW - TW)
Laminar Flow,
Heat Convection Coefficient
h =( NU.\k* (P
6
V6 )1/2
RT*,u's
Reference Temperature,
(Temperature at which to evaluate
T * = 0.5 TW + 0.28 T 6 + 0. 22 TAW
air properties to account for com-
pressibility effects)
Mangler's Transformation
(Relates axisymmetric flow to
two dimensional flow at point
of flow separation, See Figure

(Nu/ Re) Separation
= ( sr2 ) 1/2
r2 cis (Pr) 1/3
6.5-12)
Turbulent Flow,
Heat Convection Coefficient

P V VO.
8
h = 0.0296 k 6 6 (Pr) 1/3
RT*,u *s1/4
6.5-22
, COiCFiDli C, w

I
t
_
0 C
T
_
I
I
-
'
1
"
,
3
(
3
N
U
S
S
E
L
T
N
O
.
i
_
R
E
Y
N
O
L
D
S
N
O
.
'
o
_
:
_
0
J 0
'
,
"
v
0
,
"
I
I
I
I
-
n
i
_
,
,
,
=
l
'T
I
r
"
0
0
m m Z (
,
n
m 0 Z m 1
>
=
=
t
1
>
Z
m
1
>
1
>
-
'
=
4
m
m Z m Z m m
j
_
I
D
m
_
Z
m m
m
m
0
m
_
J
_
_
J
,
_
,
,
0
CON? 2241 IAt
--
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 LUNAR ORBIT H-ENTRY]
6.5-23
AFTERBODY DIMENSIONLESS HEAT TRANSFER PARAMETER
RE-ENTRY ORIENTATION
LAMINAR flOW
o = 6.2 FT.
Pr = .7
o 0
Z Z
.4
~
.... c
y:: .... .2
~ 0
~ Z
::J >-
Z .....
a.::
o
o .4
5/0=.52
.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
S/O
CO",? i e i iAl
~ ,
FIGURE 6.5-12
l
O
'
O
"
,
-
-
u
'
t
O
,
O
,
,
0
,
-
I
-
-
,
,
v
,
_
u
a
0
"
0
o
.
)
a
L
l
Z
u
)
m )
a
L
l
Z m
0
z t
u
o <
0
F
-
_
_
I
_
-
_
-
_
_
:
_
I
/
/
_
o
"
_
r
Z
_
I
I
_
o
o
Z
/
I
_
O
o
o
"
"
I
I
'
_
I
_
o
"
_
c
_
l
,
_
/
_
,
o
o
o
'
L
I
"
"
/
...........
(
.............
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
_
o
]
a
n
l
v
a
]
d
W
]
J
.
I
L
_
I
L
_
0 I'1
I
! I
t
I :f
i

I
iii
i :1
FII
:1
(
1\ I
-' , .. :.,-
\..UI.FiDEL _
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
FIGURE 6.5-13
TYPICAL MAXIMUM AFTERBODY SURFACE
TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION

o
2200. ::;:;::""""'f'
20001 \
1.39 1.7
I I
1800 '6'0=-6.00
VO=36,04S FPS
c( hO=400,000 FT.
aI: ..... CL =0
W/CDA=77.6
1600 =0.9
.4

o 2.0 .8 1.2 1.6
SID
COt'5'Pft!JI e!
6.5-24
C
_
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
glJPiOENTllL
--
TYPICAL AFTERBODY SURFACE TEMPERATURES
2400
0- 2000
~
II
0
.......
1600
on
l-
e::(
....
0
1200
w
a.:
::J
I-
800
e::(
a.:
w
0-
:E
...
400
I-
o
V
O
=36,045 FPS
h 0 =400,000 FT.
W /COA=69 LB/FT.2
C
L
=0
(=0.9
5/0=0.59
o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
TIME-SECONDS (AFTER 400,000 FT.)
6.5-25
J
FIGURE 6.5-14
-- -
.-..---'/
-t
I
1
I
I
1
1
I
I
0-
LIl
II
C
.........
LIl
I-
et
LL.
0
LLI
ICIII::
::::l
I-
et
ICIII::
LLI

LLI
l-
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
EFFECT OF RE-ENTRY ANGLE & W/COA ON
AFTERBODY MAXIMUM SURFACE TEMPERATURE

2100
VO=36,045 FPS
ho=400,000 FT. W /COA
CL=O
S/0=.59
2000 L t =0.9
1900 1 :/"1 ...,- I I
18001 / V / I ,r
S --- S/O =.59
1700 1 J IJ J
I
o - I 1
1600 1$ $ $ V J .,
L
1500'" '1 <
-5.0 -5.2 -5.4 -5.6 -5.8 -6.0 -6.2 -6.4 -6.6 -6.8 -7.0
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE, Y
o
- DEGREES
FIGURE 6.5-15
6.5-26
Tlnr,ITIAI
O
_
o
'
1
I
_
J
I
-
-
I
o
'
1
!
i
,
.
,
a
O
_
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
-
-
O
F
0
0
0
0
0
0
_
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
_
I
1
1
"
1
.
m
_
I I
"
M
0
I
I
,
0
0
m
Z
"
_
m
_
x
m
_
:
m
m Z 0 m Z m m
j
_ m
_
Z
m m
m "
,
:
m
0
m ,
,
,
0
,
,
0
,
o
,
_
o
I
CONE'S IliiAE4
1 SEPTEMBER 1959 luNAR ORBIT I
6.5-27
EFFECT OF RE-ENTRY ANGLE & SURFACE EMISSIVITY
ON AFTERBODY MAXIMUM SURFACE TEMPERATURE
LL.
o
w

;:)
....

w
Q..
:E
w
....
VO=36,045 FPS
h 0 =400,000 FT.
W /COA =40 LB/FT.2
CL=O
2100.
t.l't\otl
2000 t-I --+----1---+-----1--
,
1900 I I '>.

1800
1700
1600
1500
-5.0 -5.2 -5.4 -5.6 -5.8 -6.0 -6.2 -6.4 -6.6 -6.8 -7.0
IN ITIAL RE-ENTRY ANG LE -"10-0 EGREES

FIGURE 6.5-16
-;
O
_
O
,
,
=
-
U
'
)
O
,
O
,
,
,
0
,
-
_
'
u
a
0
m
I
,
M
I
,
M
)
=
=
I
.
I
M
Z
u
_
,
=
=
z z I
,
M
_
0
e
x
O
I
'
,
0
_
0
i I

(
I
,. CONFIDENTIAL _
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.6 lL:.c,.r PROl'U;'lION
The heat protection sY!!Item is divided into tvo
major areas 0 The front face area consists of an
ablation type material with low temperature back-
up structure 0 The afterbody area consists of
high temperature er..ingles with appropriate insul-
ation and low temperature material for the
internal structure.
Front Face Heat Shield
A comparison of 'the advantages and disadvan-
tages of three methods of front face heat pro-
tection is presented in Table 6.6-1.
The cumparison considers heat sink
j
radiation
a..""1:i ablation mat-erial!!!. Typical. thermal. and
are presented for
these materials during re-entry,
A beryllium heat l'ink is not feasible for use
during a lunar re-entry. A six inch
t.r..lck h"!at sink not only has a large weight
penaltYi but al60 will begin to melt at the
The maximum st.agnation point
atures V8. angle are presented in
Figure 'l'ypica.'J. temperature time
tories, neglecting gaseous radiation heatingj
presented in Figure As seen 1n
Figure 6.6-2 the external surface temperature
exceeds the melt.ing point of beryllium. (The
calculations for these curves were made by
ficticio'.Asly exte!ld:i.ng property data above
the melting point).
A radiation cooled type heat shield consisting
of pyrographi te on sta.1nl.ess steel honeycomb was
analyzed. Temperature distributions pres
sented for typical lunar re-entries,
(See Figures and 6.6-4) using 1.5 inches
pyrograpbi te. Thel'!'e distributions are determined
ueing a transient temperature on an IBM
709 dig! tal computer. Gaeeou3 radiation to the
surface, and re-radiation frOOl the-3urfR.Ce were
considered. These calculations show that the
internal surface of thp. 1.5 inch pyrographite
heat shield exceeds the allowable temper.a+.urp.
of sta.1nl.ess steel honeycomb (l200
o
F.)} indi-
cating that greater pyrographi te th.iCknPBS i or
a higher temperature structural materi&'. would
be required,
The results of the studies conducted indicate
that an ablation type heat. shield is the most
feasible method of heat protection during a
lunllr re'--pntry, A modified,? one.-.dimensJonal
traneient tf'!mperature analy3is, programmed on
an IBM 709 digital 11'J to deter-
mine variation of ablated and the
t.emperat11re d.i.stribut:lon in a. t.ypical hp.a.t
shield design.
Heat transfer at the surface of the shield is
considered to consist of the aerodynamic heat-
ing rates" the blockage effect due to at.t.a":.ion,
the heat reradiated to 8pace j the heat c 'l.l ried
away by the ablation of fiberglass, and the
heat conducted. 1nter.nally. At the in2 r char
surface, part of the heat is carried away by
the ablation of pheDyl-silane, and part is
rnll,uilDlOt.lTIAI _
6.6-1
O
x
o O
_
t
O
I
.
J
o
0
_
o
_
_
_
o
_
_
_
o
O
_
o
_
o
_
_
.
0
m
(
_
_
:
c
+
_
_
+
m o
Z
_
0
o
_
'
_
.
,
_
o
_
o
h
_
_
0
_
f
t
_
o
d
'
d
"
_
o
o
_
.
_
,
,
,
_
_
_
_
,
0
o
_
_
0
_
_
t
_
_
l
_
_
.
_
'
o
0
_
N
I
T
I
I
u Z m I
T
I
m Z
m r
r
l
I
T
I
I
0
m ,
0
'
,
0
,
0
,
0
",,,,". 'r,ft ..
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
A
conducted. into the shield and supporting
ture where it is absorbed.
A suitable material for the ablation heat shield
is, reinforced with. fiberglass.
Th.;- ph('>nolic. ablates at 800 F. lea.ving the
glass which ablates at 230d
j
F. Cons id.e rable
energy is radiated to from the ablating
fiberglass The he.at of evaporation
used for phenolic and fiberglass is 1000 BTU/Lb.
The heat of ablation used is the heat
-.)1' evaporati.:m of the ablating material plus
.45 of the difference between the stagnation
enthalpy and th6 air enthalpy at the surfaCt'l
temperature. The reduction il:!. aerodynamic
heating due to the blockage etl'ect of
tion is introduced by the enthalpy difference
term in the effective heat of ablation.
Figure shows a typical cross section of
the shield during the ablation process, the
equations used to determine the effective heat
of ablation and the weight of material ablated
at the outer surface, and ablating temperatures.
The above calculation procedure is used to
determine the required thickness of an ablation
heat shield for the simulated lunar re-entry
trajectory . The design of the ablation shield
..
is based on USing some of the phenyl-silane
fiberglass as insulation to limit the maximum
temperature of backup structure to 500
0
F. The
ablation shield thickness required for the
lated lunar vehicle is shown in Figure
as a function of re-entry angle. Figure
also shows the of phenolic
binder and fiberglass ablated, and the tot&.l
weight ablated. If the Mercury concept
0f utilizing 02 inches of the heat shield th.ie-k-
ness for structure is used on the lunar re-entry
miSSion, the Mercury heat shield is satisfactory,
as is for angles steeper than -5.6
degrees 0 With moderate increase of the heat
shield thickness the range of allowable re-entry
angles could be extended to even lower values 0
A time history of some ablation parameters is
shown in Figure 6.6-8. The curves are for an
ablation material and insulation thickness of
.75 inch, which is not enough to limit the
backup structure to 500
0
F. for the most criti-
cal re-entry angle shown. in Figure This
figure shows that the phenolic binder ablates
during the skip portion of the trajectory, but
that the fiberglass does not.
A structural description of the ablation shield
and supporting structure is shown in Table
6.6-2 and Figure 6.6-7.

,
t5.6-2
) I
u
_
1
4
4
u
J
f
_
I
,
-
t
_
a
.
Z
_
n
m 1
4
,
1
z m z 1
4
4
Z
0 c
_
L
_
t
o
0 O 0 Z 0 0
0
b
_
o
I
_
-
_
.
_
.
_
-
I
4
.
u
;
_
_
_
_
0
_
<
0
_
.
0
o
.
_
o
b
_
o
_
.
_
_
'
_
_
_
e
.
,
o
_
.
.
_
I
e
.
,
e
_
_
o
0
!
.
o
o
f
_
)
I
r

TABLE 6.6-1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
COMPARISON OF METHODS OF FRONTAL FACE HEAT PROTECTION
TYPE OF PROCESS ADVANTAGES DISADV ANT AGES CONCLUSIONS
Heat Sink Applicable Materials Have Not Applicable for High Surface Melting is a Problem.
(Example - Beryllium) Structural Strength, there- Heating Rates
Requires More Than Five
fore No Support Structure
Low Melting Temperatures Times the Weight of Ablation
Required
High Thermal Conductivity
Shield
Simple and Reliable
Required
In Workable
Range
Heat is Retained in Sink
After Re-Entry
Requires Insulation
Radiation Cooled Applicable for High Heating .Many Materials Have Poor Materials With Adequate
(Example - Pyrographi te) Rates Oxidation Characteristics Thermal Properties are
Heat Absorbed is Small Non-Structural Material
Impractical Due to Lack of
Leads to Attachment Prob-
Structural Strength.
lems. Requires Approximately
Support Structure Required
Twice the Weight of
Ablation Shield.
Insulation May be Required
Low Thermal Conductivity
Required
Ablat ion Shield Applicable for High Limited Test Data to Verify Recommended Method.
(Example - Heating Rates Material Properties.
Efficiency at High Heating
Silane Fiberglas:;)
Low Ablation Temperature Rates Leads to Lightest
Heat Absorbed is Small
Support Structure Required Weight Shield.
Low Temperature Support
Structure
6.6-3

""v ... r .......... ;r'... "', ...........
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
~
! LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
6.6-4
MAXIMUM BERYLLIUM HEAT SHIELD TEMPERATURES
AT STAGNATION POINT
2400
u..
0 1600
I
LLI
011:
::>
~
or:(
011:
LLI
Q.
:E
800
LLI
~
o
- 5.0
MELTING POINT OF BERYLLIUM
VO=36,045 FPS
hO=400,000 FT.
W /C
D
A=77.6 LB/FT.2
CL=O
RN= 6.67FT.
GASEOUS RADIATION NEGLECTED
6 INCH BERYLLIUM THICKNESS
EXTERNAL SURFACE
MAXIMUM WORKING TEMPERATURE
/
-5.4 -5.8 - 6.2 -6.6 -7.0
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGlE- YO-DEGREES
FIGURE 6.6-1
~ A '
--l
0
'
,
0
'
,
,
,
0
,
-
I
=
-
e
v
e
w
,
w
0
m
a
.
O
a
.
Z
_
Z Z
Z n I
,
,
,
-
u
l
u
_
0 0 m "
1
"
g U
m
O
-
.
-
,
_
_
_
w
.
-
"
i
_
m
Z
u
-
o
,
0
.
o
_
o
_
.
_
,
,
,
,
,
,
_
o
_
_
0
0
-
_
*
-
o
>
.
.
_
j
z
,
0
_
)
0 I
.
I
.
I
l
.
n
Q
i
(
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 O
'
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
U
3
I
C
.
O
x
i
I
D
f'
I
,
11
i 1
I
I
II
.....
0
w

::I
I-
<I:

w
Il..
::E
w
I-
FIGURE 6.6-2
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TYPICAL TIME HISTORY OF BERYLLIUM HEAT SINK
2800
2400
2000
1600
1200
800
400
0 .... --
o 100
GASEOUS RADIATION NOT INCLUDED
Yo = -5.38
0
Vo = 36,045 FPS
hO = 400,000 FT.
W/CDA = 77.6 LB/FT.2
C
L
= 0
RN = 6.67FT.
6 INCH BERYLLIUM THICKNESS
-- I I I
EXTERNAL SURFACE
n
I
I
, "F ... .. ' ... ' p+ i ........
- .... ... ... .......... "
", "L, ---- ----- --- I
liTERNAL SURFACE I [' .--j
;,,' I ,I - -- .
" I . i _.- --+1----1--
, I+--, - HEAT SHIELD -1
,____ S ttl
I TAGNATION --
, I ,
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
TIME-SECONDS (AFTER 400,000 FT.)
CQNFIDENTIAL
""""""'
6.6-5
c
_
Q
C
_
!
C
T
'
o
0 L
-
z
'
j
I
,
0
I
u
.
_
0
b
I
O o O
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
-
F
0 0 0
,
,
,
,
,
iI I
"
1
"
1
_
o
Z _
>
i
I
C
Z
'-
r
l
m
o
_
0
0
0
O
0
O
O
O
\
I
,
M
X m Z _
>
f
i
C r
_
m
_
,
z
"
.
.
.
_
.
0
0
I
I
i
i
_
I
I
I
I
-
r
-
N
I
I
.
-
i
'
1
0
.
'
,
M
O
_
Q
m
,
I
'
M
X m
C -
<
Q "
r
"
m m
l
I
=
I
=
I
I
=
I
=
I
"
-
4
f
_
m m
I
G
m "
0
m
m Z m Z m m m
m m
m 0
m
.
,
=
I
,
0
_
I
D
,
o
_
0
1
ENGINEERING,REPORT 6919
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CONE'??'I L
MAXIMUM PYROGRAPHITE HEAT SHIELD TEMPERATURES
AT STAGNATION POINT
8000
6000
u..
0
I
W ~
-
~
~
....
4000

~
w
Q.
~
w
....
2000
...
o
- 5.0 - 5.4
INITIAL
6.6-6
/.
Vo= 36,045FPS
h O=400,OOOFT,
W /COA= 37. 5 l B / F T ~
Cl=O
RN= 6.67FT.
1.5 INCH PYROGRAPHITE
/' EXTERNAL SURFACE
V INTERNAL SURFACE
/
- 5.8 - 6.2 - 6.6
C
- 7.0
1
FIGURE 6.6-3
O
,
,
-
i
#
_
w
D
0
w
a
.
_
E
1
,
1
,
1
1
.
1
.
1
m
i
-
-
1
,
1
,
1
Z m I
J
L
I
1
,
1
,
1
Z u Z 1
.
1
.
1
a -
.
I
-
r
I
-
-
-
l
-
r
_
"
_
(
.
9
_
=
_
o
_
0
c
o
_
-
-
_
"
o
_
o
"
"
,
_
=
_
,
_
o
,
_
.
u
_
_
.
a
.
.
.
,
o
z
H
H
.
U
_
'
,
I
,
-
-
o
0
0
_
"
.
Z
u
_
u
,
_
0
z
o
_
_
o
! '
I
! ! !
8
|
i
8 0
i
_
o
-
]
_
A
l
V
t
l
]
d
W
3
1
I I
D
o
I
I
I
.f
I I
COIIFlP?'TIAL
--
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TYPICAL TIME HISTORY OF PYROGRAPHITE HEAT SHIELD
----- HEAT SHIELD CORNER
--STAGNATION POINT
u..
0
I
u.a
~
:::>
l-
e:(
~
u.a
c..
~
u.a
I-
FIGURE 6.6-4
8000
6000
4000
2000
o
o
,
EXTERNAL SURFACE
INTERNAL SURFACE
YO=-6.0
VO=36/045 FPS
h 0=400/000 FT.
W /CDA = 37.5 LB/FT.2
CL =0
RN= 6.67FT.
1.5 INCH PYROGRAPHITE
------
-------
200 400 600
TlME(AFTER 400,000FL) -SECONDS
CON FIDEI e ! ! 5 !
800
6.6-7
(
_
!
C
o
_
o
=
o
-
_
o
c
-
-
Z
-
-
-
-
J
g
Z
Z
_
_
-
.
\
,
N
r
-
-
_
"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
_
g
'
z
m
O
_
Z
_
P
Z
m
r
-
m Z m Z m
m u Z
m m
m 0
m -
-
.
,
0
_
0
,
o
_
o
C
_
O
_
I
o
i
i
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
--
rn'.F.nF, '7' ' 7
BASIS OF ABLATION SHIELD
CALCULATION METHOD
.2 BACKUP STRUCTURE
HONEYCOMB SUPPORT STRUCTURE
THE EFFECTIVE HEAT OF ABLATION:
HE = 1000 + .45 (is - iw)
THE AMOUNT ABLATED:
w = il[ qs
ASSUMPTIONS:
-q" - qk 1 dl LB/FT2
HE
FIBER-GLAS ABLATES @ 2300 OF
PHENOLIC ABLATES @ 800 of
(REFER TO SECTION 6.5 FOR NOMENCLATURE)
ABLATION MATERIAL
PLUS INSULATION

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SURFACE
POSITION
ABLATION MATERIAL PLUS
INSULATION AFTER ABLATION
b J
l FI."GLAS
ABLATED
PHENOLIC ABLATED
6.6-8
)
-4 -
j
FIGURE 6.6-5
O
_
O
_
u
9
,
0
,
-
;
-
i
v
0
m
=
-
:
E
L
U
l
a
.
I
0
a
.
u
d
Z
u
_
1 I
L
l
1
,
1
.
1
Z
1
0 Z L
U
u
l
L
I
d
1
.
1
.
1
=
E
<
[
<
[
Q
.
_
3
u
i
1 -
r
-
I
.
/
1
I
-
.
-
<
[
I
.
L
I
"
I
-
Z 0 1 C
O
<
{
o
o
o
o
o
o
,
o
0
r
_
.
S
(
]
N
Q
O
d
-
I
H
O
I
]
M
0 I
'
%
I
o Z
u
=
u
J
i
-
-
,
0
o
_
,
t
0
o
,
_
t
'
-
0
C
O
U
l
0
_
I
I
I
_
,
o
,
o
{
,
o
_
-
r
_
r
_
"
o
"
o
-
c
>
_
u
,
,
,
z
a
U
,
.
_
_
(
_
u
.
.
0
/
_
n
3
_
n
-
-
/
m
/
I
I
_
_
_
_
,
_
F
-
-
_
o
.
_
-
-
l
z
,
-
l
!
_
_
/
_
_
_
_
I
_
_
m
l
I
_
Z
l
>
_
z
_
=
_
l
_
_
!
!
-
_
_
"
Z
_
,
'
-
_
"
/
.
_
,
'
=
Z
/
<
{
<
{
_
u
u
_
-
,
.
_
-
-
-
_
u
-
_
-
-
:
_
-
1
.
.
,
,
,
o
.
.
u
r
n
3
_
,
,
,
_
l
Z
_
.
I
,
_
'
o
-
S
]
H
3
N
I
-
S
S
]
N
N
3
1
H
I
]
_
I
_
]
i
_
W
C
_ I
_
D
_
D
I
q
:
)
0 h
_
,
I
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ABLATION HEAT SHIELD PARAMETERS
VI
w
h
O
= 400,000 FT.
VO= 36,045FT/SEC
W /C
O
A=37 .46LB/FT 2
CL=O
R
N
=6.67FT.
.8
.7
I
BASIC MERCURY TOTAL THICKNESS
IJ
ABLA TlON MATERIAL
PLUS INSULATION REQ'O
TO LIMIT
STRUCTURE TO 500
0
F
I '
I
3 .6 BASIC MERCURY ABLATION & INSULATION
z
.5
w
Z
::.::
.4
J:
....
.....
ct .3
tX
w
....
ct
.2
.1
I1\. I I I
. ,
FIBERGLASS ABLATED
CHAR MA TERIAL
0' ! !
-5.0 -6.0 -7.0
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE,
YO -OEGREES
FIGURE 6.6-6

-----
ABLATION MATERIAL
PLUS INSULATION
,20IN. BACK-UP
STRUCTURE
! il!'!!!! i:I!!!!! t'-'HONEYCOMB
SUPPORT STRUCTURE
130
120
VI 100
c
z
=>
o 90
D-
,
....
J:
C) 80
w
!:
70
60
c-
I
I
+- ]
I --+- - I
+ -----r----l
j , -,

---,
50
-5.0 -6.0 -7.0
INITIAL RE-ENTRY ANGLE,
YO
eo", '.sun",
6.6-9
c
_
c
_
!
0
B
1
> >
_
o
_
_
'
_
o
,
_
.
o
o
0
t
B
_
0
_
-
o
_
o
!
o
_
Q
I
n
"
O
q
0
"
0 0
c
r
_
o 0
0 & 0 m
0
q
m 0
o o
0
t
_
B
o m o
_
o
t
_
o o
o
t
_
e
.
i
-
(
1
)
e
'e
-
0
_
u
B
t
_
:
:
r
I
,
.
.
,
B
o
_
_
o
_
o
o
0 o
!
0 .
>
.
o
g
q
o
> t
n
Z
o B
o
o
o
0
8
e
,
*
-
o
t
_
0 t
_
0
m z m Z m m i
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
_
-
-
4
_
J
!
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
-
eOJQPiDENTIAL
TABLE 6.6-2
ABLA TION SIllELD AND SUPPORT STRUCTURE
ABLATION SmELD
Shingle Layup
SUPPORTING STRUCTURE
Outer Parallel Laminate
Inner Parallel Laminate
Fiberglass Honeycomb
DESIGN DATA
6.6-10
Fiberglass Laminate Layed 20
0
to Local Tangent for Optimum Ablation
Performance.
Considered to be Non-Structural for Airloads and Landing Impact Loads.
Total Shingle Layup for Ablation Shield Includes Insulation Thiclmess
Required to Limit Temperature of Supporting Structure to 500
0
F.
Compression Cap of Supporting Structure.
Surface Temperature Limited to 500
0
F. to Retain Required Strength.
Tension Cap of Supporting Structure.
Maximum Operating Temperature is 100
0
F.
Bonded to Parallel Lamimted Fiberglass Caps.
Shear Carrying Member of Support Structure.
Landing Impact Load is Approximately Same as Mercury (100 g Ultimate).
Strength Shall be Such That the Pressure Vessel is Not Punctured on Landing
Maximum Airloading is 1800 PSF Ultimate and Occurs During Re-Entry.
All Inertia Loading Conditions are Less Critical.
---l
0 a
.
1
4
,
1
0 z i I
,
M
M
M
z m 0 z M
_
O
,
O
,
M
J
a
.
M
_
z
r
_
.
.
J
m -
r
Z o
z
z
o
z
_
,
_
o
-
_
,
z
"
f
f
.
_
,
0
>
.
.
'
_
z
O
>
.
.
_
-
,
0
-
,
0
Z
_
,
,
,
Z
_
_
y
_
f
-
_
-
-
-
_
,
,
-
,
,
I
,
,
-
,
,
I
I
t
.
O
L
_
!
I
t
.
O
I
,
I
,
I
I
I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ABLATION SHIELD AND SUPPORT STRUCTURE
K PARALLEL LAMINATE STRUCTURAL
FACE PLATES FOR HONEYCOMB
SANDWICH
FIGURE 6.6-7
6.67FT. RADIUS
C O N F I ~
}
SHINGLE LAY-UP
PHENYL SILANE FIBERGLASS
ABLATION SHIELD
INSULATION THICKNESS
FIBERGLASS
HONEYCOMB SANDWICH
SUPPORTING STRUCTURE
6.6-11
/
/
;
?
/
:
J
c
_
I
o
!
C
0
O
.
-
i
m
i
o O i
-
n
o Z t
/
1
,
-
-
I
m
_
0 0
b
0
,
0 o -
=
I
-
,
4
C
,
,
0
0
0
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
-
F
X
_
_
_
a
_
.
<
0
,
.
-
0
z
_
0
0
_
"
o
o
u
_
o
-
_
I
o
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
_
_
O
,
_
.
.
u
,
g
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
"
-
N
,
'
t
:
,
"
o
_
.
_
J
_
l
=
_
_
o
.
.
.
.
.
I
_
"
"
'0
,
0
,
,
,
,
.
0
_
I
'_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:
:
.
:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
.
o
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_
.
.
_
.
-
-
,
r
I
.
,
_
.
.
.
.
"
,
.
o
I
0
_
.
_
>
_
-
+
_
-
_
_
_
.
_
_
-
i
-
-
.
_
I
z
I
-
-
m
'
%
'
-
I
:
'
I
"
_
I
=
"
,
m
i
i
'
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
.
I
-
_
J
l
"
_
_
.
/
\
l
-
J
.
#
,
-
I
/
I
i
,
>
1
/
"
_
h
'
_
1
1
"
L
I
i
_
F
I
"
"
_
,
_
,
i
I
I
I
i
o
I
/
"
,
,
,
o
,
,
,
o
_
=
"
"
'
_
Z
'
_
-
-
'
-
-
'
-
_
'
:
:
c
c
_
_
Z
"
o
O
_
O
"
I
0
A
B
L
A
T
E
D
T
H
I
C
K
N
E
S
S
-
I
N
C
H
E
S
O
z
i
i
m Z o n Z I
'
1
'
1
I
'
n
m
u
_
Z
m -
o
O
m
m
m
O
m -
-
,
@
,
,
0
'
,
0
J
,
,
o
,
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
co", '11111'"
6.
hO=400,000 FT.
VO=36,045 FPS
ABLATION TIME HISTORY
W jCDA=37.46 LB.jFT.
2
R
N
=6.67 FT.
Y
O
=-5.13
_
--. r ABLATION MATERIAL
Xo PLUS INSULATION
=c-=----:------t-/ .20 IN. BACKUP
CL=O
XO=.75 IN.
SUPPORT

THICKNESS OF PHENOLIC ABLATED ............... .. .. 1
.............. ""'I ---j--+---.......,
......... .. .. .. f .. .... .......... r ................ i I I ' .36
I .................... rTHICKNESS OF FIBERGLASS ABLATED i I
+-----+.- ............ [.... I- I . I I I /.I""""''''''''!, .. : .32
i --J.. I ;., I I 28
/c l ' J ...... I I'
f ................................. .... 1 .......... .. ........ ...... .... .... , ...... ..... ..
I I If... ..... -_ .. .24
! ...... I I
I I If .:/ 1 .2 0
f / SURFACE TEMPERATURE
. . _. -- -r---t---
! !
f=- .12
Vii - ABLATING PHENOLIC SURFACE TEMPERATURE -!
: : ' I' II .08 : : . I
o ,i / \! I 1 : .04
./ f LBACKUP STRUCTURE TEMPERATURE
././ 1 I I I 0
o 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
TlME-100 SECONDS (AFTER 400,000 FT. ALTITUDE)

VI
w
::x::
u
z
I
VI
VI
w
Z

u
::x::
....
o
w
....

...I
a::I

FIGURE 6.6-8
--l
i
v
,
j
j
0
=
a
.
_
E
i
v
I
,
l
l
,
,
I
I
,
l
l
,
I
w
;
i
I
_
_
_
o
o
.
_
o
0
_
,
-
,
o
_
,
_
o
_
o
_
1
_
o
0
.
_
o
_
o
_
_
_
_
o
_
_
_
.
_
o
_
_
.
_
_
_
.
o
.
_
_
_
_
o
o
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
_
_
o
o
Z
:
_
@
)
!
-
,
-
I
o
o
_
_
_
_
_
_
o

o
o
o
i
i
o
o
?
o
_
_
_
o
_
I
4
-
_
I
:
_
g
_
(
_
(
g
0
,
r
4'
_
0
k
O
_
"
_
O
r
'
)
!
M
_
,
S
I I
I
, (
J
: i(
!
i
I:'
I
... -'-' .. --:..'
I __

.. . l. 1_,,'-
,
Aterbody Heat Protection
Heat protection o the conical aterbody struc-
ture is provided by exte:rnal L-605 supera1J.oy
and niobium base alloy shingles and insulation.
The shingles are separated from the inte:rnal,
load carrying, titanium pressure skin by hat
stringers thus forming a heat transfer shield.
The greatest heat protection, however, is ob-
tained from the loose fiberous insulation with
a reflective external cover and the hard bonded
insulation located on the outer surfaces of the
pressure skin and the stringer respectively.
Figure 6.6-9 gives the heat protection shingle
data.
The temperature protection realized during a
typical lunar re-entry can be noted by compar-
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
ing the aterbody surface temperature history
o Figure 6.6-10 with the pressure skin and
stringer crown temperature histories of Figure
6.6-11. Figure 6.6-10 also presents typical
re-entry time histories of the head of the high
temperature bolt which attaches the shingle
and insulation to the crown of the titanium
structural hat. The cabin atmosphere tempera-
ture for a typical lunar re-ent!7 included in
Figure 6.6-10 is lim! ted to 160
0
F. by the
environmental control system. The increase of
the cabin air temperature at the lower alti-
tudes is partially due to the reduced effective-
ness of the insulation as the air denSity
increases. Figures 6.6-10 and 6.6-11 are shown
or wjCnA of 77.6, and can be related to the
lower w/Crf. of the simulated lunar re-entry
vehicle the aid of Figure 6.5-15.
6.6-13
CONFIDt .. IIXZ%.
I
Z 0
m z 0 m z m m m Z
m
m
m
m
0
0 O
_
!
c
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
~ ,, ... or
6.6-14
HEAT PROTECTION SHINGLE DATA
~
T' PRESENT MERCURY
SHI NGLE SPLICE JOINT ~
SI D 1.70 1.39
TEMP.( 0 F) __ 1370 1370
TYPICAL SHINGLE
PLAN VIEW
1.00
1500
.7 5 .59 .52
1670 1925 2075
SHINGLES SAME AS MERCURY EXCEPT WHERE TEMPERATURE EXCEEDS
1800
0
F IN WHICH CASE SHINGLES ARE NIOBIUM. MATERIAL CHANGE
IS MADE AT AN EXISTING MERCURY SHINGLE SPLICE JOINT
MAXIMUM ELONGATION OF NIOBIUM SHINGLES IS .19 IN. MOUNTED
ON SLIP JOINTS.
HIGH EMISSIVITY PAINT ON ALL SHINGLES.
~ eo", IDE"" ~
D
FIG URE 6.6-9
---1
I
\
0
0
0
0
_
0
0
-
O
L
o
-
O
g
L
-
0
0
_
-
0
0
-
0
0
_
L
_
I
_
D 0 v
-
4
I
_
D
G 0
I
I

I
'I
I
" t
"

II
: t
!: f
! I
I
2400
2000
u..
1600
0
w
c.::

1200
l-
e:(
c.::
w
Co..
::E 800
w
I-
400
o
FIGURE 6.6-10
COI4I i2 I. IT! 0,
--
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
TYPICAL CABIN ATMOSPHERE
AND AFTERBODY SURFACE TEMPERATURES
Y
O
=-6.50
,
0 F V 0 =36,0,45 FPS
0 = 400,000 FT. --+-----1-------
W/CDA LB/FT 2
I---------I-------+-----\ __ +--C L =
0
I I
PARACHUTE DEPLOYMENT AT 70,000 FT.
0.3 INCH
i
FIBERGLASS
i
INSULATION (7 LB/ FT 3)
l-------1[------j---\----+-----+--f--S / D = .5'9 ------1-----
I
TEMPERATURE
@S/D=. 5
I
CAB I NAT M 0 S P HER E
TEMPERATURE
I __ __ __
o 100 200 300 400 500 600
TlME-SEC.(AFTER 400,000 FT.)
I I I I I I 1)
0000 00 0
o 0 0 LO 0 ......
-.:t M N
ALTITUDE-lOOO FT.
.... rlAl
6.6-15
I
I
-
=
1
0
I
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
-
O
F
J
I
-
a
I
-
"
m
_
-
8
8 z o
r
j
,
u
,
-
-
v
,
i
0
0
O
-
r
_
,
4
_
.
,
0
-
-
i
I
Z
i,
,
n
C
.
I
I
0
0
"
I
_
C
o
_
_
,
o
_
.
z
_
,
-
<
_
0
,
I
0
m
o
,
o o
m Z O m Z m m i Z
m m
m
m
0
m
_
0
_
0
_
0
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
..-
CONFIDENTIAl
TYPICAL AFTERBODY STRUCTURAL TEMPERATURES
u..
0
w

::>
I-
<

w
Q..
:E
w
I-
6.6-16
SID = 0.59
1600 -----------.-----------,--
1200
800
400
100 200
INSU LA TlON
J
TI STRINGER CROWN
PRESSURE SKIN
YO = -6.50 -
Vo = 36,045 FPS
hO = 400,000 FT.
W/COA = 77.6
C
L
= 0
PARACHUTE DEPLOYMENT AT 70,000 FT.
SID = 0.59
fl STRINGER CROWN
---------
300 400 500 600
TIME - SECONDS (AFTER 400,000FT.)
FIGURE 6.6-11
CONEma IE i b
-<
O
'
O
'
0
m
L
0
L _
a
Z m w I
,
M
z m 0 z w
t
'
-
,
3
,
3
,
i
:
:
1
0
m
o
,
-
-
I
O
e
-
t
I
I
)
%
,
-
-
-
t
%
I
_
N
}
,
-
I
_
4
j
_
o
O
0
o
0
.
_
_
,
-
-
I
m
o
_
_
o
.
i
J
0
0
o
.
_
,
-
I
N
_
o
_
m
r
-
I
r
/
]
"
g
_
0
_
+
.
q
.
_
_
_
_
!
a
1
1
.
,
o
_
.
.
_
r
4
,
_
/
i
I
I
-
I
4
j
.
,
4
o
_
o
_
o
_
I
1
_
.
M
4
_
.
_
O
X
,
,
_
.
_
_
.
;
_
0
0
_
t
4
.
_
0
_
.
_
o
?
_
_
,
_
0
0
_
0
o
,
=
t
,
_
g
+
'
o
c
O
;
-
4
,
-
I
_
O
_
0
"
,
_
o
o
.
,
'
4
O
.
r
-
t
_
N
O
o
0 .
o
.
_
o
_
,
-
4 !
t
'
-
I
I
'I
I
I I
I I

1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.7 STRUCWRAL CONSIDERATIONS
'!he unmanned lunar orbit re-entry mission re-
quires certain changes to the basic Mercury
vehicle. changes are discussed in detail
in Section 6.2 and their structural implications
are summarized in Table 6.7-1.
Structural Environment
The various environmental conditions and their
effect on the structural design are discussed
individually in the succeeding paragraphs.
'!hermal Environment
The thermal environment during re-entry is dis-
cussed fully in Section 6.5 and structural design
of the shingles and front face heat shield are
discussed in Section 6.6.
Equilibrium surface temperatures on the launch
fairing are shown in Figure 6.7-1. The maximum
temperature, which occurs on the three inch
radius nose, is obtained using the theory of Fay
and Riddell for the stagnation point heating
rates. Away from the stagnation point the tem-
peratures are obtained by the Reference Temperature
Method for a cone.
The nose cap which reaches a temperature of
1570
0
F. is a nickel or cobalt super alloy. The
remainder of the fairing is constructed of
Bl20VCA titanium, chosen for its good formabil-
ity and excellent mechanical properties at the
temperatures shown.
Adapter temperatures are held below 300
0
F. by
the shielding effect of the fairing during the
launch trajectory. Aluminum alloy 202OT6 is
selected as optimum material for this appli-
cation except in areas requiring electromag-
netic transparency, where fiberglass is used
as noted in Figure 6.2-1.
wad Environment
wngitudinal load factors during boost are
shown in Figure 6.7-2. The effects of drag
coefficient and initial re-entry angle on re-
entry longitudinal load factors are shown in
Figure 6.5-3 of Section 6.5. '!he time history
of load factors during re-entry for six possible
trajectories is shown in Figure 5-4 of
Section 6.5. Air loads on the jettisonable
fairing during boost are given in Figure
6.7-3. Critical loading on the capsule and
adapter are presented in Figure 6.7-4, and
the structure to support these loads is shown
in Figure 6.7-5.
Micrometeorite Environment
Exposure time for the lunar re-entry vehicle
is small in comparison to the fourteen day
vehicle. '!he environmental description given
for the latter vehicle applies here; however,
this vehicle only has 590 square feet of vul-
nerable area exposed for one-fourth
yielding a safety probability of .99999.
iu '9NfIRUZ' ....
6.7-1
O
_
!
r
o
w
_
_
o
_
0
_
"
_
0
o
_
_
_
o
_
_
_
[
i
1
m Z m Z m m m
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
m -
,
I
-
-
'
0
,
,
,
0
'
,
0
(
,
,
n
J
,
,
0
,
0
o
.
i
-
,
.
r
A
i
_
I
-
b
i
-
,
.
_
m
c
+
m
G
m
_
o
o
o
_
,
_
o
I
cOt'! ,,,,aL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.7-2
Radiation Environment
']he corpuscular radiation environment is dis-
cussed in Section 4.12. The structural mate-
rials most susceptible to radiation damage
are rubber and glass. For the small dosage
expected, suitable inhibitors will penni t this
mission to be completed with II ttle or no
deterioration.
Acoustic Environment
During the boost phase, the noise loading is slightly
less than that of the basic Mercury vehicle due to
the greater distance from the capsule to the engines.
However, it is conservatively assumed that Mercury
engine sound levels apply during Atlas stage firing.
Aerodynamic noise is also less during boost because
of the higher weight to thrust ratio and consequent
higher altitude for a given velocity. Predicted
acoustic loads are shown in Figure 6.7-6.
--I
_
0
.
-
.
e
v
e
_
w
0
w
L
u
J
I
,
M
u
J
Z u
J
L
u
z 0 Z
u
.
i
I
_
o
_
c
l
_
_
0
0 N
m
_
_
_
_
t
_
I
0
o
c
O
!
b
_
b
_
AI
I
I
I 'I
, 1
'I
j
11
I
I I
CONFibEi de,.
i LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
TABLE 6.7-1
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
STRUCTURAL COMPARISON WITH MERCURY
Manned
Heat Shield
Escape System
Adapter
Shingles
Fairing
Capsule
MERCURY
Yes
.6 Inches of Ablation Material
Towe r Mounted Solid Rockets
Attaches at Heat Shield -
Titanium for Boost Temperatures
L-605 Material
None Required
Double Wall Titanium with Longitudinal
Stringers
1m 'flOENTlAL
LUNAR SIMULATION VEmCLE
No
Same as Mercury
Unmanned Vehicle-None Required
Attaches at Safety Tower Support Ring.
Aluminum Alloy Due to Lower Boost Temper-
atures since Adapter is Covered by Fairing.
L-605 Shingles Except Where Temperature
Exceeds 18000F in Which Case Shingles are
Niobium.
Vehicle and Adapter Enclosa:l in Titanium
Fairing to Reduce Drag.
Same as Me rcury
6.7-3
o
_
0
,
i
O
J o
,
L
-
z
'
J
e
!
T
E
M
P
E
R
A
T
U
R
E
-
F
-
.
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
6
:
o
F
A
I
R
I
N
G
/
E
J
E
C
T
I
O
N
r
n
Z
0
m Z I
'
1
'
I
I
T
'
I
m
u
_
Z
m
"
a
0
m
m
3
"
u
m
0
m
-
'
O
_
,
,
0
'
,
0
,
,
o
_
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CONFIDENTIAL
FAIRING TEMPERATURES
DURING LAUNCH
VEHICLE SURFACE EMISSIVITY=0.9

NOSE
12001 .... 1 1 1
6.7-4
-..e & 18 PI 1111'1 1 ,..
FIGURE 6.7-1
O
_
O
_
O
_
O
_
_
0
,
m
l
L
U
0 L i
v
0
L
Z m Z i
0 z
!
L
"
-
g
o
I
5
,
9
-
z
u
_
I
O
.
I
.
D
V
:
I
a
v
o
1
1
V
N
I
O
n
.
I
.
1
9
N
O
1
!
I
L_
0
I
1
- CONFIDE'" ' ....
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
7
'"
6
C>
I
N
c
I:IIi:
5
0

u
4(
I,&.
4
c

0
....
..... 3
4(
Z
C

2

C>
Z
0
.....
1
o
FIGURE 6.7-2
LONGITUDINAL LOAD FACTOR S
DURING LAUNCH AND BOOST PHASES
I
r-- FIRST STAGE- STAGE--
I
)
J

V
/

o 100 200 300 400 500
TIME FROM LAUNCH - SECONDS
k G2"SlPst'JJt'
JPL STAGE-
o 100 200 300
TIME FROM START OF STAGE
- SECONDS
6.7-5
m Z 0 m Z m m u
_
Z
m m
m
_
0
m
_
!
b
FE.nc"TY.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
~ . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.7-6
FAIRING DESIGN AIR LOADS
6
14.32xl0 IN. LBS
4550 LBS. -111 ... 1 -------
S7,SOO LBS.
BOOSTER ATTACH.
STATION
----l!L-1:I' ~ - - 1 i
-----J;
AIR LOADS SHOWN ARE APPLIED AT THE FAIRING <t . AN ELLIPTICAL DISTRIBUTION
IS USED WITH RESPECT TO PROJECTED AREA .
LOADS ARE ULTIMATE AND POSITIVE AS SHOWN. ULTIMATE LOAD = 1.5 LIMIT LOAD.
THIS CRITICAL CONDITION OCCURS AT 35,000 FT. WIND SHEARS ARE INCLUDED.
THESE LOADS MAY BE ROTATED, AS A UNIT, ANY DEGREE ABOUT THE ct..
DESIGN TEMPERATURES ARE SHOWN IN FIGURE 6.7-1.
POSITIVE PRESSURE CONDITIONS ON THE FAIRING BODY ARE LESS CRITICAL.
CON EI QliN I!j\t.
r-
IS.0 PSI
FIGURE 6.7-3
O
,
O
,
i
m
0
a
_
1
4
,
1
=
i
0 Z
m
=
I
L
U
1
4
4
Z m Z 1
1
4
4
O
,
u
'
1
O
,
1
4
4
I
o
=
E
1
4
,
1
a
.
1
4
,
1
I
I I
, 'PRa'l' 0 ,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CAPSULE AND ADAPTER CRITICAL LOADI NG
FAIRING (REF.)
ADAPTER C.G.
MODIFIED MERCURY
VEHICLE
983,900 IN.#
(520,000IN.#)

4350
lZO'OOOINfSj 21,800#
21800#.
(7,050#) #
4050 # 4,050
(3,900#)
BOOSTER ATTACH.
FIGURE 6.7-4
STATION
LOADS ARE ULTIMATE AND POSITIVE AS SHOWN APPLIED TO STRUCTURE
ULTIMATE LOAD = 1.5 LIMIT LOAD.
LOADING CONDITION IS LAUNCH INERTIA JUST BEFORE FIRST STAGING
THE VEHICLE AND ADAPTER ARE SHIELDED FROM AIR LOADS BY THE FAIRING
DESIGN TEMPERATURES ARE SHOWN IN FIGURE 6.7-1
PROJECT MERCURY SAFETY TOWER SUPPORT LOADS ARE SHOWN
IN PARENTHESES FOR REFERENCE
t "'IFlsn'l'"
6.7-7
i
m
,
,
-
i
C
r
-
o
o
o
i
,
,
,
o
o
o
"
T
I
I
o
,
,
"
O
m
I
em Ii :CEN IIAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
--
6.7-8
FAIRING
CORRUGATED SKIN (TYP.)
hl--------- + -----
STRUCTURAL CONFIGURATION
LIGHTENING HOLES (TYP.)
u
TYPICAL LONGERON
CRITICAL SECTION AT
BOOSTER ATTACHMENT
ADAPTER
CORRUGATED SKIN (TYP)
1lr
TYPICAL LONGERON
CRITICAL SECTION AT
CAPSULE ATTACHMENT
ST ATION 'k"----- // ST ATION
LONGERON (TYP.)---" -----r-r LONGERON (TYP.)
STRUCTURAL RING (TYP.) STRUCTURAL RING (TYP.)
SHEAR & BEARING PIN (TYP.)
-HALF SHELLS ARE HELD TOGETHER BY BEARING LOADS INDUCED
BY PRE-LOADING CIRCUMFERENTIAL TENSION STRAPS AGAINST
BUILT IN WARP OF THE FAIRING. PRE-LOAD PREVENTS GAPPING
OF SHELLS THROUGHOUT LAUNCH PERIOD UNTIL THEY ARE
JETTISONED.
_ ADAPTER MATERIAL IS 2020-T6 ALUMINUM
_ DESIGN TEMPERATURE-JOO 0 F.
-FAIRING MATERIAL IS B-120VCA TITANIUM, AGED
-DESIGN TEMPERATURES SHOWN ON FIGURE 6.7-1
FIGURE 6.7-5
'- ....., SQNFlpENTlAL .I
0
,
0
'
,
M 0
'
,
O
,
I
=
=
J
_
,
u
J
0
_
u
J
u
J
0
_
-
u
J
Z
B
j
_
,
,
-
-
I
.
M
u
J
z
m
0
z l
.
u
"
I
z
o
>
'
Z
o
_
o
Z
_
0
0
0
!
L
'
-
-
I
L
'
-
-
=
=
0 i
_
=
_
tONFIBEt iii S' _
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
CAPSULE EXTERNAL NOISE ENVIRONMENT
MAXIMUM SOUND LEVEL FOR ADEQUATE SERVICE LIFE
(F-l0l EXPERIENCE AND MAC LAB TESTS)
..a
"'C
I
.....
140 I\; I zLs..:: I
IoU 120. . ... _ .. _. _n ... u __
> _ _ iii
IoU
.....
IoU
100
1" I I I
In
o I I I
Z EXTERNAL
..... 80 AERODYNAMIC NOISE
.....

CI:
IoU
> 60 I \
o NOISE AT CAPSULE
i , I
FRO M BOOS TE REt>! GIN E
40 ,

o 20 40 60 80 100 120 0
TIME FROM LAUNCH-SECONDS
FIGURE 6.7-6
II.
20 40 60 80 100
TIME FROM RE-ENTRY
AT 400,000 FEET -SECONDS
CONFIDEN I 'XE ..
6.7-9
O
h
a
o
l
o
o
_
o
_
_
o
_
,
+
_
o
_
_
o
_
'
_
_
.
_
.
.
_
_
_
o
.
.
.
_
.
=
.
_
_
o
_
o
i
_
"
P
_
o
@
_
-
_
0
1
m
M
|
I
'
D
_
.
_
.
o
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
,
,
m
_
,
_
_
-
_
"
_
0
_
-
_
,
_
_
_
.
+
_
_
_
o
0
@
_
I
-
I
e
l
.
i
-
.
_
? a
.
0 F
a
.
+
b
l
!
+
Z 0 m Z m u
Z
m .
=
0
"
4
0
m
m
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
,..,... . r'
I LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTiY]
6.8 ELECTRONICS CONSIDERATIONS
6.8-1
Attitude Control in Orbit
The present Mercury attitude control system is
adequate for the Lunar Orbit Re-entry. Because
ot the large increase in moment of inertia with
the JPL stage attached, the high torque re-
action controls of the present Mercury must be
used. The mission is of short duration (approx-
imately 53 minutes from second stage (Centaur
burnout to JPL light-off) so the !'uel required
(32 pounds) ot which approximately 10 pounds is
included as a safety factor, is less than the
amount provided in the present Mercury (34
pounds) for the automatic control system.
A block diagram of the control system is
shown in Figure 6.8-1. This control system is
used for all portions of the flight from
adapter separation to touchdow with the excep-
tion ot the period during JPL stage firing.
Only minor differences exist between this con-
trol system and the control system of the
present Mercury. The retrograde orientation
command is removed and JPL guidance-ready and
JPL light-off command signals have been added.
In addition an. accurate attitude mode is in-
corporated which reduces the deadband in the
orbit mode from 3 degrees to ~ . 5 degrees
for a short period Just prior to tiring the
JPL stage. Also a signal is added to shut
otf power to the solenoid valves and thrust
chambers during the JPL stage firing. Following
posigrade, the system assumes control in attitude
mode. Since the :flight is of short duration,
sufficient battery power is available for contin-
uously slaving the vertical gyro to the horizon
scanner instead of slaving periodically as is
done in Mercury. During the portion of the
flight where the capsule is attached to i.he JPL
stage the center of gravity of the combined
vehicle is located in a direction from the
reaction control Jets which is opposite to that
ot the present Mercury vehicle. For thil2 reason
the polarity of the control system in pi t;ch and
yaw is reversed from Mercury and must be
swi tched back upon separation from the JPL stage.
It is know that the JPL stage incorporates an
inertial guidance system and this system will
be used during the firing of this stage. Its
function will be merely to minimize all ~ p a c e
rates during firing and tn this manner the re-
entry vehicle will be at the correct flight
path angle at separation from the JPL stage.
If it is later determined that this stagf; has
an attitude control system, the inertial
guidance system could be used for the ent.ire
mission, in place of the Mercury attitude con-
trol system.
O
,
O
,
_
0
,
-
-
e
,
,
u
_
0
m
1
4
4
1
4
4
0
=
"
1
4
d
Z
v
_
1
4
4
1
4
4
z 0 z
u
J
L
,
;
o
:
E
>
.
z
O
l
o m
w z
_
a
_
_
o
:
'
o
o
"
_
.
_
z
_
_
o
o
_
_
z
_
,
z
l
z
z
o z
o
L
o
o
_
_
,
o
>
_
_
.
_
o
o
o
-
.
o
_
o
o
o
_
o
z
z
z
>
_
-
o
o
!
!
c
O
J
[
'" j
IlOCI(
AT liGHT
D.... G 'UIlO-UP
1
FIGURE 6.8-1
COI4I IS 2 FI.t.L
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
BLOCK DIAGRAM OF AUTOMATIC CONTROL SYSTEM
CLOSES ON SIGNAL ftOM 'IOGI.&.""MlI
O,fNS ON SIGNAL flOM ,t,CCHEIOMfTU
lOGIC
MO'OE I
SOlENOID
VALVES
ATTITUDE
L 'PNf'PENlIt!
BLOCK DIAGRAM Of ATTITUDE REFERENCE SYSTEM
TO &"10 fORDun
lOll 'llCESSION SIGNAL lU lo.aUtl
VUTICAl GYIO OUTEt GIM'Al IS PITCH
INNER G1M'AlIS lOll
SPIN ... Xl$ VUTICAl
DllleTIONAl GTRO OUTER (;.I"""L IS YAW
INNlI GIM'AlIS lOll
S,.,.. AXIS NOUU.L TO OIBII PLANE
VEiTICAl GYIO SlAViO TO HOIIZON SCANNER 10 kHP SPIN AXIS VUTICAt
ROll PRECESSION SIGNAL TO VERTICAL G"IO =OSINV
PITCH
(0 0"11 ."n, V. HEAPING Of VEHICLE WITH IEHECT TO Olin PLANE)
O'lteT'aNAL GYIO lOll SlAVED TO lOll OUTPUT Of VUTI(AL GrllO
DllECTIONAl GYIO YAW SlAVED 10 lOLL PUCEBION SIGNAL DEIIVED FIOM \lU1ICAl GYIO AND HOIIZON SCANNU
6.8-2
o
_
C
o
I
t
_
_
_
o
_
_
-
_
c
+
_
_
_
_
o
_
o
_
o
_
_
o
_
_
O
_
o
_
.
_
_
o
_
.
_
_
0
H
_
G
t
_
I
_
m
_
_
c
+
_
.
_
_
.
-
_
_
.
-
'
.
.
_
.
_
_
-
-
_
o
'
-
@
:
_
I
_
:
I
.
I
_
m
.
,
_
@
I
-
,
.
o
.
m
@
I
_
S
o
.
m
o
)
4
_
m
_
0
1
-
_
_
o
'
0
1
-
'
-
_
l
_
_
o
o
I
_
t
_
o
c
+
m Z 0 i Z m m
u Z
m
0
m
m 0
m
cap IS!5CiiAL
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.8-3
Antenna
Figure 6.8-2 is a representative sample of the
Mercury capsule antenna pattern. Due to the
structural similarity between the Mercury escape
tower and the supporting structure of the JPL
final stage it is felt that the bicone antenna
configuration should provide adequate coverage
at minitrack, telemetry, and command frequencies.
However, model testing should be performed on
the configuration to veri ry the pattern.
An alternate design which may be utilized if
the radiation pattern of the bicone does not
comply with the is a carl ty backed
spiral antenna. To assure adequate coverage,
two such antennas in this configuration will
probably be required. The spiral antenna has
an efficiency of approximately 6I::Ifo and the
gain referred to isotropic will be in the
order of -3 db. The weight of the antennas
will be between eight and twelve pounds <
.......
l
m
a
a
0
m
L m
J
J
m
J
J
0
o
.
L
L
m
Z m u
.
m
z m 0 z m
.
m
.
m
Z Z
Z
0 U k
L
m
,
_
m
n
_
Z u
_
m
k
L
m
m
r
k
k
m
> m
_
L
m
-
r
m
m X .
_
m
Z
0 ,
=
,
4
m
_
u
-
r
I
.
-
-
/
I
!
L
U
U
U o o o
I
N
U Z o l
u
!
J
I
i )
CONFiS P'I!AL
"7
[UJNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
FIGURE 6.8-2
ANTENNA PATTERN IN A PLANE CONTAINING
THE LONGITUDINAL AXIS OF THE VEHICLE
WITH TOWER
FREQUENCY = 300 MEGACYCLES
, SGt'ElDOlJl
tt
6.8-4
o
x
_
o I
(
1
D
o
'
o
_
L
l
'
l
t
-
t
I
-
'
.
m
i
.
_
I
n
_
I
-
-
'
o
_
o
,
_
_
.
_
o
_
.
f
f
-
'
_
_
.
.
_
_
_
_
'
_
_
N
!
O
x
I
I
'
1
Z
m Z
m m
_
,
p
l
_
u
_
Z
m "
0
m
m
m
0
m
. . , . . ~ . , .. _=._. ft,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
- -,-
: LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
6.9-1
6.9 EI..Ern'RICAL POWER SYSTEM
Requirements
The mission electrical power requirement break-
down and the load. prof'ile are shown in Table
6.9-1 and Figure 6.9-1 respectively. The load.
prof'ile def'ines the average electrical load f'or
the mission and possible peak loads during
launch, trajectory', re-entry and post landing.
System Description
The electrical power supply consists of' three
1500 watt-hour silver-zinc batteries located
wi thin the capsule. The batteries are isol-
ated f'rom each other by a series of' on-otf'
switches which allows automatic selection to
either position of' one or more batteries de-
pending upon the load demand and battery con-
di tion. A complete f'ailure of' any battery
switches it of'f', isolating it from the rest of
the system. Any two of the batteries are cap-
able of' supplying suff'icient power f'or a:>mpletion
of' the entire mission. Furthermore, in case of'
complete f'ailure of two batteries, suf'f'icient
power is still available f'or completion of' the
entire mission, except that the post landing
period would be reduced f'rom 25 to 12 hours.
--/\
CONEm
s
, 2 IIAL
1
I
-
O
,
w
D
P
-
0 a
.
w 0 Z m l
,
u
w z
m
0
z
u
'
)
O
,
:
E
l
,
U
_
Q
F
_
_
_
0
'
Z
r
_
[
.
-
,
_
,
.
.
.
1
o
m
g
,
_
o
_
,
_
.
_ <
.
0
_
'
'
_
o
_
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
_
_
o
M
M
.
.
_
_
[
.
.
.
,
O
_
0
_
"
O
_
_
O
=
_
d
_
4
.
.
.
.
.
M
_
4
M
M
M
_
'M
0
o o
_
"
_
e
,
i
,
.
_
.
.
r
__
z
.
_
P
-
.
r
_
o c
o
c
o
I
II
:11
1
i:
~ !
ill
i l ~ 1
~ ' I
1
I 1
LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY i
ITEM
TELEMETRY SYSTEM:
Hi-Power and Warm-Up
Peak Transmitting
Command Recetver (2)
Commaod Decoder (2)
Mini-Track
C-Band Transmit
Standby
S-Band Transmit
Standby
HF Rescue Beacon
UHF Rescue Beacon
ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL:
Cabin and Room Equipment Fan
Relays
ASCS:
Calibrator
Rate Gyro (3)
Inertial Platform
Computer
SEQUENTIAL SYSTEM:
Flight Path DeViation Sensor
Relays (Control)
Thrust Cut-off Sensor
Loss-of - Thrust Sensor
Acceleration Sensor
Max. Altitude Sensor
MISCELLANEOUS:
Squibs
Relays (Power System)
SUB TOTALS
Tot. I DC Walt-Hrs.
Tot.1 AC Walt-Hr .
Tot.1 DC Equivalent of AC W.tI-Hr .
Tot.1 DC EqUIvalent Watt-Hr .
WATTS
10.0
12.5
1. 0/ 2. 0
1. 0/2. 0
1.0
24.0
11.0
24.0
11.0
3.0
3.2
18.7
15.0
3.9
19.1
36.0
90.0
60.0
21. 0
30
5
5
4
2
5
8
720.0
15
731. 7
528.3
1590
2322
TYPE
POWER
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
AC
AC
DC
AC
AC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
DC
AC
DC
AC
COiCFlSZ: II' e ,
TABLE 6.9-1
ELECTRICAL POWER REQUIREMENTS
PRE-LAUNCH LAUNCH TRAJECTORY
0.40 HOURS 0.14 HOURS .86 HOURS
WATT-HOURS WATT-HOURS WATT - HOURS
DC AC DC AC DC AC
4.0
1.4 8.6
12.5
17.5 12.5
.8
.3 1.7
.3 .6
.4
.1 .9
2.4 3.2 20.7
1.1
1.5 9.5
2.4
3.2 20.7
1.1 1.5 9.5
7.5 2.6 16.1
6.0 2.1
12.9
1.6 .6 1.2
7.7 2.7 5.6
14.4 5.1 30.9
36.0 12.6 77.3
24.0
8.4 18.0
10.5
12.0 4.2 25.8
2.0 .7 4.3
2.0 .7 4.3
1.6 .6 3.5
.8 .3 1.7
2.0
.7 4.3
3.2 1.1 6.9
.3
6.0 2.1
12.9
106.7 44.8 57.8 15.7 235.9 65.5
GotT !i!!At
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
RE-ENTRY IPOST - LANDING
0.17 HOURS PERlOD-24 HRS.
WATT - HOURS WATT- HOURS
DC AC DC AC
1.7
22.2
.3
.3
.2
3.9
1.9
3.9
1.9
72.0
76.8
3.2
2.6
.7
3.3
6.1
15.3
10.2
3.6
.9 120
2.6 360
62.5 22.3 268.8 360
6.9-2
m Z 0 i Z m m m
_
Z
m -
o
0
m
m
3
"
1
=
w
0
m -
-
'
O
_
,-----CONfIDEIC I IRE.
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.9-3
V)
....
....
7
6
5
4
;:
I
c
3
o
-'
2
1
ELECTRICAL POWER REQUIREMENTS
POWER SUPPLIED BY THREE 1500 WATT HOUR SILVER-ZINC BATTERIES
j I I I I t
INSTANTANEOUS TO 1260 WATTS
l
I
1
I
LJ
I
:

I I
I l- I
I
I I
I
1I0000- IL.J
I I
I I
.!-
!
I I
LAUNCH
I
RE-ENTRY
I
: 4
1
I TRAJECTORy---1 POST LANDING PERIOD -J
I
i I
I I I 1 1 I
I I
r
"'MISSION LOAD AVERAGE
I
I I
I
I
: l
I
I
_._ .....
------
_._._.

_._--- ... _._-
"'._._1-
I ___
I
I I V
I
I I
I
! I
,I
I
o .2 .4 .6 .8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 24.8 25.0 25.2
TIME-HOURS
FIGURE 6.9-1
COl mUD;;: '"
w
0
m
a
.
k
M
k
M
0
a
.
L
U
Z
_
n
m k
M
M
,
I
Z
m
0
Z
l I
0
I
4
.
)
o
_
I
4
_
o
_
4
_
I
4
a
l
0
0
'
t
l
0
0
_
B G
I
_
.
=
1
"
_
I
-
I
0
_
o
_
o
o
I
.
H
I
_
1
!
1
.
1
1
4
I
_
1
_
_
_
_
.
_
e
o
.
_
_
o
_
_
_
.
_
_
_
o
_
O
o
_
o
r
-
4
0
4
_
_
-
I
0
_
-
_
+
_
_
.
_
_
o
_
_
a
_
o
.
_
Q
)
.
M
f
.
)
_
.
.
_
.
_
_
_
-
I_
.
_
0
_
_
o
_
_
o
(
o
!
0
1 U
: i
i '
! I
i
IIlr:,1
111 '
11
Ii
il
,II
I
I
1
1:,1
: tl
ill
I
I I
t
\.:0&
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
6.10 EQUIPMENT J!.i.LNIRONMENTAL CONTROL SYSTEJoi
The Equipment Environmental Control System used
during lunar orbit re-entry is not intended
for life support; its function is to provide
an artificial environment Which will cool and
pressurize the capsule equipment. A comparison
or the primary features of the system and the
basic Mercury system is given in Table 6.10-1,
and a system schematic is presented in Figure
6.10-1.
Pressurization System
Pressurization is furnished by a gaseous
rogen supply which is stored at high pressure
(3000 psi).within the capsule. Nitrogen is
selected as the cabin atmosphere and source
of pressurization since it is readily avail-
able and will not support combustion. The
nitrogen provides a pressure source to feed
the Aqua-Ammonia Refrigerant into the evapor-
ator and to maintain the Aqua-Ammonia in the
liquid state. The nitrogen flow rate from the
tank equals the cabin leakage plus the now
required to feed the Aqua-Ammonia into the
evaporator.
The nitrogen tank pressure is reduced in two
stages. The pressure reducer regulates the
pressure of the rirst stage to approximatEly
180 psi which pressurizes the Aqua-Ammonia
Tank. The second stage of regulation is pro-
duced by the Cabin Flow and Pressure
which, in conjunction with the
Pressure Relief Valve, will maintain a
cabin pressure or riTe pSia at altitudes above
27,000 feet and ambient pressure at lower alti-
tudes.
Heating and Cooling System
Cabin cooling is proTtded by continuously cir-
culating the cabin atmosphere through one side
of the ETaporator with a fan while eT8.porating
the refrigerants in the other side. The refrig-
erants used in the eTaporator are Freon 114
which is supplied externall,. during the pre-
launch phase and aqua-8DIIIonia which is stored
in the capsule and is supplied during the
launch, re-entry, and post landing phases of
operation. Freon 114 rather than aqua-ammonia
is used during the pre-launch phase because it
is non-toxic.
The adTantages of aqua-ammonia as a refrigerant
are its high latent heat of Taporlzation when
compared with other refrigerants (with the ex-
ception of water) and low boiling point at sea
level pressure which makes it suitable for
cooling at all altitudes when the correct sol-
ution of water and ammonia is used. The cor-
rosiveness of ammonia is not considered serious
since, for a simulated lunar re-entry, the time
of operation is expected -to be short.
Due to its low boiling temperature at 14.7 psia,
the aqua-ammonia must be pressurized to be main-
tained in a liquid state at cabin temperatures.
As explained. previously, the gaseous nitrogen
eM IFlPurrr Nt
6.10-1
_
q r
_
Z
m
0
3
"
=
m
0
o
,
o
o
,
o
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
1",lfIRE,rr"
supply is used as a pressurization source. This
pressurization also feeds the refrigerant into
the evaporator. The feed rate is controlled by
the aqua-ammonia control and shut-off valve and
temperature sensor. The temperature sensor
regulates the aqua-ammon1a flov to produce a
constant temperature in the refrigerant line
downstream of the evaporator.
The equipment heat output is more than adequate
for required heating. Therefore, it is only
necessary to supply a cooling unit with appro-
priate controls.
operating Procedure
Pre-Launch Phase- The aqua-ammonia control and
sbut-off yalve is maintained in the closed pos-
ition, and the air circulati.cn fan is "on" con-
tinuously. The cabin atmosphere is cooled
during the pre-launch phase of operation by
Freon 114, which is supplied in liquid form
through an umbilical connection, circulated
through the evaporator, and discharged to the
atmosphere as a vapor. The aqua-ammonia con-
I LUNAI ORBIT IE-ENTRY I
trol and shut-off valve, which is initially
closed, is maintained in the fUll closed position
until the automatic temperature control system
is activated and Freon 114 cooling discontinued.
With inadvertent activation of the temperature
control system, the aqua-ammonia control and
shut-off valve remain in the fUlly closed posi-
tion provided the Freon 114 flov maintains the
temperature lower than the pre-set value in the
control system.
The aqua-ammonia and gaseous nitrogen supply
tanks are filled through their respecti Te fill
valves. Then the nitrogen shut-off valve is
manually opened. The nitrogen-flov and pressure
regulator serves as a shut-off valve, since it
pneumatically closes when the cabin pressure
reaches five psia.
The cabin is then purged of air with nitrogen
and sealed. Ambient pressure is retained in
the cabin since pressures.above ambient are
pneumatically relieved by the cabin pressure
relief valve.
6.10-2
CUlGIIi nlnOId'
-,
"""1
O
'
_
0
0 a
.
0 Z
m u
.
i
Z
m 0 Z I
,
M
O
"
O
'
a
W
,
I
I
'
-
"
l
u
,
,
-
4
i
-
,
I
,
r
-
I
_
1
_
.
_
o
_
_
o
=
r
t
,
-
I
I
o
l
1
t'l
I

I,
:i
[
'i J
;,
: !
III
Illl

!
l
I
II
rl
II
I
1
l
[ LUNAR ORBIT RE-ENTRY I
Launch and Re-Entry Phases - When a temperature
is sensed higher than the setting, the aqua-
8J:nIoonia control and shut-off' valve IOOtors
toward the open position to increase the flow
of aqua-ammonia into the evaporator.
Its evaporation cools the cabin atmosphere.
Should a temperature be sensed lower than the
setting, the aqua-ammonia control and shut-off
valve IOOtors toward the closed position, de-
creasing the flow of acqua-ammonia refrigerant
into the evaporator. From sea level to 27,000
feet, the cabin pressure relief valve remains
open, maintaining ambient pressure wi thin the
cabin. At approximately 27,000 feet and above,
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
the Cabin Nitrogen Flow and Pressure Regulator
regulates pneumatically to a cabin pressure of
five psia.
Post Landing - The aqua ammonia refrigerant
continues to cool the cabin atmosphere at sea
level for a pre-determined period in the same
manner as described for launch and re-entry.
The cabin nitrogen flow and pressure regu-
lator valve returns to the 1"ull.y closed posi-
tion pneumatically, and ambient pressure is
retained in the cabin. Cabin pressure above
ambient is relieved pneumatically by the
cabin pressure relief valve.
6.10-3
... COtlflPU IP 0 $
o
_
!
_
o
_
o
_
_
o
_
o
o
_
'
_
_
I
g
l
l
0
_
;
_
_
o
_
0
(
"
_
,
I
m Z 0 Z m m m
_
Z
m -
_
0
m
m
m
0
m
_ ENGINEERING REPORT 6919
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
rO"F'DF,'T' 0 ,
- ---,.
TABLE 6.10-1
EQUIPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEM FEATURES
FEATURE
System Concept
Atmosphere
Pressurization
Cooling
6.10-4
MERCURY
Equipment Cooling Plus Life
Support, as Back- Up for
Pressure Suit
Oxygen at 5 psia.
(above 27, 000 ft. )
Gaseous Oxygen stored at
7500 pSi.
Evaporation of H20
(to avoid toxicity)
LUNAR RE-ENTRY
Equipment Cooling and Pressuri-
zation Only
Nitrogen at 5 pSia.
(above 27, 000 ft. )
Gaseous Nitrogen stored at
3000 pSi.
Evaporation of Aqua-Ammonia
(f or Most Eff ective Cooling in
Unmanned Application)
---I
0
m
u
,
J
Z
q
n
m
z R 0 z
1
.
8
.
1
0
I
-
=
Z 0
I
,
-
,
-
,
.
Z I
L
l
Z 0
> Z
F
-
Z L
U
0 u
l
z
0
u
.
z L
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C
Q
!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
O
.
o
_
|
_
'
_
0
q
g
-
-
z
_
_
-
_
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
_
"
Z
o
.
Z
.
-
_
_
Z
_
_
Z
u
.
_
O
0
,
-
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
,
_
z
,
,
.
,
,
/
_
z
\
,
i
:
l
-
_
J
-
i
1
I
_
_
_
_
E
I
_
.
a
/
_
'
_
_
)
,
,
)
,
,
,
,
Z
u
a
I
_
\
/
o
z
'
-
-
'
_
>
Z
0
_
1
I
'
l
I
0
,
,
,
.
,
_
i
I
I
_
e
,
.
e
,
.
i
/
/
h
h
l
_
z
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
J
z
8
,
.
_
2
z
0 0
!
0
!
0 p
_
n
r
.
.
o
I
,
-
d
I
-
,
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
.
,
.
_
I:
li
liJ
1III

1-

'1
t
A
- ENGINEERING REPORT 6919
1 SEPTEMBER 1959
EQUIPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SYSTEM
_____________________________________ CABIN
AQUA-AMMONIA SUPPLY
----------------,
FROM CABIN
FAN
r - - ---- - - - -,,...., ....\. ----- - - - - - - --
I
I
I
I I \ AQUA-AMMONIA
i , EVAPORATOR
I
I
I

SENSOR
INTO CABIN
__ , CABIN NITROGEN FLOW
V AND PRESSURE REGULATOR
I
I
I
I
I
I
__ oJ
'\ AQUA-AMMONIA
FILL VALVE r-...... --,
CABIN PRESSURE7
RELIEF VALVE.
/
, ... AQUA-AMMONIA CONTROL
AND SHUT-OFF VALVE

FILL VALVE '
CHECK VALVE
PRESSURE
REDUCER
. _____ 1 ___ .

I I _
I
I I
I I
,---------.
NITROGEN
SHUT-OFF VALVE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

__ -__ .. ______________________________________________________ .1
GROUND COOLING INLET
FREON 114
FIGURE 6.10-1
L ;
, ,1S'DEgilXl
6.10-5

Follow On Experiments Project Mercury Capsules

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Follow On Experiments Project Mercury Capsules

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

m

You might also like