MOL

[Orionblamblam]

there a Civil variant of USAF MOL ?

McD wanted there to be. In '67 and later McD put out a multi-volume report on "Usefulness of MOL to Accomplish Early NASA Mission Objectives." The most detailed info on MOL that I've seen so far was in these reports.

 

[flateric]

We have some interesting persons here...

 

[OM]

We have some interesting persons here...

...On *that* note, does anyone have any side-by side comparisons along the three-views between NASA Gemini and Gemini-B/Blue Gemini? Sort of a visual "change log" of sorts? Out of all the MOL discussions on ssh, I can't recall anyone ever having brought such a set of documents up. Lowther?

 

[Orionblamblam]

We have some interesting persons here...

...On *that* note, does anyone have any side-by side comparisons along the three-views between NASA Gemini and Gemini-B/Blue Gemini?

Gemini B drawings:

http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/models/dwgemini/Drawings.html

 

[Orionblamblam]

Part of the NASA Saturn wet lab/MOL concept.

NOTE: I've a lot of drawings to put together in this set, so there'll be more at some point in the future.

 

[archipeppe]

I agree with Michel Van.

I also think that Transtage would remain attached to MOL to give the necessary delta-v in order to accomplish orbital changes.
There is the main reason to have a reflector rather than a direct wiew (as KH.15 or HST).

In that I still prefer, but it is my personal opinion, to continue to give credit to Mr. Vick's artworks.

The image that Blackstar has posted it is interesting but doesn't represent an evidence itself.

It is, of course, a piece of HW and it could be also addressed to MOL programme (even if it is not clearly expressed) but nothing came from the inside. If really related ot MOL the piece is, obiouvsly, incomplete ed it is not possibile to appreciate the inner arrangement.

Unfortunately the "oral-evidence" (someone said something to me) does not represents an evidence by itself.
To really proove something it is necessary, and also mandatory, to produce some documentation (to be examined by experts) like drawings, photos, text or other (like Scott knows very well.....).

In absence of a clear evidence of a different internal arrangement of MOL, I will continue to retain my drawings as they are.
Otherwise I would be very happy to change them, in order to update them to the real configuration.

 

[Michel Van]

different between NASA Gemini and Gemini-B/Blue Gemini?

Blue Gemini were used for differed Mission profile
1 Man Gemini - Earth Surface Mapping
similar to McD picture proposal to NASA ? ? ?

2 Man Gemini flight to inspection enemy Spysat make eva and destroy the sat if needed
and 2 Man Gemini as Space Fighter (on a extended Transstage) armend with rockets

back to dispute has KH-9 reflecting mirror or not
is there declassified Information on KH-9 and KH-10 systems ?

 

[blackstar]

I also think that Transtage would remain attached to MOL to give the necessary delta-v in order to accomplish orbital changes.
There is the main reason to have a reflector rather than a direct wiew (as KH.15 or HST).

So your drawing needs a Transtage.

 

[archipeppe]

I also think that Transtage would remain attached to MOL to give the necessary delta-v in order to accomplish orbital changes.
There is the main reason to have a reflector rather than a direct wiew (as KH.15 or HST).

So your drawing needs a Transtage.

You are right.
I will produce a drawing in that way.

Anyway you have enlightned my imagination, and I want also to produce a drawing with a different optical arrangement, as you reported.
In this way we can cover both hypotesis about MOL optical devices.

What do you think about that??

P.S. Please my family name is "De Chiara" and not "Chiarra", many thanks in advance....

 

[blackstar]

P.S. Please my family name is "De Chiara" and not "Chiarra", many thanks in advance....

I apologize.

 

[archipeppe]

I apologize.

Don't worry, my name (as a lot of Italian names) are not so easy to speak and/or write for English speaking people.
Often they are mistaken for Spanish or Mexican....

So I'm accustomed to it. ;D

Anyway tomorrow I will post the two MOL alternative configurations.

Cheers
Giuseppe De Chiara

 

[OM]

Don't worry, my name (as a lot of Italian names) are not so easy to speak and/or write for English speaking people.
Often they are mistaken for Spanish or Mexican....

...Hell, and here I thought you were from either Pottsylvania or Lower Slobbovia ??? ??? ???

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

This talk of keeping Transtage attached to the MOL is interesting. I had read about a self-propelled MOL elsewhere but I didn't really believe it.

 

[archipeppe]

This talk of keeping Transtage attached to the MOL is interesting. I had read about a self-propelled MOL elsewhere but I didn't really believe it.

It is a logical thing, if you stop a while and think it on....

All the illustration of MOL represented it w/o any stage, but only huge RCS placed in the forward part (closer to Gemini B).
The most famouse image of MOL represent the re-entry module of Gemini B just after jettison, this mean (litterally) that MOL is about to reenter in the atmosphere.
So where is the engine for the de-orbit burn??

It is likely that in the image suche engine was jettisoned earlier, just after the ignition.

But the story not ended here, USAF has always stressed the word "laboratory" meaning that MOL would be such experimental facilities in LEO.
Some MOL missions would be exactly in this way, so if MOL were a "scientific laboratory" there were any needing to change orbit once in LEO (as the ISS does).

On the other side there were some MOL-KH10 Dorian missions that needing a lot of orbital changes (in height and plane) and this imply the necessity to exploit a restartable upper stage.
The three ones available at time were: Agena (too small), Transtage and Centaur (still under development).

Transtage was the "natural" choiche, it was sufficiently reliable and were matching exactly (at least) the diameter of MOL/Titan IIIG.
If we accept the thesis of reflection mirror with side hole, so we are forced to accept either the Transtage in the back of MOL.

I will post ASAP the drawing of this version, stay tuned....

 

[archipeppe]

As promised earlier, here it is the MOL-Transtage versione.

Enjoy it!!

 

[Barrington Bond]

Am enjoying very much ;D

Regards,
Barry

 

[Antonio]

Bravo!

Thanks a lot

Antonio

 

[archipeppe]

Bravo!

Thanks a lot

Antonio

Grazie mille!!!

You're welcomed!!

Giuseppe

 

[Michel Van]

wonderfull art work

but note how long MOL is now !
and look at this

here very big pic
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Titan-3C_MOL-Gemini-B-Test_3.jpg

can it be we are on right trail now?

 

[archipeppe]

wonderfull art work

but note how long MOL is now !
and look at this

can it be we are on right trail now?

Dear Michel,

by my side the photo itself is not representative of the real MOL because it was only a Mock-up utilized for Gemini-B test.
Furthermore the real MOL was to use the more powerful Titan III-G (a sort of Titan IV's ancestor) instead of Titan III-C used for Gemini-B test.

 

[archipeppe]

As promised earlier I post the side by side confrontation between "MOL+Transtage" and "MOL like HST" versions.

Furthermore I correct several small errors of translation kindly reported to me by Blackstar.
Not only, I also corrected the lenght of Transtage, respect the previous drawing, because in that it was longer than the real one.

 

[Michel Van]

wonderfull art work

but note how long MOL is now !
and look at this

can it be we are on right trail now?

Dear Michel,

by my side the photo itself is not representative of the real MOL because it was only a Mock-up utilized for Gemini-B test.
Furthermore the real MOL was to use the more powerful Titan III-G (a sort of Titan IV's ancestor) instead of Titan III-C used for Gemini-B test.

Fantasic Artwork B)

Titan III-G ?
i always thought they use Titan-M for Launch MOL in Polar orbit
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/titan.htm

by the way has some one information on Titan III-F to K Proposals ?
(if they ever such proposasl exists )

 

[archipeppe]

Dear Michel,

you're defintely right, there was no Titan IIIG (as far I know) but only a digit error, it was (of course) the Titan IIIM.

Sorry for the confusione caused...

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Outstanding ;D As always.

 

[Michel Van]

made with Corel Draw or Photoshop ?

 

[archipeppe]

made with Corel Draw or Photoshop ?

Any of them, I use Deneba Canvas Release 8.
Something quite similiar of Freehand enhanced with some Photoshop features....

 

[Justo Miranda]

some pics from "Air & Space" June/July 1998

 

[Justo Miranda]

From "Finescale Modeler" unknown date

 

[archipeppe]

Wooo....great Justo!!!

Absolutely unseen (at least to me) images!!!

Many, many thanks.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Sweet model, cool patch! I'll take them both.

 

[Michel Van]

great find Justo Miranda

the second picture
is a mock-up used on board of aircraft for zero-g test
like Heatshield hatch open and sealing
transport of film canister and experiments cargo

saw it on NOVA doku

for the Gemini B Model on "Finescale Modeler" see here
http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/models/dwgemini/gemini_b.html

http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/models/dwgemini/Drawings.html

http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/models/dwgemini/Photos.html

 

[Spark]

The UK work on an independent Space Programme did not stop totaly with the formal June 1960 cancellation.. UK Establishments made a positive contribution to the outstanding American work in this field.
Those who were involved on the UK side are proscribed by the “Official Secrets Act” from talking about the UK contribution to MOL.
Are There any of our American Canadian cousins who can set the record right with out falling foul of the law?

 

[Brickmuppet]

Early on in this thread there is a pic of 3 MOL's docked to form a larger station. ISTR that one of the Phil Bono/Ken Gattland books I had (lost in Hurricane Isabel) also mentioned that there was a plan for linking two or more MOLs together. Does anyone have any info on that? Was it a serious proposal?

For most space station ideas expansion is a good thing, but given the mission of MOL, what additional capabilities would have resulted from this configuration (or was this intended for something more...proactive..than orbital recon)?

 

[Michel Van]

Early on in this thread there is a pic of 3 MOL's docked to form a larger station. ISTR that one of the Phil Bono/Ken Gattland books I had (lost in Hurricane Isabel) also mentioned that there was a plan for linking two or more MOLs together. Does anyone have any info on that? Was it a serious proposal?

I found those picture on russian website (with Credit: Gordon Phillips / US Air Force)
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/almaz_origin.html
text under the 3 dockt MOLs

This artist rendering shows three Manned Orbiting Laboratories, MOLs, of the US Air Force docked in orbit, while a fourth lab speeds up for a rendezvous. Such artwork, widely published in the midst of the arms race of the 1960s, helped justify the Soviet Almaz project. Credit: US Air Force

thats all about this

the UK involved in MOL is new to me !

 

[blackstar]

also mentioned that there was a plan for linking two or more MOLs together. Does anyone have any info on that? Was it a serious proposal?

There is an illustration of the 2-MOL version. I have it and will scan and post. They were mounted back to back, not side by side. I do not know how they would have done rendezvous and docking backwards.

I don't think this was a serious proposal. It was just another attempt by the contractor to try and sell the vehicle. Contractors draw up lots of stuff in the hope that somebody will be interested. It was from around 1967 or so and MOL was killed in 1969. "Serious" should really be defined in terms of money spent by a sponsor (i.e. the US government). Contractors produce a lot of artwork. Artwork is not a valid sign of seriousness.

Keep in mind that the politics of MOL were always rather tricky because it gave the United States two separate space station projects. At the same time that USAF was pursuing MOL, NASA was proposing its Manned Orbiting Research Laboratory (MORL), which then transformed into the Apollo Applications Program. By 1966 or so, AAP was a rather crazy plan for several DOZEN Skylab type space stations. Totally unrealistic. The MOL contractor was proposing a civilian MOL as an alternative to AAP, but NASA wanted AAP.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

A very fun novel called FREEFALL, by Judith & Garfield Reeves-Stevens, features a secret MOL station, among other story elements. It even has some Okuda artwork of some of the vehicles in the story. It's a "secret space projects" fanboy's wildest dream. I guess that's why I've read it through about five times in the two years I've had it.

But to get back OT, in the story, MOL segments are joined end to end, to about the length of the ISS main truss and anchored behind a Milstar, pointing away from the ground, for disguise.

If you're interested, hit up the library or go here:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0743406079/qid=1097983260/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/002-5620417-0737653?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

By the way, the MOL in the story was a "Type 4", which can tel you how long it was up there.

 

[Orionblamblam]

From NASM Udvar-Hazy...

 

[Orionblamblam]

From the Glenn L. Martin Aviation Museum archive.

More pics at my blog:
http://up-ship.com/blog/

 

[Barrington Bond]

Beautiful!
Thanks Scott.

 

[Spark]

Beautiful!
Thanks Scott.

Agreed beautiful, may I ask what mass to what orbit, what sort of performance and what was role, mission?