SLOMAR

[codeone]

We just posted the Lockheed CL-498 drawing (SLOMAR) on our site (which you have here already). But here is the accompanying description from company files:

CL-498 was an extensive study done under contract for the USAF for the SLOMAR system. Short for Space Logistics, Maintenance and Repair, the system consisted of a manned military space complex in earth orbit and a vehicle required to support the complex. The first generation system (pre 1978) would consist of a launch pad complex on earth (three pads). The complex would be capable of handling boosters that could place 30,000 pounds in a 300 nautical mile circular orbit. The space complex would be modular in design, constructed of 12-foot diameter spheres connected by cylindrical sections ten feet in diameter and 28 feet long. Total development cost was estimated at $772 million. The second generation system (post 1978) involved an aerospace plane to be used for roundtrip missions.

Link to our aviation archeology article, which we are continuing to update as we scan these finds:
http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=114

--C1

 

[Michel Van]

Martin SLOMAR picture in better resolution

source
internet
http://dreamsofspace.blogspot.be/2013/11/eagle-has-landed-story-of-lunar.html
book
"Eagle has Landed: The Story of Lunar Exploration." by Dwiggins, Dwight. San Carlos, CA: Golden Gate Jr. Books. (80 p.) 28 cm. 1970

 

[Boxman]

Apparently, no. The synthesis report on the final evaluation of the SLOMAR vehicles only cites as FUNDED contractors the five I mentioned in a previous reply. It is known that Goodyear did a report for NASA on an inflatable space station concept. I have the report somewhere. Tha booster was to be a Titan.
BTW, SLOMAR was linked to another USAF Space Development study, MTSS, that asked for a military space station. It is the father of MOL.

I came across a couple of "out of place" photos within the San Diego Air & Space Museum (SDASM) Flickr photos illustrating their VSX proposal (eventually won by Lockheed with their S-3 proposal) a few years ago, here's a link to that discussion:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,409.msg136962.html#msg136962

Well, it looks like with the SDASM's latest postings at Flickr, there's an answer! Here are two photos of Convair's mock-up of their Military Test Space Station (MTSS):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/22978178391/
Caption: "MTSS Command Module; Research Specialist; Station B Date: 06/15/1961"

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/22779026350/
Caption: "System Engineer Leaving Re-entry Vehicle; Station B Date: 06/15/1961"

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

A little something from Scott on SLOMAR.

http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=31237

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

There's a guy on Facebook showing off the old SLOMAR models his grandpa brought home from work decades ago. Not sure if it's the same one that Circle 5 posted above.

https://m.facebook.com/groups/129661223023?view=permalink&id=10155648921478024&comment_id=10155649619758024&notif_t=group_comment_reply&notif_id=1501681551127277&ref=m_notif

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Here's a couple more shots.

 

[Michel Van]

that Model is sooo Cool !

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

It is!

 

[circle-5]

Not sure if it's the same one that Circle 5 posted above.

Yes it is. Same guy, same models, still on my wish list!

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Well you should jump on the FB link and PM the guy. He wants to sell.

 

[Mike_A]

Sorry for misreading the documents I have, here is the corrected post:

BTW, SLOMAR was SR-17527 79814 and was originally part of the USAF "Space Development Planning Study that comprised 10 studies covering: satellite interception, global surveillance, SLOMAR, strategic orbital systems (bombardment satellites), lunar operations , recoverable orbital launch systems, MTSS, and more.

SLOMAR RFP was issued in early 1960. Ten contractors responded but only Lockheed, Martin, GD/Astro, Douglas, Norair apparently received funding. From the drawings I have, the Martin SLOMAR submission for a crew orbital logistics vehicle wasn't the one depicted above. Here they are.

Hello All,

My first actual post, of no intellectual/insightful value unfortunately, other than adding to the already wonderful image repository.

-Mike

 

[fightingirish]

These pictures have been posted before, but these have a better quality.

https://flic.kr/p/RgPEj7

View: https://flic.kr/p/RgPEj7

https://flic.kr/p/2dpDSvP

View: https://flic.kr/p/2dpDSvP

https://flic.kr/p/2dpDTqV

View: https://flic.kr/p/2dpDTqV

 

[Archibald]

Guess where Arthur Clarke got the idea of the 2001 pods with woman names (Betty and others) ?
"Open the doors, HAL"
"I'm afraid I can't do this, Dave..."

 

[blackstar]

Guess where Arthur Clarke got the idea of the 2001 pods with woman names (Betty and others) ?
"Open the doors, HAL"
"I'm afraid I can't do this, Dave..."

Those kinds of things were around a long time. They showed up in the Disney short films in the 1950s:

Man and the Moon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is a long history of them, even going up to the present day. But they've never gotten beyond the concept stage because in terms of mass and cost they don't make a lot of sense. Spacecraft designers have moved equipment inside of space stations, or enabled access with robotic arms (so the astronaut can stay inside), or the tasks can be done with an EVA in a spacesuit. The latter is risky, but that risk is considered acceptable (and a pressurized pod has its own risks).

 

[iverson]

Guess where Arthur Clarke got the idea of the 2001 pods with woman names (Betty and others) ?
"Open the doors, HAL"
"I'm afraid I can't do this, Dave..."

Those kinds of things were around a long time. They showed up in the Disney short films in the 1950s:

Man and the Moon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is a long history of them, even going up to the present day. But they've never gotten beyond the concept stage because in terms of mass and cost they don't make a lot of sense. Spacecraft designers have moved equipment inside of space stations, or enabled access with robotic arms (so the astronaut can stay inside), or the tasks can be done with an EVA in a spacesuit. The latter is risky, but that risk is considered acceptable (and a pressurized pod has its own risks).

Also, the use cases that would have justified these pods never developed as expected.

Compare the vast space station in Kubrick's 2001 with the International Space Station. Had there been a large, non-astronaut human population living and working in Earth orbit and lots of ongoing orbital assembly and fabrication going on--including assembly of lunar shuttles and a gigantic interplanetary ship--the pods and space tugs might have made sense. Getting them to orbit is expensive. But once there, you can amortize the cost over years of work and carry out construction tasks that could not be done by a station-mounted arm or by EVA.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Yet another slight improvement in resolution, courtesy a photo of a print selling for way too much on ebay:

 

[antigravite]

Slomar was marketed amongst children as illustrated collectible cards such as this one.

A.