PROJECT BLUE BOOK

7
ASI(ASHAF-A) RETURN TO
Maxwell AFB, Ala 36112 USAF Historical Archives KAH3.6012-HO
1961
{
ISMC
Left side:
1. 1. Committee on Science and Astronautics Committee Science and Astronautics
2. U. S. U. S. Congress Congress - Committee of the House mittee of the House
Right side: Right side:
1. Overton Brooks l. Overton Brooks
2. Joseph Edward Karth 2. Joseph Edward Karth
3. John W. McCormack
Pocket: Pocket:
1. Committee on on Science and Astronautics, Hearing
2. 2. Committee Committee on Science and Astronautics, Staff Science and Astronautics, Staff Stud Stud
7-3745 -393
1003865

4 PROJECT MERCURY
Tanle III.—Personnel manming requirements, Mercury worldwide tracking and
communications ncticork
Site M and O Organization
personnel responsible
Cape Canaveral. Grand 1Bahama 34 DOD-AMR.
Grand Turk 3 4 Do. Do.
Bermuda 49 NASA-Contract.
Atlantic Ship L 10 DOD-AMR
Canary Islands. NASA-Contract.
Kano Do.
Zanzibar Do.
Indian Ocean Ship DOD-AMR.
Muchea, Australia WREI
Woomern, Australia. Canton Island Do.
Hawaii DOD-PMR.
West Mexico NASA-Contract. Do.
California White Sands DOD-PMR.
Texas DOD-WSM.
Eglin DOD-APGC. Do.
: WRE-Weapons Research Establishment, Woomera, Australia.
The project has now crossed the threshold of a major flight test
program of short- and long-range ballistic flights, leading first to
unmanned, and later on to manned orbital flights late in 1961 if all
goes well.
Project Mercuryi pursued with the greatest sense of urgency.
This urgency stems fro fact that the project will supply yanswers
to many questions th ust be answered before one can proceed with
the next step in ed space flight program. Before future pro-
grams can go very fa downstream, much must be learned about man's
capabilities in space and about the general technology of manned space
flight.
As mentioned previously, Mercury carries a national DX priority
rating. But a DX priority rating alone does not assure that a project
for them.
It must be recognized, hoy , that Project Mercury is a research
and development program, und therefore, does not lend itself to the
firm type of scheduling that typifies a production program. Instead,
it is only possible to establish target dates th the full recognition
that such target dates must be changed as new knowledge is gained or
the complexity of the problems confronting the development become
more clearly 'defined and schedules reoriented to overcome them.
After all, if there were no problem to overcome, there would be no
need for a research and development program.
In Project Mercury, target dates have been established for every
facet of the operation. These include target dates for delivery of
components, subsystems and complete capsules. lso included are
target dates for capsule preparation sequences and launch periods

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS
OVERTON BROOKS, Louisiana, Chairman
GEORGE P. MILLER, California JOSEPH W. MARTIN, JR., MassAChuSetts
OLIN E. TEAGUE, TeXaS JAMES FULTON. Pennsylvania
VICTOR L. ANFUSO, New York J. EDGA ENOWETH, Colorado
JOSEPH E. KARTH, MinneSota WILLI N PELT. Wisconsin
KEN HECHLER. WeSt Virginia PERKIN SS, New Hampshire
EMILIO Q. DADDARIO, Connecticut R. WAL RIEHLMAN, NeW York
WALTER H. MOELLER, Ohio JESSICA McC. WEIS, New York
DAVID S. KING. Utah CHARLE A. MOSHER, Ohio
THOMAS G. MORRIS, NeW Mexico RICHARD ROUDEBUSH, Indiana
BOB CASEY, Texas ALPI BELL, JR., California
WM. J. RANDALL, MisSouri
JOHN W. DAVIS, Georgia JOHN W. DAVIS. Georgia
WILLIAM FITTS RYAN, NeW York
JAMES C. CORMAN, California
JOHN W. McCORMACK, Massachusetts
CHanles F. Ducander, Erecutive Director and Chief Counsel CHanles F. DucanDer, Erecutive Director and Chief Counsel
Dr. CHARLES S. SHELDON II, TeChniCal Dr. CHARLES S. SHELDON II. TechniCal lDirector Director
SPENcER M. BeRESFoRD, SpEcial SPENCER M. BERESFORD, Special l Counsel Counsel
PHILIP B. YEAGER, SpECial PHILIP B. YEAGER, SpEcial Consultant
JoHn A. CaRstaRPHEN, Jr., Chief Clerk JOHN A. CARStARPHEN, Jr., Chief Clerk
FRanK R. HaMMiLL, Jr., Frank R. HamMILL, Jr., Counsel Counsel
RICHarD P. HiNes, Staff RICHaRD P. HINes, Staff Consultant
HowaRD J. SilBerstein, Staff HowARD J. SiLrerstein, Staff Consultant
RayMonD WiLcoVe, Staff Consultant RayMonD WiLcoVE, Staff Consultant
C. OrIs Finch, Assistant Clerk
JoserH Felton, Publications Clerk

Statements of Page
Loftin, L. K., Jr., Technical Assistant to Director, Langley Research
Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Madden, Robert T., manager of astronautics sales, Goodyear Aircraft
Corp., Akron, Ohio.. 31
O'Sullivan, William J., Space Vehicle Group, Langley Research Center, O'Sullivan, William J., Space Vehicle Group, Langley I Research Center,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 9 9
Quie, Hon. Albert H., Representative from Minnesota, U.S. Congress. Quie, Hon. Albert H., Representative from Minnesota, U.S. Congress 1
Richardson, Robert W., vice president, Goodyear Aireraft Corp., Richardson, Robert W., vice president, Goodyear Aireraft Corp.,
Akron, Ohio.-. Akron, Ohio_ 24
Ross, Dr. Robert T., manager, aeromechanics research and develop-
ment department, Goodyear Aireraft Corp., Akron, Ohio 25,40 25, 40
III

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
FRIDAY, MAY 19, 1961
House of Representatives,
CommITtee oN SCiENce ANd Astronautics,
Washington, D.C.
The committee met at 10 a.m., Hon. Overton Brooks (chairman)
presiding.
The CHAIRMAN The committee will come to order.
Mr. KiNG. Mr Chairman, could I mention that we have with us the
distinguished Congressman from Minnesota, Mr. Albert Quie, who is
here by virtue of f the fact that Echo I was fabricated in Northfield,
Minn., which is in the district of the gentleman from Minnesota.
I think the record should show that he is here as a visitor.
Mr. Hechler. I would like to join in welcoming my colleague, Mr.
Quie, to the committee.
The CHAIRMAN. The CHAIRMAN We are happy to have you this morning, Mr. Quie. We are happy to have you morning, Mr. Quie.
This morning open a 1-day hearing on the matter of the potential ing on the matter of the potential
uses, problems and funding, and research and development on "Inflat- uses, problems and funding, and rese rch and development on "Inflat-
able Structures in Space."
We have a good many witnesses this morning. I think it is entirely We have a good many witnesses th I think it is entirely
proper that we follow the hearings that we have had by this one on proper that we follow the hearings his one on
"Inflatable Structures in Space."
We have, of course, our distinguished colleague. We want to hear We have, of course, our distinguished colleague. want to hear
from him in just a moment.
We have Mr. L. K. Loftin, Jr., Technical Assistant to the Director We have Mr. L. K. Loftin, Jr., Technical Assistant to the Director
of the Langley Research Center of NASA; Mr. William J. O'Sullivan, illiam J. O'Sullivan,
Space Vehicle Gro coup, Langley Research C NASA: Mr. Robert
W. Richardson, e president, Goodyear Aircraf orp.: Dr. Robert
S. Ross, Goodyear Aircraft Corp., and Mr. Rober t T. Madden, Good-
year Aircraft Corp., also.
We are glad to have these gentlemen here with us this morning.
Mr. Quie, I know interest, because I just talked to you.
It is customary for the committee to hear the Members of Congress
first. If you have a statement you would like to give us on this, we
would be glad to ha at this time.
Following that, we will be glad to have you come up and sit with
the committee and stay with us as long as you like.
Mr. Quie. Thank you, Mr. Brooks.
STATEMENT OF HON. ALBERT H. QUIE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE FIRST DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF
MINNESOTA
Mr. QuIE. My name is
District of Minnesota.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the committee.
1

indeed proud when the Schjeldahl
Co. in Northfield, Minn., played such an importan part in the con-
struction of Echo I ommunity is really
enthused about what is be ne old pioneer spirit
and their esprit de corps s would surely ignite
one's faith in America; these eople, no matter what their job is in
the part of fabrication, are so enthusiastic that when called on they
have been willing to practically work around the clock.
As we read of this person, Commander Shepard-people had kind
of lost faith with the Americans, and he renewed their faith in
themselves.
I think if you could come out there and see that company, too, you I think if you could come out there and see that company, too, you
would have a renewed the American people. American people.
I feel inadequate, sp I feel inadequate, spea ng here such a technical subject, be- such a technical subject, be-
cause I have no technical cause I have no technical experience, myself. myself. For that reason I was that reason I was
glad I was able to glad I was able t speak first, because I would surely feel inadequate speak first, because would rely feel inadequate
after hearing some of these other men like Mr. O'Sullivan, whom I after hearing son e of the ese other men like Mr. O'Sullivan, whom I
have heard so much about, not only read about, since Mr. Schjeldahl
speaks of him in glowing terms.
We in Minnesota and that area are indeed proud of the work being We in Minnesota and that area are indeed proud of the work being
done.
At this time, I would like to include in the testimony a statement by At this time, I would like to include in the testimony a statement by
Mr. G. T. Schjeldahl-the head of the G. T. Schjeldahl Co.: Mr. G. T. Schieldabl--the head of the G. T. Schiel
Erectable and Inflatable Structures in Space
By G. T. Schjeldahl Co., Northfield, Minn., May 2A, 1961
Having already ventured briefly into space, man is developing a host of
vehicles and capsules to propel him and protect him as he soars into the inter-
planetary void. Highly complex rocket systems and compact and efficient space
capsules will of course play the major role in helping man leave this Earth for
parts unknown.
Yet man, as he plans for his most epic voyage, is turning his attention to the
same spectacular device that enabled his predecessors to leave the ground some
two centuries ago the balloon and its modern counterpart, the inflatable satel-
lite, or "satelloon."
THE INFLATABLE STRUCTURE IS ALREADY IN ORBIT
On August 12, 1960, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration shot
into the heavens the largest volume satellite ever thrust into orbit--Echo I.
This 1oo-foot diameter plastic sphere, designed and manufactured by the G. T.
Schjeldahl Co. of Northfield, Minn., is still in orbit-a visible symbol of American
creativity for all the world to see.
The Schjeldahl Co. is already at work on other space inflatables. These
include the forthcoming Echo II on which successful inflation tests have been
concluded by NASA, Langley Research Center, and Project Rebound in which
several inflatable satellites will be launched in orbit from a single rocket carrier.

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 3
All these inflatable satelloons have a common ancestor-the balloon. But
while the balloon is designed to go up and come down again within a very
short period of time, the satelloon is so constructed that it will remain in orbit
for extremely long periods-perhaps many years.
The inflatable satellite, such as Echo I and Echo II and other satellites devel-
oped by the Schjeldahl Co., must be precisely engineered and sealed by means
of a super adhesive that will withstand the hostile environment of space. The
Schjeldahl Co. has developed such an adhesive-called "Schjel-Bond 301," which
has held Echo I together for nearly a year despite the ravages of extreme tem-
peratures, radiation and low vacuum.
AN EFFICIENT AND ECONOMICAL DEVICE
The inflatable space satellite is an efficient and economical device that can be
packed-uninflated--in a sma anister, shot by rocket into space and then
inflated to become a massive perhaps 00 times its uninflated
volume. It can be prefabricated in an unlimited variety of shapes and sizes to
perform specific functions, such ch as reflecting electronic signals, gathering solar
energy, providing safe shelter or man in space ring gases and fuels
in space.
Up to the present time, inflatable space structures have been used mainly to
reflect electronic signals. n's first space balloon, the Robin (Rocket Balloon
Instrument), is a one-meter diameter Mylar sphere with a built-in corner re-
flector for ground radar tracking. Robin was designed, developed and built
by the Schjeldahl Co. for meteorological purposes. More than 2oo of these
unique devices have been shot by the U.S. Air Force to altitudes of about 50
miles, inflated and allowed to drift back to Earth. The radar plots of their
corner reflectors yield such meteorological information as wind direction, wind corner reflectors yield such meteorological information as wind direction, wind
speed, air density and air temperature.
PASSIVE PASSIVE SATELLITES SATELLITES
Robin is an example of a passive Robin is an example of a "passive unication satellite. "Active" com- ication satellite. "Active" com-
munication satellites munication satellites carry into space a rad space a radio receiver and transmitter so that receiver and transmitter so that
they can receive signals from they can receive point and rel them to another point. The to another point. The
active satellite active satellite must ca n power or possess the means of deriving power sess the means of deriving power
from external certain inherent disadvantages: (1) it cannot certain inherent disadvantages: (1 it cannot
be repaired in s be repaired in spa eif something goes wrong and (2) its signal can be jammed. goes wrong and (2) its signal can be jammed.
The passive The passive com nications satellite is in effect one or a series of electronic tions satellite is in effect one or a series of electronic
"mirrors" in space which reflect signals beamed to it from the ground. Such
signals, since they are beamed, cannot be jammed.
This Earth's only orbiting passive communication satellite is Echo I, launched This Earth's only orbiting passive communication satellite is Echo I, launched
by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration August 12, 196o, from
Cape Canaveral and still circling the globe 1,ooo miles out in space. Echo I
was manufactured by the Schjeldahl Co.
Echo I's chief disadvantage as a passive communication device is the low
ratio of power of the reflected signal to that of the projected signal. This low
response is due to the fact that it is spherical. Although Echo I is 1o0 feet in
diameter, the effective reflective "dise" is only a foot or so in diameter, because
the surface of the satelloon is extremely shiny.
Echo II, 135 feet in diameter, which only recently was subjected to successful
ground inflation tests at Weeksville, N.C., has a duller surface than Echo I and
will present a much larger reflective surface and hence will provide a greater
ratio of response to input signal.
ECHO II 50 TIMES STRONGER THAN ECHO I
This material in Echo II is 50 times more rigid than the material used in
Echo I. It is a laminate consisting of two layers of aluminum foil only 18
hundred-thousandths of an inch thick bonded to a center sheet of Mylar 35 hun-
dred-thousandths of an inch thick. The rigidized spheres will weigh about 500
pounds each.
When Echo II is inflated in space, the folds and wrinkles it receives as a
result of packing will disappear. When the sphere is punctured by meteorites,
releasing its inflation agent, it will not deform. for it will not "remember" the
folds and wrinkles it incurred in its "fetal" position within the rocket's
canister.

4 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
At the present time, the Schjeldahl Co. is working with the Goddard Space
Flight Center of ASA in developing 29 inflatable plastic
sphere for rebounding signals from one satellite to nother. Goal of the proj-
ect-called Rebound-is to produce a new light weight material that compares
in strength to the material of Echo II. This will be accomplished by chemically
"milling" out a pattern of circular "windows" from the aluminum, leaving the
Mylar membrane intact. The network of aluminum arches remaining will
preserve the rigidity with an accompanying-and desirable -reduction of weight
amounting to about 30 percent.
SEVERAL SATELLOONS IN ONE ROCKET VEHICLE
Project Rebound will concentrate on three inflatable satellites in a
circular orbit from one rocket These will spaced at predetermined
intervals in order to test their effectiveness in bouncing radio signals from one
satellite to another, thereby extending the range of radio wave propagation far
beyond that of a single satellite, such as Echo I and Echo II.
Launching of the first three Rebound satellites is scheduled during the first
quarter of 1963. A launching of six Rebound satellites from a single rocket to
form a "string of beads" around the Earth will occur sometime in 1964.
In a move to increase the signal response and directionalize it, the Schjeldahl
Co. is proposing through the Wright Air Development Division to create a new
and different series of inflatable passive satellites. This new inflatable will be
comparable to a chandelier in space, containing a multitude of small reflective
units which will vastly increase the strength of the reflected signal. Moreover,
by maintaining a specific attitude with respect to the Earth's surface as it or-
bits, the satellite will project a "cone" with signal strength maximum at the
perimeter. Thus, a passive satellite in synchronous orbit-with its orbital speed
the same as the Earth's daily rotation-would project its strongest signal to the the same as the Earth's daily rotation--would project its strongest signal to the
horizon. Since synchronous orbits require high altitudes-approximately 22,500
miles—the "horizon" would be perhaps 6,ooo miles away. Such a device would miles--the "horizon" would be perhaps 6,ooo miles away. Such a device would
become a tactical nonjammable communications device. become a tactical nonjammable communications device.
INFLATABLES TO INFLA AID ACTIVE SATELLITES SATELLITES
The role of inflatables is by no means confined to passive satellites. They The role of inflatables is means
promise to be important to active satellites as well. Huge inflatable antennae, promise to be important to active satellites as Huge inflatable antennae,
precisely constructed on the ground, will burgeon out in space to enable maximum precisely constructed on the ground, will burgeon out in space to enable maximum
propagation of the active satellite's signal.
The inflatable concept also will be applied in building all types of space struc- The inflatable concept also will be applied in building all types of space struc-
tures. Present thinking at Langley Research Laboratories favors a "marriage"
of inflatables and erectables so that combinations of rigid members can be folded
into compact forms and "married"' to an inflatable object in space. Such a method
shows great promise in the problem of creating space stations in which men can
survive the space environment. Similarly, inflatable components of various
structural devices will be rocketed into space and inflated and rigidized. The
economy and efficiency of such a method of erecting devices in space are obvious.
NEW MATERIALS BEING DEVELOPED
At the present time, the Schjeldahl Co. is conducting research in developing
new materials to withstand the space environment for prolonged periods. These
include combinations with mineral fibers that promise to be as strong as the
strongest steels. Other investigations planned are for the development of plastic
materials that will not burn-even in the searing blast of a plasma torch.
We believe that inflatables will assume a constantly increasing role in the
unfolding drama of the space age. Their economy and their ratio of collapsed
size to inflated size command their continued application.
LIMITLESS NUMBER OF MISSIONS
Leonard Jaffe, chief of NASA's communications satellite program, emphasizes
that inflatables can be designed and constructed to perform an almost limitless
number of missions.
"The feasibility of using a passive satellite as a communications reflector has
been established," he says. "The fact that Echo I did not completely collapse
upon loss of its internal pressurization material has indicated that the thin wall
structure is almost structurally sound enough to withstand the space environ-

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 5
ment, and that only a nominal increase in rigidity will provide long-life strue-
tures.'
APPENDIX A
The attached photographs pictorially illustrate a NASA/Langley Research
Center conceptual design of an erectable space station. [The pictures in ques-
tion were not of reproducible quality and have been placed on file.] Note the
incorporation of an optimum combination of pneumatically and mechanically
erectable segments. is combination incorporates the best advantages of each
type component. sections contain all on-board apparatus. The
pneumatically erectable sections made possible the deployment and intercon-
nection of the rigid section s in a ready-to-use condition in a matter of minutes
with no requirement to bol together the parts.
As with project Echo, the G. T. Schjeldahl Co. is following carefully the
evolvement of the research done in the Langley Laboratory. Development of
materials with which to accompiish this task is an area where GTSCo will make
a contribution. Fabrication techniques to translate the concept into an actual
test vehicle are under study by the company.
This is an excellent example of the close teamwork between industry and
the government-sponsored laboratories, which should lead us forward in man's
conquest of space.
The ChairMan. That was a great achievement. I think the peo-
ple of Northfield should feel justified pride in their contribution to
this major accomplishment in space.
We are happy to have you here this morning, and we will give your
statement our careful consideration.
Mr. Quie. Thank you.
The ChairMaN. The next witness we have this morning is Mr. L. K.
Loftin, Jr., Technical Assistant to the Director of Langley Research
Center, NASA.
Mr. Loftin, do you have a prepared statement?
Mr. LofTIN. No, sir.
The Chairman. You came up to testify on this subject. So I am
sure you are familiar with it. We will be glad to have whatever state-
ment you care to give the committee on this subject. ment you care to give the committee on this subject.
Mr. Lorrin. I only learned yesterday morning that I would be
expected to discuss inflatable structures today, so I have no prepared
statement, and I must apologize for not having any large charts which
you can see. I do have some proofs which I might pass around.
[NorE.—The committee placed its request with NASA six days before
the scheduled day of the hearing.]
STATEMENT OF L. K. LOFTIN, JR., TECHNICAL ASSISTANT TO THE
DIRECTOR OF LANGLEY RESEARCH CENTER, NATIONAL AERO-
NAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Lorrin. In speaking of inflatable structures, I think it might
we should be interested in
these things, anyway.
Basically, there are wo reasons:
First of all, it takes
pound of payload in orbit. We now this. 'So that anything we
can do to make the payload light is a to the good. This is one reason
that we are interested in inflatables.
Another reason, which is perhaps not quit understood, is
ve would like
to have a craft in orbit which is large in volum ch as a space sta-
70468 0-61--2

-
moments in the missile, itself, so it has be redesigned."
So that, in a nut shell, what we wa ant to do for these large payloads
is to squeeze them down into a small package on top of the boost
vehicle, get it into orbit, and then in some fashion allow it to blossom
into its desired shape.
There have been many applications proposed for inflatable vehicles.
Perhaps I should really say erectable for one can such vehicles
either by inflation or by some means of mechanical erection or some
combination thereof. his is really what we are talking about.
Things such as con ion satellites, solar collectors, corner re-
flectors of one sort or ther, reentry vehicles, space stations, have
been proposed to empl flatable-type structures or erectable struc-
tures. Rather than go through the many applications that one might
conceive of, in which an erectable structure would be applicable, I
thought you might find it of some interest if we would discuss with you
some of the specific work which the NASA has done on inflatable,
erectable structures.
First, I would like to describe to you briefly so me of the exploratory
research which we have done at Langley Resear er, aimed at an
attempt to find and clarify son e of the problems which one would have
to overcome in applying the erectable concept to a manned vehicle.
We have not been developing a manned vehicle. As I say, we have
been studying what we would consider to be salient or pertinent prob-
nique to unmanned space vehicles such as Echo.
To talk now about the manned space station, we at Langley started
thinking about th inflatables for such a vehicle about 2 years
ago. In order to the problem areas were that we should
be looking at, it was nec o arrive at some sort of a concept of
what the vehicle might look like.
I have some photographs here of an early version. These pictures
were—this model was designed and constructed not as a proposal for
a space vehicle, as I say, but rather to permit us to fix on what kind
of problems you would ru h something like this and what
studies we should make.
If I could pass these around. They start by
showing what the vehicle would look like on top of the rocket. Then
as you pass down th ill see this craft slowly
blossoming out. The oroidal shape, which is in the form of sausage
links in this case, would the living quarters of the crew.

ver to the power plant.
The various other oparatus on there are sun seekers, star
seekers, various guida nce and stabilization systems.
In looking at this there were several problems that were apparent
to us that we should study. ne of the most obvious ones was that of
the material, itself, that we can construct this toroid out of. It has
to withstand the space environment. This means that it will be sub-
jected to various type tion. It will be subjected to high
vacuum. It will be subjected to temperature cycling, and we don't
know the effects of these ph ena on the material as to its brittle-
ness; does it become brittle wit e? Does it tend to evaporate or
boil away? We don't know wh micrometeorite problem is here.
We don't want to puncture thi Finally, we did not want a
material which would outgas in a way as to provide poisonous
or noxious odors inside.
We undertook a study of material properities. The Goodyear Air-
craft Co. undertook a set cf They provided us with some
samples, and we more or less worked in cooperation this. At the
present time we have subjected many samples of materials to a
vacuum environment which is about 10- of mercury. We have sub-
jected it to radiation, and to temperatures up to about 300 degrees,
Fahrenheit.
The things we have found out are these: We have found materials
that do deteriorate, which one would not use for such application.
On the other hand there are other materials one can use. What it
boils down to is the material problem is not a critical one in the sense
that it does not require any fundamental technological breakthrough.
I think we can find the material. We may have to search some. But
it looks like something we can do.
With regard to the micrometeorite problem, we haven't done too
much on this. We are making some experiments now. In that con-
nection I would like to show you another group of pictures here of a
some inflatable elements and mechanically erectable elements.
As you look at this sequence unk you will that what this
really is is a series of cams th re actually These unfold
and are connected by inflatable con This system has a number
of advantages. portions of this erectable
structure are in fact rigid and can be protected from micrometeorites.
It is not an unusual problem. you could t air-lock-type doors
at the ends of these compartments and close them up. And then when
you wanted to go around this toroid you could open them and go
through the inflated portions. is is another concept of the way
one might do it.
I have a couple of samples of the kinds of materials that we have
studied. They actually look pretty much like pieces of rubber. These
I believe were provided by Goodyear. They are three-ply with nylon
cords, and they have a butyl elastomrer—this is the rubber-like mate-
ial that sticks it together. It weighs about six-tenths of a pound per
square foot.
Talking about these materials, another area which we have looked
into and are looking into is that of how best should you make the in-
flatable portion of the vehicle. One way of doing it is to make plies

Another area we have looked at is that of dynamics. If one rotates
one of these space stations to provide artificial gravity, which may or
may not be required, then there is an interesting dynamics problem.
We have done analytical studies using analog computers and things
of this nature, in which we put in effect masses representing men in
different parts of the vehicle, and although they have no weight in
orbit, they do have r When a man walks from one part of the vehi-
cle to another, he changes the mass distribution. The analog computer
study shows that or
ious types of perturbations of the vehicle. W Ye have done some work
on what is called a wobble damper, a possible scheme for getting
around this problem. Perhaps more importantly, we are looking to see
whether there is really a problem. We have built a 10-foot diameter
elastically scaled model of this craft. For such a model the mass dis-
correct stress characteristics, and you
would put the correct pressure in We intend to rotate it on a free
mount with diffeent distributions of mass within the vehicle to deter-
mine what the motions are and to determine the coupling between the
overall body motions of the vehicle and any vibration modes which
may develop in the inflatable structure, itself. This model has just
been completed. We should get underway with this fairly soon.
Another model which is under design deals with the thermal balance
of the vehicle. You have the vehicle in orbit with the Sun on one
side, the reflection from the Earth on the other side; you have power
plants and things of that nature in it. There is a question of what is
the temperature distribution in this vehicle and how do we have to
paint it. Do we make it black so it absorbs radiation or do we make
it silver to reflect and in what proportions and this sort of thing, to
obtain an environment within the vehicle which is suitable not only
for the occupants but also for the equipment which we are required
to operate.
This is a model which is under design. It is not a terribly easy
model to design because king on
this.
One further type of model, and fairly large one—it is 24
feet in diameter-is be or us by Goodyear. This is a
mutual arrangement. believe we are funding about half of it and
Goodyear about half This again is a research model. What we
hope to do there is to learn something about ho w you package one of
these things. You talk about squeezing it into a small bundle, but you
don't just pick up and squeeze it. It has to be done in a fairly exact
way.

1961. If no setbacks are encount during the flight qualification
program, it is possible that this target date may be met. Iowever.
as stated earlier in this report, the critical period in the flight test
program is just now upon us, and Dr. Dryden's statement must be
considered as a project target goal to be strived for and not a hard
statement of fact.
Department of Defense support of Project Mercury
The Department of Defense provides a very broad range of support
to Project Mercury. The Air Force Ballistie Missiles Division sup-
plies and launches Atlas vehicles. The Air Force also provides air
rescue service aircraft for capsule search and recovery operations,
mapmaking services of the Aeronautical Chart Information Center,
the loan of aircraft for net work station checkout, and astronaut normal
flight and zero-g training, Atlantie Missile Range launch facilities,
control center facilities, medical support at Cape Canaveral and
remote stations, and the use of existing network facilities and man-
power at several Mercury network stations. The Aerospace Medical
use, and will provide a substantial share of DOD medical support to
Project Mercury; has supplied comm nications equipment and am-
phibious vehicles for use in possible lau ch site recovery operations.
The Army Redstone launch vehicle will l1 be used for unmanned and
manned ballistie flights.
The Navy has been given and accepted the responsibility for the
Mercury spacecraft recovery operations. The Nav recovery com-
mander will have elements of the Atlantie Fleet and Air Rescue Sery-
ice at his command for effecting rapid recovery of the capsule. De-
stroyers, landing ships, dock, miscellaneous service vessels, Marine
helicopters, patrol aireraft, and early warning aireraft will all be
utilized for search and recovery operations.
The Navy is also providing assistance in the construction of the
Canton Island network station, has loaned commander transmitter
equipment to NASA, and has given a number of tracking radars
to NASA.

this:
don't see that there is required any fundamental scientific break-
throughs that are required in order to design one of these things.
However, we have not undertaken at the Langley Research Center
a detailed engineering research design study. If such a study were
undertaken, you might run into some problems that we haven't been
smart enough to think about that are fundamental. I don't know if
you would, but you could.
In such a careful e ineering design, this ong-term proposi-
tion. We are not really hen you got all one whether you would
have something you really want or not. This is something that can
only be found by a carefu evelopmental design.
I' think this is about the status of our feeling on it at this time.
This concludes what I have to say about space stations.
Mr. O'Sullivan can talk to you some about the actual experience
we have had in developing actual inflatable satellites, two of which
arenow in orbit.
The ChaIrMan. To save time, we will hear from you at this time,
Mr.O'Sullivan.
A fter that we would like to ask both of you questions.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. O'SULLIVAN, SPACE VEHICLE GROUP,
was at Weeksville, N. ,participating in a structural test upon what
we hope will in tim ecome the Echo II satellite, which would be a
prototype of a ational version, rigidized operational version
of a long-range communications satellite of the passive type.
I came by the laboratory and I picked up some samples yesterday
of the materials tha employing in connection with this rigid-
ized version of the communications satellite, because they illustrate
some of the problems that we are faced with in trying to build erect-
able structures that can survive the environment of space. These
samples I believe will illustrate ways in which we have found solu-
tions to these problems.
I have here some photographs, which unfortunately are not large
because they were taken yesterday with a Polaroid camera, and I
brought them with me in my pocket, showing the test of the Echo II
satellite.
I will pass these around.

then increased the pressure inside of the satellite until we reached
the point of rupture of the satellite. We found that it ruptured yes-
terday at a skin stress of 18,o00 pounds per square inch. This means
that we have a fa ctor of safety of four and one-half. The satellite is
capable of withstanding a pressure four and one-half times that which
will be the maximum required for inflating it in orbit.
I have here some material of whie h this satellite is constructed.
It has been made of a laminate that consists of a plastic film whose
thickness is .35 mil, that is, .35 thousandths of an inch thick.
Into each side of this has been bonded an aluminum foil of two-
tenths of a mil thick. This gives a three-ply laminate.
This concept of a material which coul compactly folded for
transport into orbit and there pneumaticall rected to shape is one of
our ideas that we developed in the N we can build this
erectable structure.
I would like to pass some samples of this material around.
This illustrates e wavs o
problems.
Let's consider first the problem of compactly folding and transport-
ing into orbit.
We can fold this satellite, which is 135 feet in diameter, into an ap- We can fold this satellite, which is 13 eter. into an ap-
proximately spherical container which is only about 40 inches in di- proximately spherical con 40 inches in di-
ameter, transport it up through the Earth's atmosphere and there ameter, transport it through the Earth's atmosphere and there
erect it after it has gotten into space. This avoids the first problem
that Mr. Loftin mentioned, namely, the problem of the stability of our
launching vehicles. we have a great big object, we can not place it
on the front end he launching vehicle because it causes aero-
dynamic instability. The concept of having an erectable structure
overcomes this difficulty.
The next problem that we have to face in space, after it has been
pneumatically erected, is the problem of rigidization, in the case of the
communications satellite.
Here in the case of a space station eare faced with some such
problem as that, too. The problem co es about because of the cosmic
dust which will undoubtedly cause ring of our space station or
our satellite.
In the case of this Echo II satellite, the skin has been made suffi-
ciently stiff and rigid so that once it has been drawn out and set into
spherical shape, we no longer require the internal pressure to hold it
spherical. It can be punctured by micrometeorites and it will not
change its shape; it will not collapse. We know this is so from our
tests.
In the case of the Echo I satellite, which is now in orbit around the -
Earth, we designed it not as a rigid structure but merely as one which

porting into orbit an d then stretched out pneumatically, set into shape,
can be employed with regard to space stations. The problem of pro-
tecting the material against a harsh environment of space is also ac-
complishable in this manner with such material as this.
We know, as Mr. Loftin has mentioned, many materials in the very
hard vacuum of space will evaporate. the case of the samples
that we have passed out we have aluminum foil on each side of the
plastic film. This forms an excellent vapor barrier so that the plastic
can not evaporate.
We can also by choice of plastic material select those which have
large molecules and merization, make the
f the vehicle into what the polymer chemists would call
one very large molecule. The importance of at is this:
The material evaporates in space only by of its vapor pres-
sure, that is, the pressure of the gas that it
The larger the molecule we employ, the lower the vapor pressure at
any given temperature. By this process of polymerization we can
encounter in
chemistry but of sizes tens and hundreds of thousands of times bigger.
Their vapor pressure becomes so fantasticly low that we do not have
instruments capable of measuring it.
This prevents also evaporation in space. This prevents also eva poration in space.
To protect against ultraviolet radiation we have run tests which
tell us that by employing a very thin metal covering over our mate-
rials, we can shut out the ultraviolet radi We have subjected
polymers to a radiation under ultraviolet nps for long periods of
time. We find that without such protectio this they do degener-
ate in time and become somewhat embrittled the simple process
of using a thin metal foil we can prevent this.
With regard to the problem of hermal balance, we have in our
research discovered that we can pu yers, coatings, on this material
which are so thin that they have the thickness of only a few molecules.
Yet we can by this process adjust the ratio of the absorbtivity of the
surface such that we can bring the temperature balance of our satellites
or space stations to that which will not be too hot nor too cold, and
the materials wil survive in space, virtually indefinitely.
There are a number of other problems the we have found solutions
to in this manner. I would like to point out the facilities of the NASA
are as yet too few and meager in number to be able to carry out all
the basic ideas of how to build space stations or satellites that we have
been able to discover. We have been compelled to call on industry
to follow out the exploration of these ideas, and recently we placed a

though not yet ready for use materials, and this gives us great hope in
this field.
In this field further work is required.
I think that M Loftin is qui rect in stating that we have not
as yet encountered any fundamer barrie r to the ability to produce
ations; that, however, there is a
considerable amount of engineerin vork required in order to trans-
late this exploratory research that has been done in the laboratories
into actual usable hardware or materials, fabrication of materials
that would be suitable for employment in space stations.
I thank you gentlemen.
If I could answer any questions that may have come to your mind,
I would be delighted to do so.
The ChairMaN. Thank you very much.
I think we all hav many questions. I would like to ask
you this, for instance:
A man in one of t ose stations goes up in the capsule, doesn't he?
How do you get him the capsule to that circular station?
Mr. Lorrin. There has to be a passageway, a really inflatable pas-
sageway that would lead from the capsule into the toroidal portion
of the space station.
I didn't make this clear. The toroidal space station does not re-
enter the atmosphere. When the crew gets ready to come home, they
go back through the passageway into the capsule, close up to the cap-
sule, disengage from the toroid and leave that in orbit and reenter
the capsule. The toroid itself is not suitable for a reentry-type
vehicle.
The ChaiRMan. You are just going to allow that to float around
in space?
what you might cal space ferry, a reentry-type vehicle, with the
space vehicles, so that as one capsule left to take one crew home, an-
maneuver and trans-
fer a new crew in. This is a much more sophisticated-type operation.
Ultimately something like this could perhaps be worked out.
The Chairman. You state the body up there in space will not have
weight; that they will hay nass. What effect will the mass have on
the materials which you u e station?
Mr. Lorrin. I think the th t with regard
to mass, as I pointed is the dynami ation, that is,
when this thing rotates and i move mass from this part to this part,
you are changing the center of gravity—this is a b bad word to use be-
cause we don't talk about gravity up there-you are changing the
center of mass of the station so it will tend perhaps to rotate around
a new center or oscillate in some way. I think this is the context in
which we need to talk about mass.

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 13
It doesn't really affect the materials except perhaps in this way:
If the man in some way prop
to the other, propels himself hard enough, we want this material to
be strong enough so he doesn't break through and go out on the other
side.
The CHaIrMaN. He still has momentum?
Mr. LoFTIN. Yes, sir.
The ChairMan. To offset the momentum, you have to have a ma-
terial sturdy enough to resist it?
Mr. LorriN. That is correct.
The ChairMan. You will substitute for the gravity use of
centrifugal force?
Mr. LorTin. This is a possibility
this is necessary. anned perations it is found
desirable to have some nulation of gravity, although perhaps not
the full one g, perhap uarter of a g, it would be possible to rotate
this thing such that centrifugal force would simulate, as far
as the man knows, the effect of gravity. You would have to be a
little careful about this. There are some effects-as I understand it,
and I am not too familiar with this subject-—on the inner ear that
come into play if the radius of the space station is too small and it
rotates at too high an rpm, there are some secondary effects that are
supposed to occur which can result in nausea or something of this
nature.
The CHaIRman. Like seasickness?
Mr. LofTin. Yes.
I am certainly not a medical expert, so I don't think I can speak
with much authority on this.
The CHaIRMAN. Any questions?
Mr. KarTn. What would the primary function of this so-called
space station be?
Mr. Lorrin. It could have many functions. We are not really
proposing a space station. What we are doing here is saying if you
out, he is going to make that journey and he ca pome back until
he has gone around to where he is going to hen he is going
to come back, before we do this, one might say it would be desirable
to have a space station in orbit wher re we could put men, materials,
different kinds of mechanisms, we could put them up there for weeks
at a time and see if there are any undesirable effects that we have
not foreseen. If these effects crop up, then you bring the man back.
You could get him back from there. This is one possibility, one way
in which you could use this.
Mr. KArTH. You are talking about long distance space flights then,
much longer than from here to the Moon?
Mr. Lorrin. Yes. You might even call it a space laboratory.
Suppose you wanted to know the effect of long-term space exposure
on certain kinds of materials. We can simulate it only to a certain
70468 0-61--3

Mr. Karrh. Could it have any communications capability?
Mr. Lorrin. Yes, I suppose scientific observations of some s sort.
Perhaps a telescope or something of this nature. There are various
missions that one an think of that would make desirable a station in
orbit around the E th. The question of how you build s station,
whether you use flatable or erectable technique or u ne other
technique, depend what you want the station to do, how big it is
going to be, an detailed engineering f the thing. You
orations of particular
problems, say this is really the th you want It has to be subjected
to a very detailed engineering evaluation of various concepts.
Mr. KarTH. We are talking about something that is in its very
infancy of research?
Mr. LorTiN. It has only been in past two years that we have
worked on this concept. ind of thing that Mr. O'Sulli-
van talks about, the communications satellite, and so on, I believe that
goes back maybe five years, something like this, is that right?
Mr. O'SULLIVAN. Yes.
Mr. KarTh. Let's talk about this big inflatable balloon that you
passed the picture around on.
This would be a passive communications satellite, is that correct?
ing the space environment for of 5 to 10 years.
I might suggest, since you asked the question, could a manned space
station be of value with respect , say, communications, I think it
definitely could.
One of the studies that we have made at our research center has been
a comparison between passive and active communications satellites.
the components of a receiver and of a re-transmitter could continue
to operate for a period of 5 or 10 years without attendance, then it
would be very desirable to ave an active type of communications
satellite.
I would like to recall that I be eve 15 to 20 years of research was
required before it was possibl have amplifiers of sufficient reliabil-
ity that it was practical to put them in trans-Atlantic cables where
they couldn't be readily hauled up and serviced. This is somewhat
the situation that we are in at the present moment with respect to
communications satellites. I think that you can show that definitely
there would be great advantages to an active type of satellite, that is,
the kind that receives the signal and re-transmits it.

satellite and have it in on an experimental basis within a year.
Would you care nt on that?
Mr. O'SULLIVAN. can put up an active communications
satellite in a period two that would be quite serviceable
with respect to res how to build one that would have the capa-
bility of lasting to 10 years. I think if we go into
the economics e matter, it is necessary to have sa tellites that do not
have to be serviced over a period of, say, 5 years.
Mr. KARTH. en you say "we" could do this in a year or two, do
you mean NA A or industry or a combination?
Mr. O'SuLLivAN. A good combination of NASA and the industry.
I think we have many good ideas that could be contributed to the
matter that would be of great assistance, and I think industry does,
too.
Mr. KarTH. If NASA worked on an active communications satel.
lite system with th he idea that they were going to themselves do the
job, how long would it take NASA to, shall we say, develop an ac-
tive communications satellite system?
going to
face in trying to make one that is sufficiently reliable that it is worth
being placed in orbit on a commercial basis.
That is the reason why we have pursued first the passive satellite,
because we could see our way clear to ma something that had the
capability of lasting 5 to 10 years in orbit without service.
You know, it is a bit difficult to get up and put in a new tube
when one burns out. But in time this will be accomplished.
One of the reasons that it is quite important to do so is because, for
example, if we wish to have television communications, then we must
have a quite wide band width, as we call it technically, in order to be
able to transmit our pictures. This means
Mr. KartH. This can not be done by a passive satellite system, can
it?
Mr. O'SuLLivaN. It could be done with a passive satellite system
where it is large enough in diameter and where the transmitter on the
ground is sufficiently powerful and the receiver at the other end of the
link is sufficiently sensitive.
Mr. KarrH. Is this a capability that you see in Echo II, for
example?

proximately 700 miles.
Mr. KarrH. We have capable boosters, we have boosters capable of
achieving this right now?
Mr. O'SULLIvAN. Yes.
Mr. KartH. What booster would be used?
Mr. O'SULLIVAN. We tentatively have scheduled for the orbital
launching the Thor-Agena B vehicle.
Mr. KARTH. Thank you.
The CHaIRMAn. Further questions?
Mr. Van Pelr. With reference to Echo I and what you have said
about the debris that is in outer space that might puncture a vehicle,
how long will Echo I withstand that? Is there a possibility of com-
plete disintegration?
Mr. O'SuLLivaN. No. Echo I will not disintegrate in orbit. It
was designed for research on comr tions to confirm or disprove
that we could d we thought theoretically possible, namely,
send a signal fro surface of Earth up through the Earth's
ionosphere to a space, reflect it off this satellite, back
through the Eartl jonosp and it and have a signal
which did not fade out, did not undergo polarization or have other
things happen to it which ld destroy its usefulness. This was
proven with Echo I. Since that was its purpose, it was designed only
to last in orbit a sufficient length of time to accomplish this research
objective. As such, it was not designed as a permanent satellite but
one that was held spherical and a good reflector of radio signals
merely by retention of its internal 1 pressure. We calculate it was
punctured at the rate of about 1.4 square inches of hole area in it
a period of about 2 weeks.
Our second step now with Echo II is the building and verify-
dependent on the
retention of its internal pressure for maintaining itself as a good
reflector of radio signals." think that Echo II, on the basis of
our present knowledge, should have the capability of lasting in space
for a period of between 5 and 10 years. However, the orbit that
because of the minute amount of a aerodynamic resistance that it
encounters. This will bring it down much sooner than any 5 to
10 years.
The reason for not using a higher orbit is because we would have
to employ a much larger satellite than 135 feet in diameter if we
were to conduct television-—exploratory television communication
tests over a distance, say, as great as across the Atlantic Ocean.
If we were to put the Echo II into an orbit, say, as high as 2 to

reflecto
that it was when we first put it up.
Mrs. Weis. Is it useful at all?
Mr. O'SULLIVAN. Yes, it is still quite use Ye are very happy
about that. It has oetter than we really anticipated.
We thought by now it would have degenerated quite badly, but it seems
to be withstanding the space envire ment much better than we had
anticipated.
Mrs. Weis. That was my impression, that it had functioned better.
Is there any instrumentation simply the globe?
Is this purely a reflecting operation?
Mr. O'SULLIVAN. It is purely operation, just like a
mirror. One of the great advantages er, say, an active com-
munications satellite is that the mirror does n care how many signals
bounce off it, what their frequencies are, what language is employed,
or what the band width is. It reflects them all just as well. " There
is no maintenance.
Mrs. Weis. It has no instrumentation or other things?
Mr. O'SuLLIvAN. That is rig only instrumentation that is
aboard the Echo I satellite we dio tracking beacons. These
had nothing to do with the tions. They did not receive
any signals and retransmit them any signals and retransmit were merely markers, bea-
cons, so that we could track the satellite by means of the Minitrack
system, so we would know where it is.
Mrs. WeIs. Are those outside? Mrs. We1s. Are those outside?
Mr. O'SuLLivaN. They are mounted on the skin of the satellite.
Mrs. Weis. I was interested in this model on display. Mrs. Weis. I was interested in this model on display.
The CHairMAN. That is the Goodvear The CHAIRMAN. Ths t is the Goodyear. That is what I am going to That is what I am going to
get to.
Mrs. Weis. hink the question we go for any of it. If you have
your instrumer tation in any of these things, the man and instruments
has to stay in the nose cone, there is nothing but pressure in what is
being inflated?
Mr. LorrIn. The men stay in the reentr capsule or the command
module, whatever you want to call it, until it is inflated, and then they
enter. It is possible that certain instrumentation could be carried in
the inflated portion as it is folded up. It is letail of engineering.
Mrs. Weis. You could put some-
Mr. Lorrin. You could. This is a matter of detailed design of
how in fact you put it together.
The ChairmAn. Before I recognize the next member for question-
ing, I would like to ask the Goodyear people about how long would
your presentation require? We have three witnesses from Goodyear.
Mr. RicHarpson. I think our presentation we would like to give
you would take somewhere around 50 minutes.
The CHaIRMaN. I will recognize Mr. King, and then if there is no
objection
Mr. KinG. I yield to Mr. Hechler on the ground of seniority.

comparable cost fig
structing the Echo cho II satellites and also the Explorer
IX satellite, which w in orbit, all three of which are erect-
able structures, that the been surprisingly low. I think this
has been in large measu e to the working out and the solution of
many of the problems laboratory so that we had a clear idea of
how to proceed. ne way that costs can be cut down.
Mr. Hechler. If I may interrupt a second, I am surprised that you
are surprised. I would assume the cost of the inflatable structure
would be considerably less than that of a different type.
Mr. LofTiN. I would like to make a comment on that. I can't
answer your question with regard to the numbers.
One thing I want you tokeep in mind on-——
The CHAIRMA Could you talk a little louder?
Mr. LofTIN. Yes, sir.
I can't answer your question as o the comparative costs. I would
make this comment, that in new system,
whether it be an inflatable space station or reentry vehicle or what
have you, a very large part of the cost is in the R. & D. that has to go have you, a very large ge part of the cost is in the R. & D. that has to go
into the thing.
Although, again, I can't give you numbers, I would guess this is rela- Although, again, I can' ive you numbers, I would guess this is rela-
tively large as compared to the cost of the actual metal or fabric or tively large as compa cost of the actual metal or fabric or
what have you that is cut to make the thing out of.
Mr. Hechler. I would suggest maybe that Goodyear might want to
volunteer to help you out on the R. & D. cost.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. King, I recognized you.
Mr. King. I will pass. I don't want to cut into Goodyear's presen-
tation.
The Chairman. Unless there is an urgent question, let's ask these
two witnesses to stand aside for awhile while we Goodyear an
opportunity to put on its case.
Goodyear has a motion picture.
Mr. Karrh. For a matter of comparison, from the witnesses in the
communications industry who were here, they estimated all the way
from $400 to $600 million for a 25 or 30 active satellite communication
system.
Could you estimate the cost for approximately that many passive
satellites at the 2,000- or 3,000-mile level so their duration would be
from 5 to 10 years; could you give me a figure on that or could you not
at this time?"
Mr. O'SuLLivan. I am sorry that I am not in a position to try to
give you a figure on that.
Mr. KarTh. Would you try to prepare one and give it to the com-
mittee for the record?
Mr. O'SuLLIvaN. I think we could do that.

6 PROJECT MERCURY
The Naval Air Materiel Center, Naval Air Development Center,
Naval parachute fa nedical units all have given sub-
stantial support to NASA In addition, the Pacifie Missile Range,
under Navy management, is aiding in the operation of the Canton
Island, Hawaii, and southern California tracking stations.
Supports by units of the Department of Defense has, in general.
been formalized through a series of agreements between NASA and
the particular military service oncerned. As a rule, these agreements
call for reimbursement by N or any support or services ren-
dered over and above normal military operations. Estimated costs
of DOD support are contained in table IV.
TaBLe IV.—Estimated costs of DOD support of Project Mercury (through
MR-Y and MA-S)
[Thousands of dollars]
Estimated Portion re- Balance ab-
DOD unit/command total costs imbursed sorbed by
by NASA DOD
AFMTC 3,188 1,500 21,688
AFBMD ---- 54,350 153,900 450
APGC 130 8 E 122
ACIC 185 4185
WSMR 4 660 560 100
PMR 1,552 1.552 1,192 3360 1360
Air Rescue Service 1,394
Navy recovery forces 18,333 5,135 613,198
Bioastronautics:
Operational 560 100 460
R.&D 1,425 496 929
U.S. Army, LARC Supply 114 34 80
GEEIA GEEIA 166
NASA space task group 290
Total... Total........ 82,347 64,794 17,533
1 These estimated costs are not supported by or obtained from any accounting system. They are as.
sembled by estimating the cost of effective man-days effort which is applied to Project Mercury by DO D sembled by estimating the cost of effective man-days effort which is applied to Project Mercury by DO I)
personnel who would have been employed by DO D whether or not Project Mercury were supported.
Includes $325,000 to construct a building to replace Telemetry-3 Building. which is being used as Mer- 2 Includes $325,o00 to construct a building to replace Telemetry-3 Building. which is being used as Mer-
cury control center. Includes estimated cost of range support of Mercury.
The AFBMD reimbursable costs are based on a 14-booster, 13-launch Mercury program. These esti.
mated costs were prepared as of July 31, 1960, in conjunction with the development plan covering A FBM D
support of Project Mercury. As such, they are subject to current and future negotiation, refinement, and/or
approval by NASA.  This is a continuing process as the program develops and as the requirement for
boosters and/or launches changes.
Appropriate action to obtain reimbursement is in process of negotiation.
Includes nonreimbursed cost of Navy Construction Battalion work at Canton, and cost of general pur-
pose range support of Project Mercury.
Cost of operations and maintenance of Navy Recovery Forces are being reimb sed by NASA in ae-
cordance with agreement between CNO/ NASA (STG) dated Mar. 23, 1960
Overall coordination of De urtment of Defer oport for Project
Mercury operations is a
USAF, Department Defense representative for Project Mercury
Mercury.
Project Mercury funding summary
Initial funding Project Mercury was provided in fiscal year
1959, when $46,416,330 was obligated for Mercury research and devel-
opment, and $2,425,o00 for construction and equipment.
In fiscal year 196o, the obligation for research and development
totaled $84,328,370, and for construction and equipment, $35,795,000.
The fiscal year 1960 figures include supplemental funding of $12,200,

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 19
(The information requested is as follows:)
The question was asked for the comparative cost of a 25 to 30 passive com-
munications satellite system to a system incorporating an equal number of active
communications satellites.
NASA has engaged the Rand Corp. under contract NASr-21, a copy of which
is attached, to study passive and 24-hour active communications satellite sys-
tems. The Rand Corp. will develop information which will help determine the
practical and economic benefits and the cost consideration related to satellite
communications systems. When the information is developed we shall be happy
to make it available to the committee.
Economic and Technical Studies oN COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITES FOR THE
Year DecemBer 1, 1960-NoveMber 30, 1961
The studies deseribed below are proposed to be initiated during the coming
year. It is expected that the study of passive can be essentially com-
pleted during the od start made on the study of 24-hour active
systems.
We expect, however, that during the course of these studies other technical
problems will arise which cannot be foreseen now or may become of special
interest as the development of the communication satellite technology progresses.
We propose that study of such problems be undertaken when deemed desirable
after appropriate consultation between NASA and Rand.
I. Passive Systems
As a first step, a parametrie As a first step, a parametrie study of those systems containing spherical reflec- tudy of those systems containing spherical reflec-
tors as orbiting elements will be made for the purpose of evaluating their eco- tors as orbiting elements wi be made for ng their eco-
nomic potential. The main variables are:
A. Reflector.--The size, weight, and useful lifetime of the reflectors are of A. Reflector.--The size, weight, and useful lifetime of the reflectors are of
importance. The lifetime as a function of weight is presently least understood.
Therefore, at first, it will be necessary to assign a range of reasonable lifetimes Therefore, at first, it will be necessary to assign a range of reasonable lifetimes
for a given weight. As the study progresses we should be able to refine this. for a given weight. As the study progresses we should be able to refine this.
Close contact will be maintained with groups studying the problem of stiffening
the reflectors and consideration will also be given to reflector shapes other
than spherical.
B. Orbital altitude and configuration.—The orbital configuration influences B. Orbital altitude and configuration.—The orbital configuration influences
the capacity of the system, the circuit outages in terms of total fractional out-
age time and also the duration of outages. age time and also the duration of outages. Other important factors are the
number of reflectors and the launch vehicle. Tradeoffs among system capacity number of reflectors and the launch vehicle. Tradeoffs among system capacity
(desired to be large), outage time, and the number of launches required to place 41
the system in orbit (both desired to be small) will be investigated. These trade-
offs depend in part on the great circle distance between terminals and on their
locations relative to the poles. As a consequence, it will be necessary to make
assumptions about the locations of the ground terminals.
C. Ground environment.-It is necessary to develop solid information on the
present state of the art of high effective radiated powers and the projected
state of the art a few years hence, including the properties of large tracking
antennas. In the course of the Echo experiment, certain tracking difficulties
were encountered. This raises the question whether in an operational system
each ground terminal would catalog the orbital parameters of each individual re-
flector, whether a central station could perform this function, etc.
Variations in the parameters mentioned above will be studied to determine
their effect on costs, and to see what general system design now appears most
promising.
For the same antenna size, receiver temperature, and transmitter power at
the ground installation and equal payload in orbit the number of channels
in an active system is much higher than in a passive system, when a single link
is considered. However. in a passive system the number of participating ground
stations can be increased, subject only to the restrictions imposed by the avail-
ability of frequencies is, a passive system may become competitive with
active systems when th number of participating stations becomes large, par-
ticularly if the stations tend to concentrate in some geographical areas. This
possibility will be examined as part of the passive satellite study.

20 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
II. Active Systems
A thorough analysis of 24-hour communications satellites will be undertaken.
While results of some aspects of this analysis will be reported during the coming
year, it is currently anticipated that this study will extend beyond November
30, 1961.
As noted in the special advisory report, by using a more advanced repeater de-
sign a capacity increase of a factor about four seems quite feasible over what is
now planned in the Advent program. A different approach to the 24-hour system
is a smaller (lighter weight) satellite which could be launched by a smaller
vehicle than Atlas-Centaur or several smaller satellites launched simultaneously
by a large vehicle. study will be made of the economic potential of such a
24-hour system based on the following technical studies:
A. System implications.-The system implications of a few small 24-hour
satellites as contrasted with a single big satellite will be investigated. The
frequency requirements in the two cases differ drastically provided the smaller
satellites are separated in excess of one beamwidth as viewed from the ground.
Also, replacement considerations are different as are a number of other system
characteristics.
B. Booster possibilities for 24-hour orbit.-Booster data will be needed as
background information in varying the other parameters of 24-hour systems.
C. Orbital and attitude control subsystems.-The principal objective of this
investigation will be the determination of the relationship between fuel require-
ments and useful lietime in orbit for a specified payload or payloads. Possible
byproducts might be performance specifications for the orbital and attitude con-
trol systems and a discussion of possible system mechanizations. The study
will include investigation of orbital perturbations, orbital control, and attitude
control.
The orbital perturbation analysis will include, for example, investigation of
the perturbations of the orbit due to gravitational effects of the Sun, Moon, and the perturbations of the orbit due to gravitational effects of the Sun, Moon, and
the Earth's bulget to determine the length of the time permissible between orbital
corrections. If a sizable antenna is involved the effects of disturbing forces due
to radiation pressure from the Sun on orbital and attitude control processes may
become significant.
The orbital control investigation will include, for example, investigation of the
aecuracy with which the desired orbit could be established, single and multi- accuracy with which the desired orbit could be established, single and multi-
stage orbit correction processes from the standpoint of fuel stage orbit correction processes from the standpoint of fuel economy and accu- economy and accu-
racy, the effect of the attitude reference performance on the orbit control proe- racy. the effect of the attitude reference performance on orbit control proc-
ess, and probable fuel requirements to compensate for gravitational perturba- ess, and probable fuel requirements to compensate for vitational perturba-
tions of the initial orbit.
The attitude control investigation will include, for example, consideration of The attitude control investigation will include, for example, consideration of
possible attitude reference system mechanizations, performance specifications of
the attitude reference system based on antenna and orbital control requirements,
and energy requirements for attitude control systems.
D. Repeater electronics.-A 24-hour satellite may use a single high power
output tube, a number of lower power tubes or a still larger number of low
power solid state devices. The satellite antenna system may consist of only a
pair of Earth coverage antennas or may include a number of highly directive
antennas. The amount of directivity desirable depends on such factors as
ground station distribution. the degree of attitude stabilization, and the type
of power output device. The state of the art in output devices, antennas, and
other satellite components as well as the interrelationships will be examined
to define advantageous systems, e.g., choice of frequency, output device, number
and type of antennas, design techniques.
Out of the voluminous work being carried out on auxiliary power systems,
space environment and reliability, items of particular significance to active com-
munications satellites will be studied.
E. Quasi-fired ground antennas.—Only relatively small diurnal motions of
the antenna beam directions are needed in 24-hour systems, so that the necessity
for tracking antennas is eliminated. We propose to investigate what antenna
arrangements might be most attractive.

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 21
Cost estimate, economic and technical studies on communications satellites-—
Estimated costs and fee for year Dec. 1, 1960Nov. 30, 1961
Direct salaries. $77,700
Overhead, at-85.68 percent 66, 600
Publications----. 2,500
Staff travel--- 9,250
Consultants, fees, and trave 7, 000
Computing machine rent 10,200
Total estimated cost- 173, 250
Fixed fee---- 10,400
Total estimated cost and fixed fee.. 183, 650
Economic And International Policy Questions Associated WItH Space Ac-
Tivites foR the YeAR DeceMBer 1, 1960NoVEMBER 30, 1961
Studies planned on the economic and international policy questions associated
with space activities fall into three broad areas: those dealing with communi-
cations satellites, those dealing with meteorological satellites, and consideration
of the impact of the "space race" on other countries. Proposed programs of
research in each of these areas are described below. The studies described
are proposed to be initiated during the coming year and is expected that
substantial progress can be made on all of th ver, during the course
of thesse studies, other problems may arise which cannot be foreseen now or
may become of special interest. We propose that study of such problems be
undertaken when deemed desirable after appropriate consultation between NASA undertaken when deemed desirable after appropriate consultation between NASA
and Rand.
1. Communications Satellites
Three studies are planned on the economie and international policy questions Three studies are planned on the economic and international policy questions
associated with communications satellites: a study of economie and social economic and social
benefits stressing possible growth of new kinds of demands for long-distance
communications; a study of economie policy issues; and a study of the pros communications; a study of econom y issues; and a study of the pros
and cons of internationalized development and operation of communications and cons of internationalized development and oI ation of communications
satellites.
A. Economic and social bcnefits.Though most of our future work in con- A. Economic and social bcnefits.-Though most of our future work in con-
nection with analyzing the economic benefits of communications will be done in
close connection with the technical studies described separately, one aspect
of these studies is of general interest, and is proposed to be continued more or
less independently of the detailed economie and technieal analyses. This study less independently of the detailed economie and technical analyses. This study
will further examine the new kinds of demands for long-distance communications
that may emerge in the future; especially demands for data transmission, fac-
simile devices, closed-circuit TV, and commercial TV. The economic promise
of communications satellites undoubtedly will be substantially affected by how
rapidly these new types of demand emerge.
B. Economic policy issues. -The study of economic policy issues will involve
three considerations: a short-term study (several months) of licensing the
use of Government launching facilities and two longer term studies (some-
thing like a year), one dealing with the frequency allocation problem and the
other with the ratemaking problem.
The analysis of the economic poliey problems involved in working out a
scheme for licensing private contractors to use government launching facilities
will include consideration of the kinds of licensing arrangements the AEC has
worked out and an examination of alternative formulas for determining what
rates should be charged for the use of government launch facilities as well as for
the launching vehicles.
The study of the frequency allocation problem will be directed to finding ways
for insuring efficient utilization of the frequeney spectrum in the light of in-
creased demands on spectrum space brought on by unications satellites.
The study will include, for mple, consideration of the follow items: (a) An
examination of prevail tices in nd assigni equencies, and
how these practices will affect the availabil spectrum for ace purposes;
(b) an examination of the effectiveness of the current procedures for allocating
frequencies. How well do they take into account the value of the rights that are
assigned for particular purposes? How well do they insure that adequate atten-
704680-61--4

22 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
tion will be given for finding ys for conserving on the use of the spectrum?
How well do they ljustments in trum use as technology ad-
vances?: (c an examination of tl the proposals that have been made for improving
the efficiency of the allocative process. Amor those th will be seriously
examined from a practical viewpoint is the s gestion tha market be estab-
lished for the purchase and sale of frequency assignments.
The analysis of the ratemaking problem will include, for example, considera-
tion of the following subjects: (a) A systematic examination of how communica-
tions rates are presently determined with the view of developing an explanation
in terms understandable to the layman; (b) an inquiry into how international
rates are determined both in the communications fleld and in the airlines field;
(c) an analysis of the consequences present policies are having in allocating
resourees; (d) a discussion of the kinds of changes in ratemaking policies that
appear necessary if the benefits of communications satellites, or other kinds of
new technology, are going to be fully exploited.
C. Internationalized development or operation.-A communications satellite
system is by definition "international" in that it provides a communication serv.
ice between countries and probably on a global scale. Ground links would be
located in various countries and international arrangements would have to be
made accordingly. The United States may decide to develop and operate the
system cssentially as a U.S. enterprise (public or private) and to work out po-
litical arrangements and technical details on a bilateral basis with the user-
participants. The Special Advisory Report of September 15, 1960, recommended
such an approach, for reasons cited on pages 73-75.
However, insufficient analysis has been given the question already raised by
U.S. officials and businessmen: Why not develop, or at least operate the system
under some sort of international auspices? Development, ownership, or operation
might be vested in a specialized agency of the United Nations; or in some inter-
national technical group; or in a consortium; in a public or private corporation
in which shares are held by governments, private concerns, or other groups; etc.
We propose to study this problem to identify and assess the worth of a rariety We propose to study this problem to identify and assess the worth of a rariety
of possible "internationalized" of possible "internationalized" arrangements: their advantages, risks, and draw- arrangements: their advantages, risks, and draw-
backs, and the longer term implications and consequences for U.S. national backs, and the longer term implications and consequences for U.S. national
interests. Several case studies of analogous or pertinent international ventures
would be undertaken (e.g., International Atomic Energy Agency) in order to
assess the precedents and to establish a factual footing for future projections.
This study will follow through on present Rand work for NASA, nearing
completion, on some of the political problems and opportunities in the field of
cooperation and international regulation and control of space activities. It will
be pursued in close association with the planned project on "The Impact of the
'Space Race' on Other Countries" (see description below). 'Space Race' on Other Countries" (see description below)
II. Meteorological Satellites
Two studies of the economic implications of meteorological satellites are
planned. The first treats the value of improvements in storm warning and the
second considers how information derived from meteorological satellites might
be used to improve the hurricane warning system.
A. Economic value of improvements in storm warning.Over the next few
months, work on the economie and social value of weather information will
focus on the problem outlined in section V RM-2620-NASA: the determina-
tion of the value of improvements in storm warning, particularly hurricane
warning. A model of the sequential decisionmaking problem involved in the
efficient use of storm advisories is being developed. When it is completed, which
is expected to be in the near future, an attempt will be made to apply it in some
situations where the economic significance of better warning may be expected
to be considerable. One particularly interesting opportunity for a case study has
come to our attention: when a hurricane threatens at Cape Canaveral a decision
must be made as to whether launching vehicles should be taken down and
gantries secured against the high winds. Such action may be costly both in terms
of the direct costs of taking protective action and the resulting delays in the
testing program; on the other hand, failure to take such action when it is needed
will result in expensive damage. It is hoped that the analysis will both point
the way to optimal use of the existing possibilities for warning and indicate
what sorts of improvements might have the greatest value. Subsequent to the
analysis of the Cape Canaveral problem, we propose to undertake other case
studies of the use of hurricane warning, but the particular situations to be
studied have not yet been decided upon.

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 23
B. Possible improvements to the hurricane warning system.—A study is
planned to indicate specifically some covements in the hurricane warning
system which be obtained by using meteorological satellite observations.
In particular, we will seek to determine what improvements would result simply
from having the information on the position of the hurricane which the satellites
would make available, and compare the costs of obtaining position data in this
way with the costs of obtaining it by aircraft reconnaissance. Because the long-
range contribution of the weather satellite program to improvements in forecast-
ing techniques and to the science of meteorology cannot be estimated with pre-
cision, our conclusions in this area will have to be regarded as providing lower
bounds to the benefits obtained rather than expected value estimates.
III. Impact of the "Space Race" on Other Countries
Currently nearing completion is a study of Soviet cold war objectives in space,
and the Soviet conception of U.S. objectives and space programs. The impact
of the Soviet technical program and political strategy, and the impact of U.S.
efforts need to be assessed for their effects on in-between nations. Such a study
is proposed, on a limited scale, in order to provide an empirical basis for positive
proposals and initiatives which the United States m ht undertake in the
futureinitiatives for consolidating and building international support for U.S.
space activities, both technical and political.
In order to make realistic assessments of the support the United States can
expect from other countries and to guide future U.S. actions, an analysis will
be made of the views and positions already entertained in key countries as
expressed in their own space programs and interests; in their stand at the United
Nations, COSPAR, ITU; their attitudes toward space aspects of arms control
negotiations:ete. Much of the present knowledge on the impact of the space com-
petition is based on casual impression or episodic public opinion polling. The petition is based on casual impression or episodie public opinion polling. The
proposed study will attempt to develop a more objective synthesis of existing proposed study will attem otto develop a mor objective synthesis of existing
source materials and might be followed up with field studies on a pilot scale. source materials and be followe on a pilot scale.
Cost estimate, economic and international policy questions associated with space
activities-Estimated costs and fee for the year Dec. 1, 196o-Nov. 30, 1961 activities-Estimated costs and fee for the year De -Nov. 30, 1961
Direct salaries_ Direct salaries_. $133,300
Overhead at 85.68 percent- Overhead at 85.68 percent---. 114, 200
Publications_-- Publications_-. 4,900
Staff travel_--- Staff travel--- 15,900
Consultants, fees, and travel Consultants, fees, and trav 63,650 63, 650
Computing machine rent Computing machine rental 3,800 3, 800
Total estimated cost Total estimated cost. 335, 750
Fixed fee_..-- 20, 150
cost and fixed 335,900
Mr. O'SULLIV VAN. regard believe you asked a
moment ago, I have formation; namely, to the effect
that RCA was selected yesterday to conduct notions to construct an
experimental active communications satellite. That is a relay type.
It is to test out the satellite components in the space environment. 'We
are proceeding in that direction.
The CHAIRMAN. $3 milliOn?
Mr. O'SuLLIvAN. I think so.
The CHaIrman. If there is no objection, we will go ahead now and
hear the witnesses from Goodyear.
Mr. Richardson, you are vice president of Goodyear Aireraft Corp.
Could you take over your presentation and you ean introduce the
picture on at the proper time and place in the testimony.
Mr. RICHARDSON. 7 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

talking about things that you make small on the launch pad and make
large as you get into orbit.
We are very delighted to be here, primarily to acquaint you with
a new technology.
I think Mr. Loftin and Mr. O'Sullivan have done a good job, and
NASA is to be com nmended the Echo and the communication
satellite programs.
We would like to carry the discussion into some other areas that
haven't been covered, which I hope you will f of interest.
It is obvious, as pointed out by Mr. Loftin, that in an expanda-
ble structure you can fold it up on the launch pad. It basically has
light weight, and through that utilizes only medium size or smaller
boosters therefore not requiring the large boosters to put large struc-
tures in space.
At Goodyear Aircraft we have been interested in this subject and
have done active research work for a number of years.
The state of the art is coming along well. We don't know all the
answers as yet, but it is all very feasible, and there is very definitely
a big world ahead of us in this country in the use of expandable
structures for many space applications.
I think in the interest of conserving time, we should get ahead with
our presentation.
We are going to have to ask you, Mr. Chairman, to bear with
us. We have some slides and motion pictures. We have a black- e have a black-
board and we are going to try to work between them so we may
have a little problem of turning lights on and off this morning.
The CHaIRMAN. We will help you. We have until noon. That
will give you 40 minutes.
Mr. RicHaRDson. We will do the best we can to be finished by
noon.
There are two gentlemen with me from our organization, Dr. R. S.
Ross and Mr. Robert T. Madden, who are going to participate in
our presentation morning. I hope you will find it very
interesting.
We will be most happy to answer any questions when we are
through.
to Dr. R. S. Ross.

INFLATABLE SPACE 25
STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT S. ROSS
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT DE AIR-
CRAFT CORP., AKRON, OHIO
Dr. Ross. We are going to show you a few slides of some of the
subjects that we think we can make out of the inflatable or expanda-
ble structures. I have some movies here
The CHAIRMAN. JuS noment. Some of us can't see the slides.
Dr. Ross. Some call the inflatable, expandable, erectable, or pliant
structures. They all invol same thing, the basic function; they
can be folded up into a small compact package at one time and
opened up into a very large one at another time.
50 YEARS OF FLIGHT FABRICS
o
1909
1917 E
1935 1935
1939
1949
1955
TODAY
FIgure 1
Figure 1 shows that what Goodyear has been doing for the last
30 years has been tied up with this type of structure. We can go
all the way back to the beginning of, you might say, the Wright
Brothers, way back in 1909, we started working with fabrics that
went on airplanes. Actually the tires that went on the airplanes,
too, and that we ride on today, are of that type of structure, up
through the balloons and airships.
Back in 1949, we found we could see through some of this ma-
terial with radar, and we made fabric radomes.
In 1955 we found we had a breakthrough. We built the inflata-
ble plane at that time.
Today we are oking at space applications that could be space sta-
tions or different kinds of re-entry vehicles.
We will try to tell you about some of these today.
Why do we really look at expandable structures in the first place.
There are four major advantages as shown on Figure 2.

26 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
ADVANTAGES
PACKAGING ABILITY
EASE OF ERECTION
LIGHT WEIGHT
OVERLOAD RECOVERY
Figure 2
First of all, as has been mentioned several times, the packaging
ability. We have a million hinges built int and we haven't had to
pay for them. Normally, when we make a h d structure, if you put
a hinge in, it costs you extra weight. need any kind of
actuators or cams or anything like that. You put the gas to it and
it erects. This is simplicity and results in reliability. What we are
talking about is space reliability because we aren't up there to see it
usually
is such a problem, it is
usually very difficult to do anything that will save 5 percent in weight.
In our applications s ometimes we talk abo t saving 90 percent. This
is a very large factor and an important one.
There is nothing magic or secret about it. We aren't varying any
basic fundamentals. The reason that we can usually go to these extra
light weights is that we can make practical structures of very very
small dimensions which are not possible out of normal sheet metals.
If you got the metals down to those dimensions, they would be foils
so delicate that they would be hard to fabricate.
The last factor, overload recovery, is the kind of thing that is
helpful to the engineer who works in this field. Any time a man de-
signs a structure, he has to anticipate how big the loads are going to
be that he is going to encounter. Nature doesn't always play in his
favor, and once in a while he encounters a 'oad that is greater than
what he anticipates.

Figure 3 FigUre 3
The reason for showing the picture (Figure 3) of the airship, which
is not necessarily as space item but could be related to it in that we have
already examined this for carrying very large boosters and find you
can do this with an airship-type vehicle. Another reason for showing
this is that si not really a difficult problem with an expandable
structure.
The car that you see underneath the airship is about the size of a
good size airplane. You can see how much larger the envelope, which
is an expandable structure, is.
When we talk about space, we are talking about applications that
usually requires very large structure And when we talk about an
expandable structure, a large structure shows great advantages.
Let's show the movie here of a typical airship in flight. This will
be the first of several brief moving picture examples of expandable
structures.
(Movie shown of airship being moved from air dock and in flight.)

28 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
TAILORED EXPANDABLE STRUCTURE
T
M
T
M
FIgure 4
Dr. Ross. Leaving the airship a moment and looking at one of
the basic characteristics of expandal ctures, Figure 4, shows
that we put the cords that these materir made of in the direc-
tion we want. nis is a major advantage er sheet metal construc-
tion where you have the same strength and weight in all directions,
whether required or not. If we have a big load in one direction, we
can put lots of cords or heavy ones in. If we have a small load in this
direction, we can put few cords. This gives us the advantage of only
load. Don't carry anything you don't need. It gives us the oppor-
tunity of making these light weights that we talked about.
Also, everybody knows if you mak here, a pressurized struc-
ture, where you have pressure in the cen nter and carry all the material
around the outside, this is one of the lightest structures you can pos-
sibly make.
The airship is a body of revolution of this type.
We attach the car to the bottom and distribute its load into the
envelope by catenaries attached to the top. Actually, you will find
that we have pulled down on the envelope in those areas to take the
high load.
If we carried that over a wide span, you would find we could pull
very hard on the top and bottom and get to the shape shown in the
lower part of Figure 5, and ha e what you might consider a flat
airship.
Let's consider that you might take this and put an infinite number
of connections in there, and you structure that
has what we call drop threads. This gives you flat structures so you
don't have to be limited to round structures, cylinders, or torus-type.

exploration of space, in it est sense, will begin only when man
himself can participate dired this exploration.
Man is destined to play a vital and direct role in the exploration of
the Moon and the planets. In this regard, it is not easy to conceive
that instruments can be devised that can effectively and reliably du-
plicate man's role as an explorer, a geologist, a surveyor, a photogra-
pher, a chemist, a biologist, a physicist. or any of a host of other
specialists whose talents would be needed. In all of these areas, man's
judgment, his ability to observe and to reason, and his decision-
making capabilities are required. Only man can cope with the unex-
photographie methods, to focus and choose the most profitable in-
stant for exposure, to recognize that his view is obstructed, or even to
note that the lens has become dirty.
Closer to Earth, man's special abilities would be employed in manned
orbiting space laboratories, or space stations. Man's observational,
analytical, and functional capabilities can provide an advantage in the
conduct of a range of meteorological, communication, broadcasting,
mapping, and search activities in orbiting vehicles. Orbiting labora-
tories will also permit the investigation and proof testing of vehicular
components and operating techniques required for the development of
other advanced space vehicles and missions. Of note in this area are
the evaluation of micrometeorites and radiation damage to space ma-
terials, the development of space propulsion systems, the study of
spacecraft erection and construction, the investigation of rendezvous

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 29
EXPANDABLE STRUCTURAL FORMS
2
FIGURe 5
One of the breakthroughs we had was the development of a material
called Airmat, which is made out of this flat structure as shown in the
upper right side of Figure 5. This is a typical flat panel with the
number of threads in between it. When you put pressure in it, it
doesn't go to a sphere but is flat. We call this Airmat. When you
put pressure into them, the threads prevent the pieces of cloth separat-
ing more than the dimension of the threads.
We were able also to take these and actually shape the structure,
that is, change the lengths of the drop threads so when you inflated
this body you would have an air foil-shaped device. See Figure 6.
This shows how we went from the catenary-typ ngement on
the airship and to the drop thread.
Frankly, the samples we are showing you are nothing but pieces
of carpet, made on a carpet loom and normally they make these out-
side surfaces very close together. T make carpet they cut the drop
threads to make the plush surface. In our applications, we coat the
surfaces to make them gas tight, seal the edges and pressurize inter-
nally to make a rigid structure. This is nothing more than an I-beam,
if you might visualize it, as shown in Figure 6. With pressure, you
get tension in the surfaces and you have an I-beam with the web of
the I-beam essentially weighing nothing.
It is difficult to get material lighter than this. This is why we look
at it as one of the world's lightest structural materials. It will remain
stil! and hard as long as you maintain pressure in it.

30 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
LOADING SYSTEM
-
B 5
3
Figure 6
As I mentioned earlier, we actually y were able to make an airfoil
shaped body on these looms.
blocks in them and instead of carpet, and we said, "We want a speci- blocks in them and instead carpet, and we said, "We want a speci-
fied number of yards of N fied number of yards of NAC 'A 0015 wing structure." 0015 wing structure."
To show that we could To show that we could do things and make o things and make them useful in this way, them useful in this way,
we actually, in working with the Navy, ONR, decided we would make we actually, in working with the Navy, ONR, decided would make
a rescue-type vehicle as shown in Figure 7. a rescue-type vehicle as shown in Figure 7.
The idea behind this was that we would try to make it as small as
possible. If a pilot is down in some hostile territory, you could fly :11
over, drop this package to him, and some dark night he could turn a
valve and he would inflate, start the engine and fly back to his own
base.
To make an airplane like this, we had to make what you would call
breakthroughs in the state of the art of structures. We were able to
make wings of this airplane of one-tenth of the weight of a conven-
tional structure.
We have a short movie now of one of these little airplanes so you
can get some idea of its design and flight characteristics.
We made this one-place plane for the Na vy. The Army asked us
to make a two-place plane for them.
(Movie shown of Inflatoplane being unpacked and flown.)
Dr. Ross. The next slides cover some of our work on space stations.
Since this field covers everything from underneath the sea to in the air
and off into space and the space field is what we are talking about
today, we have divided our expandible structures into three areas:
Those that require large strengths-light weight, such as a space
station, those items that encounter high temperatures such as some-

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 31
INFLATOPLANE
F
Wea
GOOD,AYEAR
FIgUre 7 FIgUre 7
thing you would use for re-entry into the atmosphere, and finally those thing you would use for re-entry into the atmosphere, and finally those
items that are very very light in weight, but don't have to take any items that are very light in weight, but don't have to take any
big loads. Usually, you want the light weight stru uctures very ac-
curate in shape, such as a gigantic solar collector.
At this time, I would Tike to introduce Mr. Madden, who will give At this time, I would Iike to introduce Mr. Madden, who will give
you a little discussion on this particular type of space station. Then
I will return to cover the other two structures fields of applications.
SALES, GOODYI ON, OHIO
Mr. MADDEN. Figure 8 shows what we might consider an advanced
space vehicle, a large toroid tier-type con-
struction.
Figure 9 shows a configuration which is more representative of
the type of work ith the Langley Research
Center, which Mr. Loftin reviewed earlier.
You can see here have taken a look in our configuration evalua-
tions at two possibilities of how expandable structures I might be used
in a space vehicle, and in the upper left hand side for comparison
have shown a configuration which might be a metallie cylinder, pos-
sibly the final stage of a booster.

32 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
SPACE STATIONS
I
GOODAYEAR
Figure 8
CONFIGURATION EVALUATION CONFIGURATION EVALUATION GOODFYEAR GOOD/YEAR
RENDEZVOUS FEASIBILITY
GRAVITY SIMULATION
GROWTH POTENTIAL
MAXIMUM VOLUME PER POUND
VERSATILITY
Figure 9

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 33
Our studies have she own that the problem of gravity simulation,
if this is an area ern, can probably be best handled with a
toroidal arrangement and that this type of structure, using some of
the principles that Dr. Ross explained, can be made a minimum
weight for the desired volume. The research work that we are pres-
ently doing with the Langley Research Center is being directed at
getting the optimum type of material for this type of configuration.
On Figure 10, we show a comparison of some of the expandable
space station configurations that we have been investigating.
The first is a one-man 24-foot diameter configuration, identically
that configuration that Mr. Loftin described and as represented by
our model which I want to describe a little later.
BOOST WEIGHT DATA GOODFYEAR
WEIGHT BREAKDOWN (LB)
MISSION LAUNCH
STATION (DAYS) CAPSULE TORUS * POWER + TOTAL
I-MAN
(24FT) (24 FT) 14 3.344 3.344 3,432 3,432 1005 1005 7.781 7.781
3-MAN
(50FT) (50FT) 14 14 3,500 3,500 3,090 3,090 1,000 7,590
IO-MAN
(I0O FT) (I0O FT) 35 6,596 8,018 7,500 * 22,114
IO-MAN
(200FT) 35 6,596 6,596 9,128 9,128 6,300† 6,300* 22,024
IO-MAN
(400FT) (400FT) 35 6,596 10,798 5,100 5,100 22,494
* * INCLUDES MISSION,LIFE SUPPORT,AND ELECTRONIC INCLUDES MISSION,LIFE SUPPORT,AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT. EQUIPMENT.
+ + INCLUDES LAUNCH AIRFRAME WEIGHT. INCLUDES LAUNCH AIRFRAME WEIGHT.
25 KW ELECTRICAL SYSTEM.
FIGURE 10
We have also looked at a three-man, 50-foot diameter space station.
I think an important thi note at the total launch
weight of these vehicles is of the order of 7,500 to 8,000 pounds, which
is well within the anticipated capability of the Centaur booster.
The concept in the first instance would utilize the Mercury capsule
as the re-entry vehicle, and you can see it is identified as a one-man
station.
Looking at later capabilities, we also show 100-foot diameter, 200-
foot diameter, and 400-foot diameter stations.
It may be of interest that for the exact simulation of gravity that
we have here on Earth, a 4o0-foot diameter space station, rotating
at approximately 4 rpm gives the one g simulation.
Figure 11 shows a concept of a three-man station, using again the
same principles of an inflated torus.

A
FIgure 11
Here a ballistic-type nose cone and re-entry vehicle would also be
the center hub and, as brought some of the earlier rdiscussion,
the space station would be boosted in the packaged configuration
within the nose cone, as an integral unit. fter deployment of the
space station in the space environment, the space station space ecrew could move out crew could move out
through the spokes into the working structure.
Figure 12 shows ical deployment sequence for this type of
vehicle.
left-hand side, completely packaged,
the inflatable componen nicely with the oster configuration.
After deployment, th urized space station sumes the toroidal
shape. After completion of mission, the ca le can be separated
and programmed for re-ent d recovery in this instance, much like
that recently accomplished with the Mercury capsule.
Figure 13 shows the launch configuration, which is perhaps better
described by a movie which we can show n buildup of an
expandable configuration.
(Movie shown of space station model launch and deployed con-
figurations.)
Mr. Mappen. Starting with the basic Atlas booster, as shown here,
then comes an interstage fairing, the attachment of the Centaur stage,
and finally on top of this the mission module, as we term it, which
would enclose the packaged inflatable space station. This is attached
to the Mercury capsule configuration, much as it is presently designed
today.

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 35
ASCENT AND RE-ENTRY GOODAYEAR
DEPLOYMENT
STATION IN ORBIT LEAVE ORBIT
CENTAUR SEPARATION ORIENTATION,RE-ENTRY
RECOVERY
TOWER SEPARATION
ATLAS SEPARATION
: LANDING
LAUNCH
FIGUre 12 FIGure 12
LAUNCH CONFIGURATION CoOon/FEAD COOD/YEAD
MERCURY ORBITAL ALTITUDE -300 NAUT MI
CAPSULE
SPACE ORBITAL INCLINATION N - 28.5 DEG
STATION LAUNCH WEIGHT - 304,000 LB
MODULE
CENTAUR CREW -I MAN
BOOSTER MISSION DURATION - UP TO 14 DAYS
ABORT SYSTEM . MERCURY SYSTEM
ESCAPE AND RE-ENTRY MERCURY SSTEM
RECOVERY - MERCURY SYSTEM
FIgUre 13

FIgure 1I
Here a ballistic-type nose cone and re-entry vehicle would also be
the center hub and, as brought some of the earlier discussion,
the space station would be boosted in the packaged configuration
within the nose cone, as an integral unit. After deployment of the within the nose one, as an integral unit fter deployment of the
space station in the space environment, the space station in the space environment crew could move out crew could move out
through the spokes into the working structure. through the spokes into the working structure.
Figure 12 shows the typical deployment sequence for this type of
vehicle.
As you can see, in the lower left-hand side, completely packaged,
the inflatable mate nicely with the booster configuration.
After deployment, the ressurized space station assumes the toroidal
shape. After completion o mission, the capsule can be separated
and programmed for re-ent l recovery in this instance, much like
that recently accomplished with the Mereury capsule.
Figure 13 shows the launch configuration, which is perhaps better
described by a movie which we can show now of the buildup of an
expandable configuration.
(Movie shown of space station model launch and deployed con-
figurations.)
Mr. Mappen. Starting with the basic Atlas booster, as shown here,
then comes an interstage fairing, the attachment of the Centaur stage,
and finally on top of this the mission module, as we term it, which
would enclose the packaged inflatable space station. This is attached
to the Mereury capsule configuration, much as it is presently designed
today.

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 35
ASCENT AND RE-ENTRY GOOD/YEAR
DEPLOYMENT
STATION IN ORBIT LEAVE ORBIT
CENTAUR SEPARATION ORIENTATION,RE-ENTRY
RECOVERY
TOWER SEPARATION
ATLAS SEPARATION
: LANDING
LAUNCH
FiGure 12 FiGure 12
LAUNCH CONFIGURATION GOOD/YEAR GOOD/YEAR
MERCURY ORBITAL ALTITUDE -300 NAUT MI
CAPSULE
SPACE ORBITAL INCLINATION -28.5 DEG
STATION LAUNCH WEIGHT - 304,000 LB
MODULE
CENTAUR CREW - I MAN
BOOSTER LE CE1T
MISSION DURATION - UP TO 14 DAYS
ABORT SYSTEM MERCURY SYSTEM
ESCAPE AND RE-ENTRY - MERCURY SYSTEM
RECOVERY MERCURY SYSTEM
Figure 13

36 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
Our studies of this configuration have that the payload of
the packaged space station and the re-ent hicle are well within
the limits of the Centaur booster, that is, the payload CG position,
and the total weight are compatible with the booster capability.
For that reason we have no redesign on the booster to put such
a space vehicle into orbit.
Perhaps I can describe this better by going actually to the model.
Can we have the lights, please?
Here we have the model that you saw in the movie. (See figure 14.)
You can see that the mission module and Mercury capsule would
be launched in this configuration.
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT GOOD/YEAR
2T
t * 2
Figure 14
Then going to a slightly different scale-excuse my back, please—
the Mercury capsule would be integrated with the center hub and
then this section inflat 2 this instance the 24-foot diameter unit
would come out of th packaged module.
I think it is signific of construction that we are
using here is a rather r ent development in that we have gone to
the filament cage that Mr Ir. Loftin touched on earlier, and it has given
us the capability of going to virtually unlimited diameters in the torus
construction without any real concern for the tooling problem.
We have here a paper model which shows this, although simple,
in fairly vivid terms, in the type of arrangement that we can go to with
a filament cage.
The filament cage would be basically designed to hold the toroidal
structure that is required for the design pressure.
Figure 15 is a photograph of the bladder internal construction,
which would be then the pressure-sealing member of the structure.

more difficult, space missions.
But the determination of man's capabilities in a space environment
is only one of the benefits that will be derived from Project Mercury.
Of equal i importance is the technical knowledge being gained during
the design, construction, and operation of the first vehicle specifically
engineered for manned flight in space. The accomplishment of
Project Mercury will mark a tremendous st rward; man's ven-
ture into space neasurably extend the frontiers of flight. The
speed of flight will creased by a factor of eight over present
achievements, and the itude by a facior of five; the environment
encountered in space at will be one that heretofore has not even
been approached. This extension of the flight envelope has required
major technical advancements in many diverse fields including a aero-
dynamics, biotechnology, instrumentation, communications, attitude
control, environmental control and high-speed parachute development,
to I mention only a few. By its very advanced nature, therefore,
Project Mercury has opened the door for future manned space-flight
programs.
Originof program
The genesis of the Nation's manned space-flight program dates
back to research and study efforts carried out in 1956, 1957, and 1958.
In those vea Vational Advisory Committee
In August 1958, the President assigned the responsibility for the
manned flight program to NASA, which by that time had been estab-
lished by law, though it had not yet become an operating agency. At
that time, the early work on the capsule concept, the painstaking anal-
ysis, design, development, and progressed to
the point where on August 1, 1958, Dr. Hugh L. Dryden, then Director
of NACA and now Deputy Administrator of NASA, was ready to
present to the Select Committees of the Congress on Astronautics and
Space Exploration, a program which he called technology of manned
space-flight vehicles. Dr. Dryden's testimony included the following
statement: "This program that we are talking about will lead to a
man in space in something of the order of 2 to 3 years, depending on
how much luck you have with it."
Although the responsibility for the manned

Figure 15 FIGURE 15
It is important to note in this configuration many of the components, It is important to note in this configuration many of the components,
such as bunks, and other required equipment; work tables, work stands
could also be of the inflatable type of construction. And these then
lend themselves to similar packaging and light-weight capability in
the launch configuration.
Of course there is the question asked, what do we see in looking Of course there is the question asked, what do we see in looking
at the early availability of a space vehicle?
Figure 16 summarizes some of these. We feel the approach we
are discussing here with torus configuration lends itself directly to
studies of artificial gray mulation. It gives us a working labora-
tory where we can investigate, as on a test-bed basis, the performance
of life-support ystems, auxiliary power, attitude controls, and it
ing laboratory that is one of the considerations in the Apollo planning,
as well as the Military Test Space Station which the Air Force is now
considering.
Figure 17 shows a picture of the center hub of a 30-foot diameter
unit that we are building on corporate funds at Goodyear. This unit
will be assembled with the 30-foot torus shown in Figure 15.

38 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
ORBITAL MISSIONS GOOD/YEAR
DETERMINE SURVIVAL REQUIREMENTS
GRAVITY SIMULATION WORK - REST CYCLE
PSYCHOLOGICAL RESPONSE PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSE
EVALUATE SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT
WASTE COLLECTION ATTITUDE CONTROL
@ LIFE SUPPORT ON-BOARD POWER PLANT
CONDUCT TEST PROGRAMS
TEST BED FOR ADVANCED SYSTEMS MATERIALS AND SYSTEMS
SCIENTIFIC TESTS
FIgure 16
1 Tre Cav
W%
L.
Figure 17

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 39
Figure 18 shows a development plan which we feel is feasible, based
on our current work in house at Goodyear, and that h the Langley
Research Center and with the Air Force.
As Mr. Loftin and Mr. Sullivan pointed out, we too agree that
there are no major technical breakthroughs required to work toward
an operational system of this type in approximately 3 years.
This is not to say certainly that we have the answers to the coating
problems in terms of radiation, thermo-balance and a number of other
areas, but we do feel the education we are getting now in the structural
design of these full scale units does give us a firm basis in this area.
Our plan here would be to work toward vertical shots and then the
fabrication of three orbital full-scale prototype units, two of which
would be unmanned, the third manned, and as previously mentioned,
would utilize the Mercury capsule for the re-entry of, in this instance,
a one-man crew.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN GOOD, YEAR
PROGRAM PHASE YEARS AFTER CONTRACT GO-AHEAD AFTCRCONTNAOTOO AHCAD
- - 2 3 4
PRELIMINARY STUDIES,MODEL TESTING PRELIMINARY STUDIES,MODELTESTING
DESIGN. FABRICATION DESIGN, FABRICATION
GROUND TESTS
VERTICAL FLIGHT TESTS
INSTRUMENTATION
DEPLOYMENT
SYSTEMS
ABORT
ORBITAL TESTS
QUALIFICATION (UNMANNED)
QUALIFICATION (UNMANNED)
QUALIFICATION (MANNED)
Figure 18
This completes my portion of the presentation.
Mr. RICHaRDSo other thing I like to point out, that I
think Mr. Madden overlooked, is it allows the man to get out of his
space suit, to take it off after he comes o into the space station, and
to work in a normal atmosphere in the space station.
Things like this we have to learn as we go on into space.

for instance, as one sophisticated type of material, has a very good
temperature strength curve. Actually, you can get up to 1,500 or
1,800 degrees Fahrenheit and still retain strength.
The problem w get this material drawn down into fibers so
we could weave it into cloths. We found we could do this. We had
it continually drawn down and drawn down until we got some of the
fibers to a third of a human hair.
We took some that were more practical to use, and we made woven
materials out of them.
Here are some samples of stainless steel draw down to one-
thousandth of an inch and woven into cloth.
You may find it difficult to get some of these materials in flat sheets
that are uniform in characteristics. If we can get it to wire and then
weave into cloth, we find it is a flexible sheet, and it can be used as a
structural vehicle that is going to be operated at high temperatures.
Then you have to do something about making it gastight.
The next problem was to develop an elastomer that would be able to
withstand the kind of temperatures that we are going to encounter.
We don't feel we have the answer to this problem yet. We do feel
we have been making some headway in this particular direction.
I think if we can go to the movie I would like to show you one of
our high-temperature tests.
Since we are not in the space environment, it is very difficult to
evaluate some of these materials on Earth. So we have to attempt
to simulate conditions as closely as possible. We try to do these in
altitude chambers using high temperature lamps to apply heat on
these materials. Such tests do not show the problem as you come
through the atmosphere and have th air rushing over the material,
itself,so we developed a little hy drogen and oxygen rocket. We
put a little material in the blast of this rocket nd try to evaluate
what takes place here.
(Movie shown of High Temperature Material Test.)
Dr. Ross. We have this piece of material, similar to what you have
in your hands, in a frame in a hydrogen-oxygen rocket blast. You
will notice when the hot gas hits the piece of material, it will start
to glow and it will actually get red hot there. It still retains most of
its properties.
This is just a simulated type of test. As I say, it is the type that
we are using to try to screen the different kinds of materials that we
would need for high-temperature re-entry.

types of units can be put on a launch pad in a small package.
Figure 19 will show you what we call our Ballute, which is a com-
bination of balloon and parachute.
we found that you can make a balloon-type vehicle, which you can
see at the left here, with a torus-type ring around it, which can be
attached to a re-entry vehicle or escape capsule.
DECELERATION BALLOONS
=
.
Figure 19
This item, when opened up in the high altitudes, is actually posi-
tively inflated by the gas inside so we don't have the problem of a
parachute, trying to open when there is no air. As it comes through
the atmosphere it has to go through the speed ranges, and this par-
ticular type of vehicle can do it.
It inflates behind the body, makes it act like a shuttle-cock, and
comes down through the atmosphere.
This is used on the Cree missile to bring back about a 500-pound
weight.
I would like to show some movies of this in the NASA tunnels at
31/ times the speed of sound.
Movie shown of Ballute in supersonic wind tunnel.)
tenths of a second.
This is 31/ times the speed of sound.

As far as we can tell, everything was successful. We don't know
what to change on the next one. This has been a very successful
program.
We are going to make some of these to operate at 10 times the speed
of sound. We have been working with the Air Force and NASA
unit.
The other type of re-entry that we might want to discuss is what
determined landing space?
This would mean we would have to build a vehicle up in space. It
would have to be all packaged into the launch nose. When it gets
up into space, it would have to open up to the vehicle that we are
talking about.
Figure 20 is a typical example of this. The booster would carry
it on up into space. There it would open up into a vehicle with wings
and now come down and fly in from outer space.
LIGHT WING LOADING RE-ENTRY VEHICLE GOODfrEAD
FIgure 20

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES SPACE 43
Why do we think we can do this now?
I think if we can go on through the slides, I can show you
a little bit of what we can do.
Figure 21 shows how the entire thing could be packaged into a
small 5-foot by 10-foot nose cone.
These parts that you see here, that are indicated by cylinders and
spheres, show the approximate volume of the hard structures, the
instrumentation, the gas supply, the controls, and so on, as they would
fit.
The space around here is taken up by the flexible structure. When
you get that into space,it
RE-ENTRY
PARACHUTE STOWAGE
GUIDANCE, COMMUNICATION AND
INSTRUMENTATION
ELEVON AND RUDDER SERVOS
$H_{2o}$ REACTION CONTROL TANK
INFLATION SPHERE, HELIUM INFLATION SPHERE, HELIUM
PAYLOAD
GETT
9 IN. RADIUS
METAL NOSE
10 FEET I0 FEET
Figure 21
Figure 22 shows how small it is when it starts and how large it is
when opened up. You notice the little parts in here are the same
parts that we had on the package and how they are distributed to
where they are needed in the vehicle.
Figure 23 is another view of the flight configuration.
ship. It has the same aerody-
namics as any other hard structure. The inflated structure material
is made out of a metal and has the same kind of properties as any hard
structure.
I believe this slide will show it as clearly as any the reason we think
we can do more things with this approach than with some of the hard
structures; that is, we can go to a lighter weight vehicle that could fly
in the atmosphere at high altitudes.

FIgUre 22 FIGure 22
RE-ENTRY MODEL DEPLOYED RE-ENTRY MODEL DEPLOYED
RUDDER AND ELEVON
SERVOS
17 FT GUIDANCE, COMMUNI-
CATION, AND
INSTRUMENTATION
INFLATION SPHERE.
HELIUM
28.5 FT
H202 REACTION CONTROL
TANK PAYLOAD
FIgure 23

probably fly with this vehicle and the lower region of this plot is
where a conventional hard structure would operate.
These lines drawn on here are basically temperature lines. The
bottom of this curve is the temperature through you cannot
carry a hard structure because it would burn up.
The upper line e aerodynamic line. our vehicle, you can
see we would hay lower temperatures.
So you see th hole thing is raised up ome in and fly
at higher altitude Because of that, we do not have the high temper-
atures. This temperature may be around 1,500 degrees, where with
conventional structure this is 3,o00 degrees. We don't have to develop
materials to go to such high temperatures as a hard structure. materials to go to such high temperatures as a hard structure. This This
is why if we can develop coatings and finishes to take 1,500 degrees, is why if we can develop coatings hes to take 1,500 degrees,
you can have a winged vehicle to fly in to a predetermined landing you can have a winged vehicle to fly in o a predetermined landing
site. If you were just going to make a suborbital flight from Canav- site. If you were just going to make a suborbital flight from Canav-
eral, Figure 25 shows you the footprint of your maneuvering capa-
bility. If you sent it up, you could pick any place in that area and If you sent it up, you could pick any place in that area and
RE-ENTRY RE-ENTRY FL CORRIDOR
350 3501
L/DMAX*17
CLMAX ·0.66 CL*0.17
d ·14 DEG
300 L/0-072
d · 50 DEG
L/D-1.3
CL-043 RESULTANT
250 α · 30 DEG ACCELERATION ·22
T P T TTU WING LEADING EDGE
1500 DEG F CONSTANT
RADIATION MAXIMUM L/D, 50 PERCENT
200 KEY:
ORBITAL
.. SUBORBITAL
7 A·72 DEG
W/S= 25 R : 075FT
5 10 15 20 25 30
VELOCITY (THOUSANDS OF FEET PER SECOND)
Figure 24

You do not have to pick a particularly large field. Because of the
light wing loading, you don't need a very large field to land in.
I think now I might show you a movie of one of these units assum-
ing that this is the unit on the launch pad. This would normally
be standing this way. The entire inflated structure is in this hard
cover, and you can see the way it opens.
(Movie of Inflated Re-entry Glider.)
Dr. Ross. It opens up and goes to the predetermined shape. When
it opens, it opens to that shape and you noy e a lifting type of
to which it was fabricated.
Then it can maneuver just like any other type of vehicle. The work
that we are doing in our house now is to try to develop the materials
that are needed to withstand the re-entry conditions that we will en- matareneeuea
counter on th counter on that kind of vehicle. at kind of vehicle. As soon as that is done, we will be soon is done, we will be
able to fly in from outer space.
(Movie shown of wing structure opening in tunnel.)
Dr. Ross. Here is an example of what would happen—you know in Dr. Ross. Here is an example of what would happen—you know in
the suborbital shot the suborbital shot showed you, there might be some thought of it
coming in where there was some atmosphere and you would have to
open the wings in that atmosphere.
The next shot is in a wind tunnel and trying to open the wings The next shot is in a wind tunnel and trying to open the wings
with air going by. You will find that this thing is going to be tested
at about 50 times the air load that we would normally encounter on at about 50 times the air load that we would normally encounter on
one of these suborbital shots. There is air blowing by at this time. one of these suborbital shots. There is air blowing by at this time.
There are four shots here. This thing opens in about a second ANL 4N1
or so.
The next one we put it at a high angle to see whether it would affect
it. It looks like this is a very promising area. We should be able to
go on to look for re-entry vehicles of both the lifting and drag type.

Administrator of the NASA on 1958, a space task group
was organized from personnel of Langley and Lewis Re-
search Centers and immediately began Langley Field,
Va. The space task group was given direct responsibility for im-
plementing Project Mercury.
Summary of progress to date
In January 1959, McDonnell Aireraft Corp. was selected as the
prime contractor to design and construct the Mercury capsules. The
selection based on an industrywide competition: 12 firms sub-
mitted proposals based on NASA specifications for the satellite cap-
sule. After a thorough evaluation of thes proposals, the contract
was awarded to McDonnell.
The compressed time-phasing of the project, between inception
and scheduled flight, has required that research, development, design,
and fabrication be undertaken simultaneously. Thus, while the Me-
Donnell Aireraft Corp. was implementing the initial design phases
of the Mercury production capsules, a broad research and develop-
ment program was being carried out. This program included scien-
The tests were used to develop a highly parachute system
and to determine procedures to be used operations. In
other tests, vehicles were released from fighter
speeds to develop and qualify the capsule's drogue parachute. The
escape system was I perfected by launching full-scale capsules with the
escape rocket as the only means of propulsion.
Rocket-boosted flight tests were required to check the capsule and
its components over range of speeds and altitudes. A solid pro-
pellant rocket booster, nicknamed "Little Joe" was designed and fab-
ricated especially for Project Mercury. This booster, which develops
one-fourth million pounds of thrust at takeoff, was used on a number
of occasions to further aid in the qualification of the all-important
emergency escape system.

INFLATABLE IN SPACE 47
FLIGHT
AREAS
2
5 ENVELOPE OF MANEUVRING AREA
TGIONM AT L/OMAX
9A
I CAPE CANAVERAL
2 JUPITER INLET of
3 GRAND BAHAMA
4 ELEUTHERA
5 SAN SALVADOR
6 MAYAGUANA
7 GRAND TURK
8 8 DOMINICAN REPUBLIC DOMINICAN REPUBLIC RANGE OF GROUND a
9 9 PUERTO RICO
9A ANTIGUA CONTROL·ZOONM CONTROL-ZOONM
10 SANTA LUCIA
257 253
FIgure 25
ORBITAL PLOTS
FIRING OF RETROROCKET L920 NAUT MI
90*E START OF MANEUVERING START OF MANEUVERING
80° 60* 30* EQUATOR
NOTE
180* ORBITAL ALTI-
TRACKING TUDE-130 NAUT MI
STATION INCLINATION-
700 NAUT MI RANGE BO DEG E
LAUNCH
VANDENBERG AFB
LANDING
EDWARDS AFB SO*W
MANEUVERING AREA
Figure 26

FIGURe 27 FIguRe 27
It is collapsed in a small package. It is collapsed in a sm: Ulneel. We put it in space. We inflate tin We inflate
it and then we actually foam onto the back end of the unit so we have
rigidized it so when it is punctured by micro-meteorites it doesn't
change shape. I will show you a movie here and how it can be done at
high altitudes.
(Movie shown of foaming in altitude chamber.)
Dr. Ross. This is in an altitude chamber. This is a body that is in-
flated here. The solar concentrator is the portion on the end. This is
a large unit that will collect the sun's rays and change it into electricity.
Here we have some of the foaming process taking place. Once it is
foamed, a high temperature wire burns off the part we don't need.
The Sun's rays can strike the mirror and be collected and with an
energy converter would change it into electrical energy.
This is an example of a typical unit you can see there. We put a
piece of paper there, and you can see how it concentrates the energy
in a small source. In the unit that we have made for the Air Force on
this, we have found a tremendously accurate ability here. We have
measured 3,600 points on it. We have come within 98 percent of what
would be theoretically possible.

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 49
It looks like this system could go into extremely large structures
and make them into a reliable dimension tha can do a job for us in
space. This thing of course is made out of films and foils and can also
be used for Earth applications.
(Four foot diameter collector model displayed.)
Dr. Ross. This was in a little package that was inflated and rigidized
in space. I think this gives us an idea of the things we can do. If we
go back to the slides now, I will sho what we are basically doing
in-house.
Figure 28 shows that in order to use th his material you have to con-
sider everything the basic material and coatings all the way
down through to the actual application. Each one of these things as I
mentioned before, have to be considered in designing the final vehicle.
You can't just take a piece of material off the shelf. You have to
design each of the structures for the specific application.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
BASE MATERIAL BASE MATERIAL
COATINGS
INTEGRATION OF BASE MATERIAL WITH GAS BARRIER COATING INTEGRATION OF BASE MATERIAL WITH GAS BARRIER COATING
DETAILED ESTABLISHMENT OF SPACE ENVIRONMENT CONDITIONS
EFFECT OF SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENT EFFECT OF SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENT T ON BASE ON BASE MATERIAL AND MATERIAL AND
COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL PRODUCT
FABRICATION AND MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUES FOR FABRICATION AND MANUFACTURING TECHNIQUES FOR
SPECIFIC MATERIALS AND APPLICATIONS
QUALIFICATION TESTS
INFLATION METHODS INELATION METHODS
DEPLOYMENT
ASSEMBLY AND STATION EXPANSION AND IN- SPACE REPAIR COODAYEAR
Figure 28
Figures 29 and 30 show that in-house we are defining three areas,
those having to do wi ronautics, ics and the third area,
which is the tough one e, getting into the the eories and experiments
that are necessa.y to ne thing that is
different about this and hard structures, is that w have to develop
equations and consider some things that we didn't have in conventional
hard structures.
In a hard structure, once it is deflected beyond a certai ain point, you
forgot about equations. We have to set up some new formulas and
things that we can use.

50 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
GAC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
A.ENVIRONMENTAL MATERIAL
ASTRONAUTICS
LITERATURE SURVEY-EFFECTS OF SPACE ENVIRONMENT ON MATERIAL
TEST PROGRAM - HIGH VACUUM, ULTRAVIOLET, AND TEMPERATURE
EFFECTS ON SELECTED MATERIALS
AERONAUTICS
RE-ENTRY-ADVANCE DEVELOPMENT OF PRESEI AND
COATINGS
LIGHTWEIGHT MATERIALS -CLOTH-FILM FABRIC DEVELOPMENT,
POLYURETHANE ELASTOMER
FIgure 29
GAC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (CONT)
B.DESIGN THEORY
INITIAL BUCKLING
STRESS, STRAIN, AND CREEP (CORD-TYPE FABRICS)
POST BUCKLING
STRUCTURAL DAMPING FACTOR
1M4 EMPIRICAL FACTORS AND PROOF THEORY
Figure 30

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 51
A typical example, Figure 31 shows s some of the formulas that you
find in use in sheet metals. You see the constants that you normally
have in some of them change to variables in the new formulas. They
might even change from one direction to another because we can
change the material that way too.
STRESS-STRAIN EQUATIONS
ISOTROPIC (METAL SHEET, FILM, FOIL, etc.)
$ex{$\}{x-y)
$y^{$\f{}x)
$xy^$Txy/G
ORTHOTROPIC (FABRICS)
$ex{$x{x-xyy)$
cy^{$y(o{y}$xy)
$Txy}= Txy/G
Figure 31
Figure 32 is a typical example for a curve for a metal (left side).
On the right side is a typical fabric. There is nothing wrong with
having it non-linear as long as you know what it is and use it
advantage of it.
If you have these occasions once in where you have a very
high load that you are anticipating and
the pressure crease the strength of your structure while you are
flying and bring it back down to the normal pressure. You don't get it
for nothing. You give up some of the life of the material.
You might cut it from 1oo to 10 years. This gives you a rough idea,
hurried brief background of a subject that we think has tremendous
potential. It appears with this ability of folding up things in a small
package and putting them on a launch pad, using the type of boosters
that are planned today, we should be able to use space by opening
them up into large structures that can do all types of work from the
space station type, solar type. We in the R. & D. area feel this is
one of the areas that offers great potential challenge and you can see
we have had some great successes in our work in it.

52 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
PROPERTIES OF FABRICS
SSES METAL SSES FABRIC
STRAIN
oo
PE E
LOG TIME
Figure 32
The CHAIRMAN. One question was asked about the cost. It is
probably too early, isn't it, give definite idea about the cost?
Mr. RIcHarDSON. I WOuld like to try to answer that question, Mr.
Chairman. Yes, it is pretty difficult to pin out exactly the cost óf all
of these things.
However, I think it is very evident that when you make a structure
like this, we have it like this, we have it fully made on the fully made on the ground, we don't have a lot of
rivets and actuators and things like that and the cost element is bound rivets and actuate ors and things like that and the cost element is bound
to be much lower t than making similar types of metal structures.
Also, there are a lot of things that we can do with structures such
as this that can't be done with metal structures. I think to come out
and name a dollar for such and such an item is quite a difficult thing
to do at this time, because all of them involve, what is the mission,
what are boosters required, what are the experiments that are to
be carried out, or what is the final application of the equipments that
have to go into it, and all of those get into the answer of cost.
We are very certain that the costs of vehicles like this will be much
lower than comparable metal vehicles.
The ChairMAn. Thank you very much.
If there are no questions, I want to thank these gentlemen first from
NASA, and then secondly from the Goodyear Aireraft Corp. for some
very interesting and very valuable hearings that we have had this
morning. Our membership has appreciated it very much and we have
gotten a lot of information.
Mr. RicHaRDSon. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We
appreciate the opportunity to come because we think it is a subject that
as the weeks, months and years come on ahead of us, it is one you
are going to hear more of in the space effort of our country.

INFLATABLE IN SPACE 53
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, we place in the record at
this point the statement of the Goodyear Aircraft Corp. and the bio-
graphies of Mr. Richardson and his staff.
I am satisfied of that fact that you mentioned, Mr. Richardson.
If there is no further business, the committee will adjourn, subject
to call.
(The biographies and statement referred to are as follows:)
R. W. RICHARDSON
GOODYEAR AIRCRAFT CORP., AKRON, OHIO
Robert W. Richardson, vice president for Goodyear Aireraft Corp. since
November 1954, was first associated with the Goodvear organization in 1934 as
a member of the production squadron of Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
He was transferred from the squadron the following year to take a position
with Goodyear Service in Brooklyn, N.Y., and later was associated with the
Goodyear store in Boston, Mass. In 1936, he returned to Akron to join the
Mechanical Goods Sales Department (now Industrial Products), of Goodyear
Tire & Rubber Co.
Subsequently, Richardson held sales positions with the Industrial Products
division in Chicago and Buffalo and in 1941 was appointed district manager
of Goodyear's Aviation Products division at Dayton, Ohio. He returned to
Akron in 1944 as assistant manager of the Industrial Products manufacturers'
sales organization.
He served as manager of the Aviation Products division from 1945 until 1951.
when he was appointed assistant to the vice president in charge of manufac- when he was appointed assistant to the vice president in harge of manufac-
turers' sales.
In 1952, he left Akron to assume the post of assistant to the president of In 1952, he left Akr assume the post of assistant to the president of
Kelly-Springfield Tir Kelly-Springfield Ti a Goodvear subsidiary oodvear subsid In February 1954, he was February 1954, he was
appointed vice president of that company. appointed vic oresident c
Richardson returned to Goodyear in July, 1954, when he was appointed sales
manager of the company's North-central division at Chicago, Ill. He was named
to his present position at Goodyear Aircraft four months later. Born in
Seattle, Wash., Richardson was graduated from Culver Military Academy and
attended Purdue University. He is a member of the Wings Club, New York
City, and holds a private pilot's license. City, and holds a private pilot's license.
He resides with his wife and three children, Thomas, Frances, and John,
in Hudson, Ohio.
R. S. Ross
GOODYE CORP., AKRON, OHIO
Robert S. Ross is now manager of aerome hanics research and development
department at the Goodyear Aircraft Corp. He has been with Goodyear since
July, 1949, and is responsible for all aeromechanics projects of a research
and development nature in the undersea. surface, atmospheric and space
field.
Previous to his position at Goodyear Aireraft, Dr. Ross was Technical
Director of the Daniel Guggenheim Institute, Akron, Ohio. He also taught
at the University of Akron as Associate Professor and at the Case Institute
of Technology, as Special Lecturer.
Born May 31, 1920 in Lorain, Ohio, he earned his Bachelor of Science, Master
of Science, and Doctor of Philosophy degree at Case Institute of Technology in
1942, 1943, and 1945, respectively.
Dr. Ross has been active in the field of aeronautics since 1942 and has worked
on lighter-than-air, and heavier-than-air projects including airships, balloons,
helicopters, convertaplanes, airplanes, and missiles. The Inflatoplane and Con-
voplane were two of his projects. He has also been responsible for subsystem
development such as jet engine reversers and supersonic escape capsules.
He is a member of the Aircraft Research and Testing Committee of the Aero-
space Industries Assoc. and was chairman of that committee in 1959. He is an
Associate Fellow of the Institute of Aeronautical Sciences, and a member of
Sigma Xi.

54 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
He holds a professional engineers license in Ohio, is a licensed pilot, has au-
thored many technical articles and holds several patents in the aeronautical field.
He is married to the former Betty I. Bailey and they reside at 4270 Hickory
Lane, Cleveland, Ohio.
R. T. MADDEN
GOODYEAR AKRON, OHIO
Robert T. Madden, manager of astronautics sales at Goodyear Aircraft Corp.,
is responsible for programs concerning hicles, recovery
equipment, structural components for outer spa well as astro-
nautics research and development programs.
Madden joined Goodyear Aircraft in 1952 as an Engineering Specialist in the
firm's Research and Development Department. He moved into the Sales organi-
zation in 1956 and handled the sale of escape capsules for supersonic aircraft
and re-entry vehicles before transferring to astronautics sales in 1959.
Prior to his association with Goodyear Aircraft, Madden spent 41% years with
the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics conducting research on super-
sonic aircraft and ram jet propulsion systems. He also worked in the aircraft
industry as a missile systems engineer and as an ignition applications engineer
for turbine engines.
A 1943 graduate of the University of Notre Dame with a Bachelor of Science
degree in Aeronautical Engineering, he also took courses in high speed aero-
dynamics at Stanford University in 194s.
Madden spent 31% years with the United States Navy during World War II as
an aircraft squadron engineering officer. At the time of his separation from an aircrart squadron engineering oni icer. at tne tme or ms separauon irom
the Navy in 1946, he was aircraft overhaul inspection officer at Naval Air Sta-
tion, Alameda, Calif.
A member of the American Rocket Society, Madden resides with his wife, the A member of the American Rocket Society Madden resides with his wife, the
former Helen Marie Gallagher, and five sons in Hudson, Ohio. former Helen Marie Gallagher, and five so Hudson, Ohio.
Summary Presentation on Expandable Structures Summary Presentation on Expandable STrUcTuReS
By
GOODYEAR AIRCRAFT CORP., AKRON, OHIO
The utility of lightweight, packagable fabrie structures in considerations of The utility of lightweight. packagable fabrie structures in considerations of
current and future engineering designs has led to a relatively new technology-— current and future engineering designs has led to a relatively new technology-
broadly identified as expandable structures.
This structural approach permits the designer to select and orient filaments
and elastomers to best suit a specific application in the anticipated operational
environment. This ability to create lightweight structures when combined with
packagability looks very promising, particularly for vehicles and components to
be used in space and re-entry applications.
Although expandable structures have been considered for many types of under-
sea and earthbound uses, space vehicle applications can be classified in three
major categories.
I. High strength expandable structures for use in orbital and space vehicles,
such as manned and unmanned space stations.
II. High temperature, high strength expandable structures for use in manned
and unmanned re-entry vehicles.
III. Lightweight expandable structures with possible foam rigidization for
use in solar concentrators, anter unmanned satellites, and so forth.
In each application for expandable structures, the vehicle remains folded on
the launch pad and the desired geometrical shape of the configuration is estab-
lished by inflation with a suitable gas once the vehicle arrives at its operational
altitude.
As noted above, in some application, after erection, the shape may be main-
tained by lightweight foam or other rigidizing techniques. By "patterning"
or weaving the fabric structure in the desired final configuration, it is possible
to produce virtually any size or shape.
One of the big advantages of this type of structure is the ability to assembly
and inspect the entire configuration in the fabrication area before the unit is

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE 55
deflated and packaged into a canister for efficient handling as a ground trans-
port or booster payload.
Shapes such as spheres, ellipsoids, paraboloids, cylinders, and other bodies
of revolution can be readily fabricated in single wall structures by pattern
design, or "goring" to develop the desired inflated geometry. For those appli-
cations where specialized shapes are desired, dual wall st tructures are formed
of a Goodyear product called Airmat (Goodyear Tire & Rubber TM). This
development has evolved from the process of weaving simultaneously the two
wall fabrics with interconnecting filaments, the length of these filaments
accurately establishing the wall spacing.
Using this technique, it is possible to create almost any desired shape in
the form of a pressurized expandable structure. Further developments in the
basic fibers and elastomers permit the utilization of high temperature metals
and glasses which result in structures capable of withstanding the heating of
specific re-entry applications,
It has become apparent that the need for larger space payloads has resulted
in the development of boosters which are dimensionally impossible to carry
on our existing highways or railroads. New means of transporting these from
the source of manufacture to the launch site must be developed.
A review of airship capabilities for handling large missile boosters indi-
cates that this is one of the most feasible methods yet devised for effectively
handling this problem.
The airship's ability to operate from extremely small areas and to travel
anywhere in the world with a cargo that will encounter less than a one-half g
load has been established in feasibility studies. Within the state-of-the-art,
it is possible to utilize airships for performing the mobility function of all
anticipated boosters. Attached is an illustration of a typical airship configured anticipated boosters. Attached is an illustration of a typical airship configured
to handle a large booster.
The need for developing a lightweight structure of high structural integrity The need for developing a lightweight structure of high structural integrity
for use in a space environment has resulted in the investigation of the ability of the investigation of the ability of
expandable structures to be utilized in a manned space station application. expandable structures utilized manned space station application.
Here it is necessary to provide a large volume in the space environment while Here it is necessary provide a
the vehicle size must be the vehicle size must be compatible with an existing nose cone on the launch pad. patible with an existing nose cone on the launch pad.
The ability to fold an entire space station into existing nose cone dimensions The ability to fold an space station into existing nose cone dimensions
permits the utilization of current boosters to place a manned space station and permits the utilization rrent boosters to place a manned space station and
recovery vehicle in orbit at an early date.
Once in space. the station can be expanded to its full dimensions and the man
move at will from his recovery vehicle into the station and back again. This
arrangement eliminates the need for a rendezvous between the manned vehicle
and the space station which would be required if each were sent up individually.
After performing a mission in space, the man could utilize his re-entry capsule After performing a mission in space. the man could utilize his re-entry capsule
to return to Earth leaving the space station in orbit. Feasibility studies have
been made of this concept utilizing a Mercury type re-entry capsule and an
expandable torus type space station which would permit the performance of a
two week manned space mission wh nile utilizing available planned boosters as
launch vehicles.
Methods for constructing the expandable portions of the space station are now
being evaluated NASA and GAC and a 30-foot diameter portion of one is
pictured under construction at GAC. An artist's concept of how this unit will
look in space is also shown.
Expandable structures have been investigated as re-entry vehicles, both of
the ballistic type, which primarily uses drag forces to decelerate it and of the
lifting type which would permit flying in from space to a predetermined landing
area, much as the conventional airplane.
Attached is a photo of a typical ballistie type decelerating system, generally
known as Ballute which utilizes a large lightweight inflated balloon for develop-
ing drag forces required for controlled re-entry. This GAC-developed system
has already been tested in su sonie wind tunnels and on the Cree missile up to
speeds of Mach 3.5 and progr rams are now underway which will evaluate its use at
ten times the speed of sou an extremely simple and reliable system
and has been a very successf irFor
The feasibility of lifting type re-entry vehicles utilizing expandable structures
is now being investigated and it appears that the utilization of this principle will
permit the erection of light wing loading vehicles that could enter the earth's
atmosphere at very high altitudes and maneuver to a predetermined landing site.
This type of re-entry vehicle would not encounter the high temperatures re-

56 INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
quired by conventionally constructe providing decreased problem
areas in all the are now being made of
the types of mater methods required.
The utilization nit the development of lifiting type
re-entry vehicles which can
vehicle in both the launch pad configuration-completely folded and the space
and re-entry configuration are shown on an attached photograph.
The requirement for power systems in space with consideration of the Sun
as a source of energy. In order to collect this energy and transform it into
useful electrical power, it is ordinarily necessary to provide a large solar con-
centrator to focus the Sun's energy into an absorber.
Expandable structures provide an ideal means for making collectors of high
dimensional accuracy which can be folded up into small packages on the launch
pad and expanded in space. A means has already been developed for rigidizing
these structures so that they can be counted on for use as reliable orbital and
space subsystems components. These are usually made of films and foams and
are extremely light in weight.
This type of structure also lends itself ideally to all types of large space an-
tennae. A typical rigidized solar concentrator made by GAC for the Air Force
is shown in an attached photograph.
The use of expandable structures for space applications requires fundamental
work on materials, manufacturing methods, and application analysis, some of
which is planned by NASA and the Air Force. However, engineering feasibility
studies and tests conducted to date indicate that these large structures can be
used with existing boosters to perform missions which ordinarily would have
to wait for the development of larger launch vehicles. The application of this
technology now should not only provide a new immediate space capability but
also a tremendous potential for future systems. also a tremendous potential for ire systems.
(Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m. the committee adjourned, to meet again (Whereupon, at 1 he committee adjourned, to meet again
on Tuesday, May 23, 1961, on another subject.) on Tuesday, M another subject.)
O

information on the effects pace flight.
All of the early flight so-called boilerplate
capsules. These capsules e the shape and weight of the Mer-
cury capsules but do no in many of the systems and subsystems
that will be required anned operation. Boilerplate capsules
are of simple constructi ilizing heavy welded sheet metal.
Concurrent with this research and development effort, the design
and fabrication of the Mercury capsules was proceeding at McDonnell.
Modifications to the design, arrangement, and structure were made
during the conduct of the pi orogram, as requirements for such changes
became evident as a resu development tests.
Nevertheless, a structural prototype capsule was delivered in January
1960, and the first production capsule was delivered during March
1960, a scant 13 months after the contract was initiated; such rapid 1960, a scant 13 months after the contract was initiated; such rapid
delivery of a ce as complex 1 rcury capsule is without
precedence. capsules were delivered by the end of April 1961.
Requirements for the Redstone and Atlas launch vehicles, used in
the Mercury pre , were also firmed up early in 1959. Continuing
cooperation bety NASA and the military services has been re-
quired to assure compatibility between the Mercury capsules and the
launch vehicles.
Four Atlas flights have been launched. Two of these flights pro-
vided verification that capsule heat protection was sufficient for the
most severe reentry heating conditions. Although the remaining
two flights did not achieve the planned objectives, capsule pressure
integrity during an inflight booster explosion was demonstrated on
one flight, and the spacecraft escape system was successfully demon-
strated on the other.
Four Mercury-Redstone boosters were successfully launched.
Three of the flights oroduction aft and one was a
booster development test with a dummy spacecraft.
A highly successful qualification of the man-Mercury spacecraft-
booster combination occurred on May 5, 1961, when Astronaut Alan
Shepard flew the first manned Mercury-Redstone mission.

Director
Maxwell AFB, Alabom ATTN: Archives Branc Aerospoce Studies
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS
RETUAN TO
Overton Brooks, Louisiana, Chairman
JOHN W. McCORMACK, Massachusetts JOSEPH W.MARTIN Jr., Massachusetts
GEORGE P. MILLER, California JAMES G. FULTON Pennsylvania
OLIN E. TEAGUE, TeXAS GORDON L. McDON JGH, California
VICTOR L. ANFUSO, NeW York J. EDGAR CEENOWETHColoradQ
B. F. SISK, California FRANK C. OSMERS, Jr., New Jersey
ERWIN MITCHELL, Georgia WILLIAM K. VAN PELT, WiSCOnSin
JAMES M. QUIGLEY, Pennsylvania A. D. BAUMHART, Jr., Ohio
DAVID M. HALL, North Carolina PERKINS BASS, New Hampshire
LEONAHD G. WOLF, Iowa R. WALTER RIEHLMAN, New York
JOSEPH E. KARTH, MinneSota
KEN HECHLER, West Virginia
EMILIO Q. DADDARIO, Connecticut
WALTER H. MOELLER, Ohio
DAVID S. KING, Utah
J. EDWARD ROUSH, Indiana
CHARLES F. DUCANDER, Executive Director and Chief Counsel
Dr. CHARLES S. ShELDON II, Technical Director
SPENCER M. BERESFORD, Special Counsel
PHILIPI Special Coneultant
HARNEY S. BOGAN , Staff Consultant
JOHN A. CARSTARPHEN, Jr., COunSel SMC
RIChARD P. HINES, Staff Consultant
Lt Col PAUL B SCHUPPENER, Staff Counsultant
RAYMOND WILCOVE, Staff Consultant
THE COMMTTTEE ON esentetives. is for the
only the most pre are permitt go into the costly
production phase.
To conduct the review of the research, development, test and engineering
program there is a
scientific background In addition to reviewing he program data thus submitted
the Department fDefense staff carries on almost constent communication with
their opposite numbers in the military departments who know the most about specific
programs and projects; they make visits to military installations such as test
ranges, proving grounds and laboratcries to observe the work going on at firstband
and also visit the plants of defense contractors who are perfoiming research and
engineeing work for the DoD.
1003865

There is a close coordination between the medical research programs of the
Department Health, Education and Welfare and
The Department of Defense is interested in the Maritime Administration pr ograms the Maritime Administration p ograms
of transportati and logistics, including logistics, including cargo-handling research. "lmost all "lmost all
areas of basi areas of basic esearch conducted by the National Science Foundation are of interest Foundation are of interest
to the Department of Defense, and the DoD has to the Department of Defense, and the DOD participated many studies and pro- many studies and pro-
grams grams conducted by the National Science Fou undation, including including of course, the of course, the
Internation Geophysical Year program.
There are other Government There are other Government agencies doing or sponsoring work which agencies doing or sponsoring work which relates in
varying varying degrees degrees to the defense to the defense effort. Private industry is also spending i Private industry is also spending increased increased
sums for research and engineering in many fields where the results can be used for
military as well as for civilian purposes.

U. S. Congress - Conmittees of the House
Standing Committee of the House
Government Operations
william . Dawson, of Illinois Clare E. Hoffman, of Micnigan
Chet Holifield, of California R. Walter Riehlman, of New York
John W. McCormack, of Mass. George Meader, of Michigan
Jack Brooks, of Texas Clarence J. Brown, of Ohio
L. H. Fountain, of North Carolina Florence P. New Jersey
Porter Hardy, Jr., Virginia Robert P. Griffin, of Michigan
John A. Blatnik, of Minnesota George M. Wallhauser, of New Jersey
Robert E. Jones, of Alabama Odin Langen, of Minnesota
Edward A. Garmatz, of Maryland John B. Anderson, of Illinois
of California Richard S. Schweiker, of Pennsylvania
Joe M. Kilgore, of Texas F. Bradford Morse, of Mass.
Dante B. Fascell, of Florida
Martha W. Griffiths, of Michigan Martha W. Griffiths. Michigan
Henry S. Reuss, of Wisconsin
Overton Brooks, of Louisanna Overton Brooks, of Louisanna
Elizabeth Kee, of West Virginia
Kathryn E. (Mrs. William T.) Granahan, of Penn.
John S. Monagan, of Connecticut John S. Monagan, of Connecticut
Neal Smith, of Iowa
Christine Ray Davis, Staff Director
The work of preparing and considering legislation is done largely by
committees of both Houses of Congress. The personnel of the standing
committees of each house is chosen by of the entire body.
All bills and resolutions are referred to th appropriate committees,
which may report a bill out in its original form, vote against it in
cormittee, make changes, or allow the proposed legislation to die in
comnittee . - U. S. Government Or anization Manual, 196o-196l.
GHIO
MHICHL-MYALLBTOWYIHLOUCEBY2S
IMIAEDELVIEPYIEROKCE
YEKOZSYCEJECHMICVCIRLERTICEHCE CEHLEIS

at Los Angeles,
in 1960. Lected succeedi ng Congresses.
Military
1918 1918 and was and was honorably honorabl rance, Belgium
and Germany. and Germany
Organization Membership Organization Membership - Member Episcopal Church; is a 32d degree Mason, Church; is a 32d degree Mason,
Shriner; member of Elks, American Shriner; member Elks, American Legion, Veterans Legion, Veterans of Foreign of Foreign Wars, Louisiana
Farm Bureau Federation, Shr Farm n Bureau Federation, Shreveport Bar Association, Louisiana eveport Bar Association, , Louisiana Bar Association,
Kiwania Club, and F Kiwania Club, and Fc rganization. ganization.
Committees - President of National Rivers and Harbors Congress for 5 Committees - President of National Rivers and Harbors Congress for 5 years years
and now chairman of the board of this organization. now chairman of the board of this organization. Member of Government Operations Operations
Committee. In January 1959 was made chairman of Major House Comittee on Science
and Astronautics and and reappointed d to this chairmamship in 1961
Office - Federal Building, Shreveport La.

Attended the University of Nebraska - School of Engineering for 2 years
of college courses engineering - education was interrupted by a call
to Combat Duty. Serv
Battlefield Commission.
Employed by Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.; International
Representative of th OCAW-AFL-CIO for years. Member of the Minnesota
and during the special session
of 1958 was voted tanding Legislator" Elected to 86th Congress on Nov.
41958.
Military Experience ve
Organizations
V. F.W.
American Legion American Legion
Indianhead Council of the Boy Scouts Indianhead Council of the Boy Scouts
First Presbyterian Church - White Bear Lake, Minnesota Church - White Bear Lake, Minnesota
Married the former Charlotte Nordgen end they have two sons.
Party;: Democra Congress and Democrat-Farmer-Labor in Minnesota.
Congressional Committees: Congressional
Conmittee of the House: Science and Astronautics: Member
Home Address: 2 2334 East County
Office: House Office Building
LOE
KONFA T8 YAA8 RAE
DE HIO
MBIGHE-LYESEBROM-VIR LOBCEBVZE
nMELLOEVAEEVIBHOECE
WEKORBWCELECHMICVTJNLETTIGEHCE CEMLEY

DALNU
McCormack, John W.
Born: December 21, 1891 in Boston, Mass. the son of Joseph H and Mary E. (O'Brien)
McCormack. Married M Harriet 1920.
Educated in the Public Schools. Admitted to Mass. Bar in 1913 and is
a member and Hardy.
Mass. Constitutional Convention: 1917-1918
Mass. State House of Representatives: 1920-1922.
Mass. State 1923-1926 emocratic Leader)
from the l2th
Mass. Distr (Majority Leader)
Military
Organizations:
South Boston Citizens Association South Boston Citizens Association
American Legion
Knights of Columbus Knights of Columbua
Elk
Moose Moose
Catholic Order of Foresters Catholic Order of Foresters
Ancient Order of Hiberians Ancient Order of Hiberians
Democratic Party
Hon. Degrees: LL.B. conferred by Boston University and Holy Cross College Hon. Degrees: LL.B. conferred by Boston University and Holy Cross College
and Villanova College, Lege, Catholic University of America and
many others.
Honors: Knight of Malta, First Class; Peace Metal of the 3rd order of St.
Francis; Knight Commander, Order of St. Gregory the Great with Star;
Philippines.
Congressional Corrmittees:
Fraiklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial Commission (Created by Public Law 372, 84th
Congress)
Officers of the House: of Majority Leader - Floor Leader: John W.
McCormack.
Home Address:
726 Columbia Road, Boston, Massachusetts
Office: Post Offic Building, Boston, Mass

Capsule recovery will be effected by the U.S. Navy. Recovery
plans were formulated jointly by NASA and the Navy and numerous
exercises have been conducted in order to establish the best search and
recovery patterns. Realistic tests of these methods were achieved
during the successful recoveries following Little Joe, Redstone, and
Atlas tests.
Early in 1959, the seven Mercury astronauts ere selected. Since
that time they participated in an training program
which has now progressed to the point where t men are ready for
the first manned ballistie flights. This training program employed
NASA simulators, in addition to facilities of the military services.
team of aeromedical monitors has been detailed to NASA from the
military services and from the Publie Health Service. During future
flight operations, these monitors will determine the condition of the
astronaut as he passes over each of the network stations and will par-
ticipate in the recovery and postrecovery activities.
Future goals
This urgency stems from the fact that the project will supply answers
to many questions tha
the next step manned space flight program. Before future
programs can go ver ry far downstream, much must be learned about
man's capability in space and about the general technology of manned
Mercury, and to do it soon.
Project Mercury has been endorsed by the National Aeronauties
and Space Council, and approved by th
top national priority. Consequently, it carries a DX priority rating.
But a DX priority rating alone does not assure that a project will
move forward at a great rate of speed. The implementation of a
project such as Project Mercury demands, on a continuing basis, great
energy, great enthusiasm, and great determination. Work on Project
Mercury, both at the MeDonnell plant and at Cape Canaveral, is pro-
70258 0-61-3

In Project Mercury, target dates have been established for every
facet of the operation ese include target dates for deliveries of
parts, components, subas assemblies, systems, and complete capsules;
they also include tar capsule reparation sequences and
launch periods for al flight test sis always the case in a complex
research and development pre , some of these target dates have
been met ahead of schedule, other schedule, some behind schedule.
Yet, there is always sufficient f 2 flexibility this type of program to
allow for some adjustment of s schedules. For example, if a certain
subassembly is not received from a vendor on time, work can proceed
on the installation of another subassembly; and if the target date for
a given flight test is missed, other tests might proceed ahead of
schedule.
Perhaps the most important target overall Mercury
schedule is that for the achievement of rbital flight. As was
mentioned earlier, Dr. Dryden in congressional testimony in 1958, im-
plied that this mission could be accomplished s sometime during 1961.
If no setbacks are encountered during the flight qualification program,
it is likely that this target date will be met.
General Description
The Mercury program consists of a number of phases, the culmi-
nating phase bei oital flight for a period of 41/ hours, a neriodo hours.
or three times around . Prior to the manned orbital flights,
detailed design, research ane development, and qualification programs
must be pursued. phase of the pre was largely com-
pleted during 1959; however, as a result of th ntinuing research
and development program, many design refinements and design
changes have been made in the basic configuration. The largest part
of the research and development phase will be completed and the
qualification phase of the program was started during 1960. The cul-
minating phase of manned orbital flight should, if all goes well, occur
before the end of 1961 ent will be preceded by additional
manned ballistic flights in Redstone-launched capsules and unmanned
orbital flights, using the Atlas launch vehicle.
Let us now examine the manned orbital mission. The capsule will
rest atop an essentially unmodified Atlas launch vehicle as shown in
figure 1. The launch will place at Cape Canaveral, Fla., and will
be in a northeasterly direction toward the island of Bermuda. Initial
ascent will be almost verticle; as the velocity increases, however, the
flight path inclines and, long before the vehicle is over Bermuda, it
will be traveling parallel to the surface of the Earth at orbital veloc-
ity. The point at which orbital velocity is achieved is called injection.

PROJECT MERCURY 13
2V
↑
1
6
FiGUre 1.-Atlas launch vehicle with development capsule.

[COMMITTEE PRINT]
4 JUL 2 51960
Copy
PROJECT MERCURY
SECOND INTERIM REPORT
STAFF STUDY
OF THE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS ASTRONAUTICS
U.S. HOUSE OF R U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NTATIVES
EIGHTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION FIRST SESSION
[Serial h]
MAY 26, 1961
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science and Astronautics
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
70258 0 WASHINGTON : 1961

and is traveling overhead between the islands of Hawaii and the Cali-
fornia coast, a retrorocket system will be fired to slow the capsule
slightly below orbital velocity. This deceleration from an orbital ve-
locity of about 17,500 miles per hour to the suborbital velocity of ap-
proximately 17,150 miles per hour, will cause the capsule to descend
earthward; as the capsule descends from its nominal orbital altitude
of about 100 miles, it will encounter the denser atmosphere. The aero-
dynamic drag forces in atmosphere will rapidly slow the capsule
further until it is at a sonic velocity of approximately 350 miles per
hour over the Atlantic Ocean not far from the island of Puerto Rico.
At this point, a small stabilizing parachute will be deployed; later, at
an altitude of 10,ooo feet, deployment of a large 63-foot diameter
cargo parachute will take place and the capsule will be gently lowered
to the surface of the ocean.
While the capsule is cireling the Earth, near-continuous radio con-
tact will be maintained with the astronaut. As the capsule is lowered
to the surface of the ocean, location aids such as Sofar bombs will
be ejected and direction-finding radio signals will be sent out to aid
in rapid location of the capsule. Ships and aireraft in the planned
recovery area will then home on the direction-finding signals. Air-
craft will guide the recovery surface vessels to the scene of capsule
impact.
To this point, a normal mission has been considered, with the as-
sumption that eyerything goes as planned. As in the case of a manned
that have been made to handle such emergencies as might occur will
be considered. First of all, as shown in figure 2, a separate rocket
propulsion system, called an escape or abort system, is provided. This
will carry the capsule to safety, should the Atlas malfunction while
on the launch pad or during the early phases of ascent. The abort
system may be energized automatically or by ground control, or by
the astronaut himself.
Should an abort or emergency landing be necessary. , it is apparent
that the capsule will land in other than the planned recovery area.
Therefore, provisions must be made for retrieval of the capsule from
emergency areas. If the emergency should occur while the capsule
and launch vehicle are on the launch pad, the capsule, after firing
the escape rocket system, would land within a short distance of the
launch pad, and emergency recovery provisions can readily be imple-
mented. Should an emergency condition occur fairly early in the
flight while the vehicle is well below orbital velocity, the capsule
would land in the area between Florida and Bermuda. This area
will be covered with aircraft and surface vessels for possible emer-
gency recovery purposes. If an abort should be required at near-

NNTN FiGUre 2.-Mercury capsule with escape tower.

fication of the emergency abort system.
The Mercury Manned Capsule System
A detailed description of th spacecraft and
associated systems is presented in 228, published
in January 1960. Hence, a brief descript of each system will be
presented in the present report; in addi evelopments and
the current status of the various systems discussed.
In considering the status of the capsule and s systems, it is im-
portant to remember the compressed timetable n which the Mercury
capsule development has proceeded. capsule development has proceeded. Concurrent design, develop-
ment, and production have, of necessity, been undertaken in order
to make the most rapid pre to make the most rapid progress possible. rogress possible. Under such conditions, it
was inevitable that retrofit and redesign of certain components of the was inevitable that retrofit and redesign of certain components of the
system were necessary as associated research and system were necessary as associated research development pro- development pro-
grams progressed. The most sophisticated of theoretical analyses grams progressed. most sophisticated theoretical analyses
and analytical designs cannot anticipate all developmental problems and analytical desig nnot anticipate all de omental problems
that might arise, and the that might arise, and tl hose modifications that might be required. Only nodifications that migh be required. Only
experimental investigations of actual prototype hardware can, in many
cases, confirm satisfactory equipment operation. many instances,
system deficiencies show up only under actual full-scale flight con-
ditions, even though the most extensive ground testing possible has
been carried out.
Basic capsule structure and heat shielding
The Mercury spacecraft, fig ure 3, has a 74.5-inch maximum diameter
with an 80-inch spherical radium heat shield. The e afterbody con-
sists of a cone frustum which surrounds the pilot's pressure vessel,
a 32-inch-diameter cylinder which contains the parachutes and on-
board recovery systems, and a ce cone frustum which form muni-
cation antenna and contains the drogue parachute horizon
scanners.
The heat of reentry will be dissipated rge rounded heat
shield. Early Redstone-launched Mercury flights will utilize a beryl-
lium heat sink for this heat shield, whereas later orbital flights will
use an ablation heat shield material.
At the time the original Mercury specification was written, the heat
sink approach was within the state of the art, while there was no ex-

be adequate, the Mercury psule could, without
change, accept a ber lium heat sink. As a result of the Big Joe de-
velopment flight tests made in September 1959, and subsequent analy-
sis of results, a firm decision to go ahead with the use of an ablation
heat shield for all the orbital flights was reached. The recovered Big
Joe capsule is shown in figure 4. The previously ordered beryllium
heat sinks were designated for use in Redstone ballistic flights.
The Big Joe flight test also showed unexpectedly high afterbody
heating under the most critical reentry conditio Ithough hun-
dreds of wind tunnel tests had been made on terbody heating
problem, none had been able to duplicate fuliy actual full-scale
reentry conditions and thus, it took the act ll-scale flight to
uncover this problem. In order to withstand this higher heating, the
thickness of the external skin on the conic afterbody has been in-
creased, and the construction of the cylindrical part of the afterbody
has been changed to beryllium plate in formerly used
light-gage metal.
During the Mercury capsule resea d development program, it
was found that the impact load sustained during a landing on the
ground, such as would occur in an off-the-pad abort, could exceed
human tolerance limits under certain wind conditions. Therefore, the
impact-alleviating or cushioning device, shown on the MR-3 capsule
in figure 5, was developed. The cushioning effect is obtained by use of
shield so suspended, the volume between the
sule structure fills with air. Upon impact, the entrapped air escapes
through holes in the sidewall of the skirt, thereby acting as a pneu-
matic shock absorber. Some strengthening of the capsule lower bulk-
head structure was found necessary to withstand the loads trans-
mitted by the skirt upon landing impact.
Extensive tests have been made to confirm that the installation will
attenuate land impact loadings acceptable to human
occupants.
The installation of the impact attenuation skirt allowed removal of
four inflatable flotation bags which in the upper section
of the capsule. These bags were to d on impact and were
to serve the purpose of ke of the capsule out of the
water during astronaut the top emergency hatch. With
the skirt installed, the space bet een the heat shield and the capsule
structure will fill, after impact, wit n some 8,000 pounds of water. In
this manner the impact bag assembly acts as a sea anchor, thus pre-
venting the capsule from capsizing during astronaut egress.

18 PROJECT MERCURY
CAPSULE INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT
CH
FiGURE 3.—Mercury capsule internal arrangement. FiGure 3.-—Mercury capsule internal arrangement.
OVERALL
V VIEWOF VEWOF
CAPSULE
FACE OF
ABLATION SHIELD
CLOSE-UP.OF
AFT SECTION 00000
CLOSE-UP OF
AFTERBODY HOOK
FiGUre 4.-Detailed photographs of recovered Big Joe capsule.

PROJECT MERCURY 19
ET
MARINES 44
4
AN
FiGURe 5.-MR-3 capsule with extended impact bag.

velopment, 40 motors were fired at the Thiokol factory and additional
motors were fired under simulated space conditions at the U.S. Air
Force Tullahoma facility and the NASA Lewis Research Center Alti-
tude Facility. Qualification tests of the retrorocket motors have also
been completed.
Escape system
As has been mentioned previously, provision is made within the
Mercury capsule system to terminate the mission and escape from the
malfunction. The escape
maneuver is car ried out by use of the esce pe rocket to the time of
booster cutoff. order provide ra ration of the capsule
from the launch vehicle, the escape rocket has a high level of thrust
over a short period of time. Because o ts location on the tower
extending ahead of the capsule, the escape rocket motor utilizes a
triple nozzle wit ith the three nozzles canted outward so that the exit
flow does not impin the capsule st ructure.
It is important that nagnitude and direction of the resultant
thrust vector of the three nozzles be controlled to close limits and that
the direction of action be known precisely. In this way, the capsule
can be forced away forward and to one side of the booster during an
escape maneuver, without setting up a tumbling motion.
Development and qualification tests of the escape motor have been
luring the
The Mercury caps ve a safe descent
and landing. led in the capsule.
The drogue parachute has a ot diameter, conic, ribbon-type canopy
with approximately
long riser made of dacron to minimize the elasticity effects during de-
ployment. . The drogue parachute is packed in a protective bag and
is ejected by a mortar. This te provides a backup stabiliza-
tion capability for the capsule in the event of failure of the reaction
control and stabilization system and also serves to slow the capsule
to approximately 200 miles per hour before main parachute opening
shock.
The main parachute is a 63-foot diameter ring-sail cargo-type para-
chute. Throughout the test
tremely favorable opening characteristics, as well as good stability

tain cabin pressurizatio emergency conditions. Carbon di-
oxide content, gas d humidity are maintained within
acceptable limits. s stored in two spherical containers at
very high pressures. ter cooling system, designed to operate in
weightless flight, dissipate the heat generated by electronic
equipment ronaut. Activated charcoal and lithium
hydroxide are used for odor and carbon dioxide removal.
A qualification progran the environmental control system has
been completed. Manned tests of the system were begun on June 20,
1960. The test program included a number of 4-hour tests which dem-
onstrated the system operation in all modes including simulation of
system failures. A 28-hour mission simulation and a 12-hour dura-
tion postlanding test have also been made. Many components of the
environmental control system were installed during centrifuge tests at
the U.S. Navy Johnsville human centrifuge (AMAL) in October 1960.
ner and gyroscopic the capsule in the
pitch, roll, and yaw planes is con reaction jet system which
uses hydrogen peroxide as ile in orbit, the
control forces required are and a low thrust mode of opera-
tion of the reaction jets is ing retrorocket firing and
during atmospheric ree -level thrust is required. In order
st, two sets of reaction thrust chambers
are provided in automatic system. In order to increase overall
mission reliability, provision is also made for the pilot to sense and
control the capsule's attitude A periscope and window are used for
visual attitude reference by the astronaut. A third set of reaction
jets, activated by the pilot's control stick, is provided.
Qualification and reliability testing programs have been completed
on the horizon scanner, periscope, automatic stabilization and con-
trol system, and rate stabilization and control system.

2
PROJECT MERCURY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL SYSTEM
P REU E S4
ME -
InCiaN2 VEETLAT NET WAE
CM
LAN PREU NELAP OLI-OIC
IEL A -
IUT JNO EMMENT COE-EE
INAD IENTLATON UTUN WOE
HEEW
GUTLE ULVEiSONE
CUY SINEEY GOUPL,E-7EIS-
LA SCNER SAUTY UT-
SICTSENFREOAE NEINDCR -SMETA
E AAINCNICTER ANCTNATEE WALVE-SIDIRR
CEN AEEAE NELTO-(E
I AA PLEDUTOY SAECDODO
EO E E-S
ADE A. NUT SAUT ENUTPY VALE-SEIRO
BRS SIEVOEN IKLET -TSE
YLY SAY FESROE ELEY SCE
thuste
NUTE ORGUIT WLOE BP -th
1I STES tME (0
A0 g54S071E-2AS4-
NES OYRES BTY ribzes
TO CHES-ESECE4
SES-
VEN PESM WENSE
15 {-20 ma
$n E BGIY' ZVRCUEY
ISTER
OTES QHEDN WLPEED4
SOWPRENCR RHIESERE ROFTENENTIAL
U 89EE-
BIT CCA Cobig ta
BTS
CNFTK WLVE -LID
ET 1ONSE
26 Lad TH PIMBBRG PROJECT MERCURY
27 14 LET DUT CHONATOE-1TESO-
31 EAEONG E-3-
3 GUIY NUPEN SEPAKATION
I
BEIN VLIE(EIDE
CESOR DRECE VAUITE
35 ES
PREBBURE TRGABDUED
28 SAPR
12 2 HET 07
TRE wiit
34 BSEN NIT1LE-d4N
INE SBUR SPOETI
38 33 51. 524
Duss SPORET K
2 807500
17 EMACAATIN
tTe208
01800
1ECTE-
BT FA ATUR FEEOR DHESR WLAT
a0854
a8ter
LWERRENCT VICA PRESLE
ME-102-
CHERRENGT MEVRER NITTLE-CHHSTE-
m SMENSENCY ORVGER AREROIRE
TRANOCER-DOETEY
SL 9AC-N400MN1CT COU2,IR04-10P20
to. TMCMRENY CELSCR SUTORR LTE
100180
STEAM CUTLET GROUKO STEAM DUTLET
wE RPORATIOR REFRIGERATION
FIgure 6.

on the original harness; however, a revised harness, currently in use,
carries quick release fittings. The original head restraint system has
been removed. I It was felt that this locked the head so firmly that
any shoulder or body movement might injure the neck. Consequently,
the current configuration provides lateral restraint only and permits
the head to move upward and forward. Tests which were conducted
on the Air Force deceleration sled at Holloman Air Force Base dem-
onstrated the adequacy of the modified system.
Communications (onboard)
The Mercury capsule communication system is designed to provide
two-way voice communication, position tracking capability, air-to-
ground physical and biological data transmission, g ground control of
vital capsule events and postlanding search and recovery assistance.
The communication system is made up of the following equipment:
S This unit is de-
continuous
main parachute deployment.
2)A1/2-wat voice transmitter-receiver which provides
backup for the att system and serves identical functions, once
selected by the ast
)A 5-watt This unit is designed
to provide extended range for two-way voice communications, backup
for UHF voice circuits for emergency use, or for normal use when
orbital path is beyond line of sight range.
A 1-watt BOF rescue voice transmitter-receiver. This unit is
designed to provide two-way voice communications with beyond line-
of-sight range capability. "It will be energized only after impact, as
a backup for UHF voice communication during the recovery phase.
(5) A 3.3-watt telemetry receiver (high frequency). This unit is
designed to provide for biological and physical data transmission to
ground-range stations; a backup for onboard instrumentation data
tape recorder; verification of events transmitted to or programed
within the capsule; and emergency telegraph transmission in the event
of complete voice-communication failure.

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS
OVERTONI BROOKS, Louisiana, Chairman
GEORGE P. MILLER, California JOSEPH W. MARTIN, JR.. Massachusetts
OLIN E. TEAGUE, TeXAS JAMES G. FULTON, PennsyIvania
VICTOR L. ANFUSO, NeW York J. EDGAR CHENOWETH, ColoradO
JOSEPH E. KARTH, MinneSota WILLIAM K. VAN PEL/T. Wisconsin
KEN HECHLER, West Virginia PERKINS BASS, New Hampshire
EMILIO Q. DADDARIO, Connecticut R. WALTER RIEHLMAN. NeW York
WALTER H. MOELLER. Ohio JESSICA McC. WEIS, New York
DAVID S. KING, Utah CHARLES A. MOSHER. Ohio
THOMAS G. MORRIS, NeW Mexico RICHARD L. ROUDEBUSH, IndIana
BOB CASEY. Texas BELL, California
WILLIAM J. RANDALL, MiSSOUri
JOHN W. DAVIS. Georgia JOHN W. DAVIS, Georgia
WILLIAM F. RYAN, NeW York
JAMES C. CORMAN, California
JOHN W. McCORMACK, Massachusetts
CHarLEs F. Ducanper, Erecutire Director and Chief Counsel CHarLEs F. DucanpER, Frecutire Director and Chief Counsel
Dr. CHARLES S. SHELDON II, TechniCal Dr. CHARLES S. SHELDoN II, TechniCal lDirector Director
SPENCER M. BEReSFoRD, SpECial SPENCER M. BEResFoRD, SpECial I Counsel l Counsel
PHILIP B. YEAGER, SpEcial PHIIP B. YEAgER, Special Consultant Consultant
JOHN A. CaRstarPHEN, Jr., Chief Clerk JOHN A. CARsTaRPHEN, Jr., Chief Clerk
FRANk R. HaMMiLL, Jr., Counsel FRAnk R. HaMMiLL, Jr., Counsel
RIcharD P. Hines, Staff Consultant RicharD P. Hines, Staff Consultant
HowaRD J. Silrerstein, Staff Consultant HoWaRD J. SILrerstein, Staff Consultant
RayMonD WiLcoVe, Staff Consultant RayMonD WILcoVE, Staff Consultant
C. Ors Finch, Assistant Clerk C. Ors FincH, Assistant Clerk
JoserH Felron, Publications Clerk JosepH FeltoN. Publications Clerk
II

24 PROJECT MERCURY
A
Figure 7.-Project Mercury molded couches.

radars.
aid after capsule impact.
(10) Auxiliary UHF rescue beacon (super-SARAH) for redudant
search and recovery aid.
System development tests have been performed etermine mutual
compatibility of communications systems each other
and with other capsule systems equipment. of these tests,
a number of equipment alte leviate problems
uncovered. Among thes rective actions were internal filtering
and repackaging of the rescue beacon, internal powerline filtering in
the command receiver, addition of powerline filters to the telemetry
transmitter, and redesign of the telemeter tran nsmitter power supply.
These were problems that did not appear until all equipment was
working together within the actual capsule structure.
Instrumentation system
The instrumentation system monitors physical condition and
environment of the astronaut, capsu ristic and condition and
operation of capsule controls. This information is supplied to telem-
etry transmitters and to a tape recorder vide data for analysis
and evaluation. Cameras are installed to and record 'the
astronaut's facial expressions and the capsule's instrument panel. The
instrumentation system also provides program control power to oper-
tion of the main supply. In addition manual switching will inter-
connect all three supplies into common system at astronaut
option. This arrangement permits utilization of all installed batter-
ies if found necessary, in flight. The normal mission requires less
power than that supplied by the main batte complement. The
reserve power in the standby and isolated so arces, therefore, is com-
pletely available for unforeseen emergencies mnanticipated power
utilization.
The d.c. battery power is converted to a.c. by means of static invert-
ers. As in the case of th eries, independent inverters are pro-
vided.
All batteries, inverters, and other electrical system components to be
used aboard the Mercury capsule have successfully completed their

manned flight.
The second MAC capsule (fig. 1), was delivered to NASA on March
14, 1960, and the third and fourth were delivered in the last week of
July. The third delivered capsule, scheduled for the first Redstone
flight, is the capsule that contains most of the systems and sub-
systems that be needed for manned orbital flight. Twelve cap-
sules had been delivered by the end of April 1961.
On August 16,
equipped for manned flight, was subjected to a development engineer-
ing inspection at the McDonnell factor The purpose of this inspec-
tion was to insure that the capsule, as engineered and manufactured,
was safe for manned flight. Representatives of NASA, MAC, USAF,
Space Technology Laboratories, and Convair participated. This
inspection was typical of those which are required during aircraft inspection was typical of those which
development programs. It focused the attention of a large group of
engineers, of various backgrounds and interests, on capsule system engineers, of various backgrounds and interests, on capsule system
details and operational procedures. details Following this inspection, the
capsule entered a period of capsule system functional checks at the
McDonnell factory, before being shipped to Cape Canaveral, Fla.,
for preflight activity.
The delivery schedule for capsules subsequent to April 1961, will
depend largely on r results from orbital flight tests. Should major
difficulties be encountered during these tests, production of subsequent
capsules will, of course, need to be interrupted for design n changes and
retrofit. As has been described before, such actions are inherent in
high-priority advanced development programs which must undertake
simultaneous development and production in order to compress the
overall program timetable.
FlighT PrograM
The rocket-boosted Mercury flight program consists of a research
and development phase and a qualification phase, as well as the
manned orbital phase. Most of the research and development flights
have been accomplished. The qualification phase began late in 1960.

2
FioURe 8.-Little Joe launch vehicle during capsule mating operations.
702580-61--5

FigURe 9.—Little Joe launch from Wallops Island, Va.

rather than the capsule. This flight proved the stability and integrity
of the launch vehicle and provided a test of the destruct
system at maximum range.
(b) Little Joe II, November 4, 1959.The primary objective of this
flight was to check' the operation of the escape system for the com-
bination of mach number and altitude which causes the maximum
dynamic pressure during launch. The escape rocket igniter fired at
maximum dynamic pressure; however the major portion of the pro-
pellant did not ignite until 10 seconds later. Because of this delayed
burning, the capsule did not separate from the booster until the dy-
namic pressure had decayed to one-fifth of the design value. All the
other capsule functions occurred as programed and the capsule landed
in the Atlantic Ocean about 6 miles offshore at Wallops Island.
(c) Little Joe I1I, December 4, 1959.The objectives of this flight
were to determine the motions of the capsule after a high-altitude
abort for a capsule with no active control system. The escape rocket abort for a capsule with no active control system. The escape rocket
fired as planned at 96,ooo feet and accelerated the capsule to a mach fired as planned at 96,oo0 feet and accelerated the capsule to a mach
number of 6. The capsule was boosted to an apogee of 280,ooo feet number of 6. The capsule was boosted to an apogee of 280,oo0 feet
and impacted, as programed, 200 statute miles from the launch site.
A monkey was included on the flight and suffered no adverse physio-
logical effects. the flight instrumentation functioned properly
and showed that the capsule was sufficiently stable to permit safe
deployment of the parachute.
(d) Little Joe IV, January 21, 1960.—This was a repeat of the
Little Joe II in an attempt to achieve a valid abort test at maximum
dynamic pressure. test objectives were successfully achieved; the
escape maneuver was ini t 36.0 and at a predetermined
maximum dynamic sule demonstrated sufficient
aerodynamic stal condition.
) Little Joe , 1960.—All the previous Little Joe
n and development boilerplate-
type capsules.
tion capsule manufactured by McDonnell Aircraft Corp. Due to
a malfunctioning switch assembly, the escape rocket fired prematurely
during the launch phase. result of the premature firing, the
capsule clamp ring did not r the capsule failed to separate
from the booster.
This flight was to have ecked th operation he capsule escape
system during an abort at maximum aerodynamie loading. The cap-
sule for this flight was previously subjected to an acoustical vibration

attempt to attain the flight objectives of Little Joe V. The Little Joe
V-B flight provided an unexpected severe test of the capsule escape
system. Due to the fact that one of the booster motors fired 5 seconds
late, the booster pitched over more rapidly than planned and flew
a low-altitude trajectory. The peak altitude was only 14,ooo feet and
the dynamic pressure at the time of abort was 1,so0 pounds per square
feet; approximately twice as high as planned. I capsule events
and recovery were normal. Capsule postflight dition was good.
Big Joe
Big Joe was the name given to the research and development
Mercury capsule which was flown on an Atlas launch vehicle and is
shown in figure 10. The flight was conducted on September 9, 1959,
with the following primary objectives:
(a) Validation of the adequacy of the ablation heat shield.
b) Determination of capsule dynamic stability during hyper-
excellent postflight condition of the heat shield verified that the de-
sign would be satisfactory for the Mercury capsule. The reentry was
accomplished without the aid of a reaction control system. Although
the capsule entered the atmosphere at an angle of aitack greater than
90, the amplitude of the angle of attack oscillations decreased to
nearly 10° at maximum reentry dynamic pressure. Because of the
steep reentry angle, reentry deceleration was 12g, 50 percent greater
than expected during reentry from orbit.
An unexpected but important result of the flight was the high de- S
gree of heating on the conic and cylindrical afterbody portions of
the capsule. The high heating rates resulted from unpredictable
shock wave interaction and shock wave impingement on the capsule
afterbody. As a result of the high afterbody temperatures, the ex-
ternal shingle material on the MeDonnell production capsules was

Fioure 10. Big Joe and gantry.

acceleration of approximately 15g, as planned." Th equencing sys-
tem worked as expected; the capsule attained a maximum altitude
of 2,500 feet and the parachute lowered the capsule into the water
3,0oo feet from the launch site. Capsule recovery was successfully
effected by helicopter.
Mercury Atlas-1
The first Atlas-launched McDonnell capsule flown July 29,
1960. The Atlas guidance system was program ause the cap-
sule to reenter along a trajectory which mum after-
body temperatures. The reentry woul naximum re-
entry deceleratio primary objective was to qualify
the capsule str nd afterbody heat protection. he flight pro-
gressed normally until approximately 1 minute after launch; at that
time a malfunction occurred which resulted in destruction of the
launch vehicle. The capsule, which was internally pressurized, main-
tained pressurization and transmitted telemetry records until it im-
pacted in the oce The capsule did not carry an escape tower;
consequently, the sequencing system was not programed to deploy the
parachute after a malfunction which occurred early in the launch
trajectory. The capsule sank after the high velocity impact; how-
adapter were made prior to subsequent flights.
The previously mentioned pressure fluctuations are unique to the
capsule payload and do not exist for the normal Atlas ICBM
configuration.
Mercury-Atlas-2
The second Mercury-Atlas, which was February 21, 1961,
closely matched the desired trajectory. was programed
to produce maximum capsule afterbody tures and maximum
reentry loads. test objectives were The capsule landed
1,425 statute miles downrange, 13 miles of the preconputed im-
pact point.
The postflight condition of the capsule shingles and ablation heat
shield was excellent. Maximum measured on the
shingles and the antenna canister were lower than expected.
The Mercury-Atlas-2 booster was modified by the addition of an
8-inch-wide band at the top of the liquid oxygen tank. This band

PROJECT MERCURY 33
--
FiGure I1. —Beach abort test of the Mercury escape system.

consideration a report oject
Report."
This report on thi The report sum-
prepared as an aid prepared as an the Con gress and the publ sum
marizes the current status of Project Mereury and assesses the accom- marizes the curren status of I oject Mereury and assesses the accom-
plishments to date which have culminated on May 5, 196l, with the plishments to date which have culminated on May 5, 1961, with the
successful ballistic flight of Comdr. Alan B. Shepard, USN, the first successful ballistic flight of Comdr. Alan B. Shepard, USN, the first
U.S. astronaut to experience the environment of outer space. U.S. astronaut to experience environment of outer space.
This report was prepared under the supervision of Mr. Howard J. This report was prepared under the supervision Mr. Howard J.
Silberstein, who wrote the introductory summary, the Silberstein, who wrote the introductory summary conclusions, onclusions,
and edited the report. The bulk of the information was provided by and edited the report. The bulk of the informatior provided by
the Office of Space Flight Programs, National Aeronautics and Space
provided by the Department of Defense. The report has been given proper staff review prior to its submittal
The report has been given proper staff review prior to its submittal
to you for consideration. CHarles F. Ducander,
Executive Director and Chief Counsel.
III

capsule was recovered in good condition and will be reflown.
Mercury-Redstone-1
The Redstone launch vehicle shown in figure 13 is used as an inter-
mediate range test vehicle Mercury program. The first Mer-
cury-Redstone flight occurred December 19, 1960 It attained a
maximum speed of 4,300 miles per hour and um acceleration
of 6g. The MR-1 capsule reached a pea 135 miles, a
range of 225 miles, and e zero-gravity
flight. The flight was success every respect he capsule con-
trol system, retrorockets, ration rockets, comm nunications equip-
ment and recovery equ quipment functioned properly. The capsule was
recovered soon after landing by a helicopter, whic was dispatched
from the aircraft carrier Valley Forge.
The purpose of the Redstone flights is to qualify the capsules during
short-range ballistic flights prior to the orbital flights. Manned Red-
stone flights will be accomplished after a series of unmanned flights
when the capsule systems prover sufficiently reliable. The
Redstone flights will provide an oportunity to fully qualify
the capsule control system ar etrorocket system in flights which
will not require these systems for the completion of a successful and
safe mission. These flights will also serve to develop pilot procedures
and ground control procedures which can be used in the orbital flights.
Mercury-Redstone-2
The second Mercury-Redstone was successfu flown January 31,
1961.1 Because the booster perated at
thrust, the Redstone burned out at approximately 400 miles per hour
higher velocity than planned. ine fuel depletion, which occurred
sooner than expected, triggered the booster automatic abort sensing
system and aborted the capsule with the escape rocket.
The resultant high capsule velocity produced an apogee of 156
statute miles and a range of 421 miles; 116 miles farther than expected.
The capsule experienced 6.6-minutes duration at zero-gravity and
encountered accelerations during escape rocket firing and reentry of
17g and 14.6g, respectively.

PROJECT MERCURY 35
2
2
EE
FIGUre 12. —Mercury-Atlas static test firing.
70258061-6

,
1
FIGURE 13.—Mercury-Redstone.

a change in the control system, another booster was launched to qualify
modified components prior to manned flight. This test was flown on
March 24, 1961, with a boilerpla nonseparating capsule mounted on
the booster. The launch was succes in every respect.
Mercury-Redstone-3
On May 5, 1961, Astronaut Alan B. Shepard flew a Mercury-Red-
stone mission. an apogee of 117 statute miles
and a range of 302 miles; dur zero-gravity was 5 minutes.
No unforeseen problems were enc ntered during the flight. Shepard
reported that the angular motions of the capsule in response to the
manual control system were identical to those of the flight simulators
in which he trained. Manual control during retrofiring was nex-
pectedly easy, indicating that retrorocket thrust misalinement was
small. 'He felt that the launch and reentry accelerations were identi- and reentry acceleratio
cal to those which he had ex xperienced many times xperienced ma the human
centrifuge. No difficulty was encountered with respect to zero-gravity. centrifuge. No dif ficulty was encountered wi ect to zero-gravity.
Shepard also felt that because more visual, acceleration, and audio Shepard also felt that because visual, acceleration, and audio
cues were present during flight than in the simulators, he had postive cues were present during flight tha the simulators, he had postive
assurance of events such as capsule separation, escape tower jettison, assurance of events such as capsule se eparation, escape tower jettison,
retrofire, retropack jettison, and parachute deployment. mont
After a mild landing, Shepard opened the side hatch and was raised
into a hovering helicopter (fig. 14). The helicopter then flew to
the waiting aircraft carrier Lake Champlain. Figure 15 shows Shep-
ard and the capsule aboard the carrier.
Future flight program
Manned Mercury-Redstone flights will continue in 1961. The pur-
pose of additional Redstone flights is to qualit nodified capsule con-
figuration and determine the rea pilots to a space en-
vironment.
Additional unmanned attempted prior
to manned orbital flight nidance system to
vector the Mercury-Atlas the correct altitude, velocity, and flight
path angle must be demonstrated; the capsule systems must be quali-
fied in a prolonged vacuum and zero-g environment; and the network
must demonstrate its ability to track the capsule and monitor the cap-
sule systems.

FicUre 14.-Helicopter recovery after Mercury Redstone-3.

eYTIT
FiGure 15. Shepard and recovered Mercury Redstone capsule.

correct retrofire point for a landing within the desired area. With
these criteria in mind, a maximum of three orbits was chosen for the
first manned orbital flight.
A number of considerations were taken into account to determine
the most desirable launching azimuth. These were:
(1) Use of existing ground d support instrumentation stations
throughout the world.
()Use of the tlantic Missile Range as the launch area and
the impact area afte r the third orbit.
(3) "'An orbit which remained over the continental United States
for a considerable portion of its flight, allowing continuous track-
ing, both during the orbital flight and during reentry.
For these reasons, a northeast launch from ( Cape Canaveral was
chosen. The northeast launch which was selected results in an orbital
inclination of 321/2.
By following the map (fig. 16), it is seen that the first orbit passes
just south of Bermuda, south of Canary Islands, across Africa,
over the Indian Ocean, and over the Australian Missile Range at
Woomera. The track then passes across the Solomon and Phoenix
Islands. The orbit then intersects the Mexican and southern Cali-
fornia coast, passing over the southern United States where a number
of available instrumention sites already exist, such as the Pacific
Missile Range, the White Sands Missile Range, the Eglin Air Force
Base, as well as the Cape Canaveral complex. The third orbit passes
within close proximity of Hawaii, a very desirable location for radar
munication is available from Hawaii to the continental United States.
In making the choice of the number and location of the various
ground instrumentation stations, a number of other criteria were
established. These include:
(1) The desire to have continuous tracking from Cape Canav-
eral through Bermuda for accurate orbital determinations and
to have real-time telemetry and continuous voice contact during
this time.
(2) The ability to reset the retrotimer conveniently on each
during each orbit.
(3) The need for continuous contact with the capsule during
launch and a reasonable length o following orbital
insertion.
(④) A desire to maintain frequent voice and telemetry contact
with the capsule.
(5) The need for continuous impact prediction in case of an
early abort requiring impact in the Atlantic Ocean, or during an
early reentry if an emergency should occur after orbit injection.

PROJECT MERCURY 41
TRACKING & COMMUNICATIONS
NETWORK
Project Mercury
To
1. AMR 5. NIGERIA 5. NIGERIA WOOMERA, AUSTL. 13. MEXICO . WOOMERA, AUSTL. 13. MEXICO
2. BERMUDA 6. ZANZIBAR 6. ZANZIBAR 10. CANTON IS. 14. NEW MEXICO
3. SHIP 3 SHIP 7. SHIP SHIP 11. HAWAII 11. HAWAII 15. TEXAS 15. TEXAS
4. CANARY IS. 8. MUCHEA, AUSTL. 12. CALIFORNIA 16. FLORIDA
61.67
Figure 16.

the critical phase of the mission, the Azusa and FPS-16 radar systems
at Cape Canaveral will provide backup information for the same
displays in the control center should a malfunction of the Atlas
ground guidance system occur. This redundancy is necessary since
information on the capsule position elocity will be required in
order to make the proper abort ded if a guidance failure occurs.
A very high reliability radio ications system between Cape
Canaveral, Washington, and Berm must be provided to transmit
real-time trajectory data., However because of the inability to pro-
vide a 100 percent reliability factor and the absolute necessity of mak- vide a 100 percent reliability factor and the absolute necessity of mak-
ing important command decisions at Bermuda, it is necessary to pro- ing important command decisions at Bermuda, it is necessary to pro-
vide redundant computing facilities at that site. vide redundant cor mputing facilities at that site.
The ground instrumentation system for Project Mercury will con- The ground instrumentation system for oject Mercury will con-
sist of 18 stations, a sist of i8 stations, a computing and communications center, and a computing and com uunu cations center, and a
control center. control center. Of the 18 ground stations, 11 f the 18 ground stations, 11 I will be equipped with equipped with
long-rage precision radars and will comprise the tracking system.
Sixteen of the stations will be equipped with telemetry receivers. All
stations will be linked with the computing and control centers by a
communications network. communications network. Major equipment at the individual station Major equipment at the individual station
is listed in table V.
Eight of the eighteen stations and the control center will be located Eiebtef ths laented
on military tracking rang nere use is made of existing radars and
other facilities. At these locations, a major part of the required
equipment, including most of the tracking radars, is now in existence
and will be made available for this project. (These locations involve
the Department of Defense test facilities and the Commonwealth of
Australia.) NASA will arrange for the use of this equipment. The
scope of Department of Defense participation in the support of Project
Mereury operations is given in the "Overall Plan, DOD Support for
Project Mercury Operations," dated January 15, 1960.

TaBLE V.-Station capability
Radar Tele- Com- Com- Acquisition Ground communications
metry muni- mand
Station name Coverage, passes recep- cation con- Timing
8 C tion (cap- trol FA SA M Voice TTY SSB
sule) radio
Canaveral w la ar a  a  e  i a i awd  a - 1, 2, and 3. (X) X X x (X) X
Grand Bahama 1,2, and 3 (X) XX XXXX AMR
Grand Turk 1, 2, and 3 AR
Bermuda 1.2, and 3 X x X
Atlantic ship k 1, 2, and 3 XXX
Grand Canary Island 1 and 2... X
Kano, Nigeria 1 and 2.. XX XXXXXX
Zanzibar I and 2. KKKKKKKKKXKXXKX KKKKKKKKXXKXXXK
Indian Ocean ship 1, 2, and 3 XXXXKXXXXXXXXXXXXX PROJECT MERCURY
Muchea, Australia - 1, 2, and 3 X X
Woomera, Australia I and 2 X x KXXXKKKXXXKXXKM
Canton Island 4 1 and 2.. . ... X
Kauai Island, Hawaii A 2 and 3.... X XX XXK XKX
Point Arguello, Calif 2 and 3 X XXX
Gusymas, Mexico 1, 2, and 3.. X XXKXKX
White Sands. N. Mex 1, 2, and 3 X
Corpus Christi, Tex 1, 2, and 3 x. x X
Eglin, Fla 1. 2, and 3 x
Goddard Space Flight Center 1.
1 Ground communications.
Site functions: FA, fully automatic; SA, Semiautomatic; M, manual; SSB, single side band; , MPQ-31.
R

Page
Introduction
Background_. -0
Project Mercury major rocket tests (table I)
Ground instrumentaion plan for Project Mereury (table II)
Personnel d Manning requirements, Mercury worldwide tracking and
communications networth (table III) T10
Department of Defense support of Project Mercury.
Estimated costs s of DOD support of Project Mereury (through MR-7
and MR-8) (table IV).. 6
Project Mercury funding summary 6
Why man in space 7
Origin of program 8
Summary of progress to date 9
Future goals. 11
General Description. 12
The Mercury Manned Capsule System 16
Basic capsule structure and heat shielding- 16
Retrograde rockets 20
Escape system 20
Landing and recovery system Landing and recovery system 20
Environmental control system
Attitude control system Attitude control system
Pilot support and restraint. Pilot s support and restraint
Communications (onboard) Communications (onboard)
Instrumentation system Instrumentation system
Electrical power supplies
Capsule deliveries. Capsule deliveries
Flight Program.. Flight Program...
Little Joe... Little Joe...-
Big Jo Bg Joe
Beach abort flight
Mercury Mercury Atlas-1
Mercury Atlas-2
Mercury Atlas-3
Mercurv Redstone-1.
Mercury Redstone-2_
Mercury Redstone booster development test
Mercury Redstone-3.
Future flight programs R66888888888883836669994422833886668888
Tracking and Communications Network
General
Station capability (table V
Major functions of each station
Ground communication system.
Station phasing and implementation pros
Computations for Project Mercury
Network checkout procedures.
Operations.
Hangar checkout of capsules
Launch vehicle checkout
Checks during mate of booster and capsule
Flight Safety ReviewI Board
Prelaunch countdown
Mercury Control Center
Flight simulation
Operational procedures duri mission
Operational procedures near orbit insertion
Recovery
v

covery
team.
2. Major functions
(a) Cape Canaveral, Gra Island, and Grand Turk
Island: The functions to be perfor nese stations, as discussed
herein, involve several locations in th C complex for tracking,
telemetry, and vehicle communication is necessary to utilize
equipment at Cape Canaveral, nama Island, and Grand
Turk Island. The use of Cape Canaveral and Grand Bahama is re-
quired during launch because of look angle problems and the associ-
ated capsule antenna patterns. Grand Turk is needed to provide
coverage during the final phase of reentry where altitude limits the
range of the stations.
From prelaunch through insertion, continuous telemetry, voice
communications, capa will be provided to the
control center and tracking d ransmitted to the computing
center.
(During this same period other lata will be made available to the
Mercury control center and will provide tracking data from the Atlas
guidance system and FPS-16 to the computing center. These data
are separate from the function of the station as discussed herein.)
internally programed
events during reentry and landing.
(b) Bermuda: The Bermuda station will determine if the capsule
has been placed into an ace eptable orbi leffect an emergency land-
ing in one of the areas if the trajectory is not accept-
emetry, and command equipment will
be provided operform this function essentially
independent of dat a from the launch site.
Other functions may be as follows:
(1) To command an abort at the direction of the control center in
the event of serious capsule equipment failure or pilot difficulty late in
the launch phase.
(2) To command an abort as directed by the control center for
impact in a major recovery area in the event of certain propulsion or
guidance system malfunctions.
(3) If the flight is normal, tracking and data transmission to the
computing center will be required.

PROJECT MERCURY 45
TYPICAL PROJECT MERCURY SITE
HF POINT-TO-POINT RADIO BORESIGHT
TOWER
ATCUTC
COMMAND
CONTROL AND 500-MILE
VOICE TRANSMITTER RADAR
(FPS-16)
700-MILE 700-MILE
RADAR
TELEMETRY TELEMETRY AND (VERLORT)
VOICE RECEIVER
TELEMETRY & VOICE
RECEIVER AND
ACQUISITION AID
DF-3-23 60-256
FiGUre 17.—Typical Project Mercury network station.

the mission is aborted near the insertion point, the station will provide
reentry tracking and landing point location. This station will provide
data on landing location rectly to the local recov ery team.
e) Kano, Nigeria: This station will provide no nal telemetry and
voice communications erage on passes the general
area of central Africa.
)Zanzibar: This station will provide nor mal telemetry and voice
communications coverage on passes the general area of
east-central Africa.
rovide telemetry and
voice communications s coverage in the area a of the mid-Indian Ocean
on all three passes. The equipment required for this station will be
placed on board a Go t-furnished C1-M-AV1 ship.
(h) Muchea, Australia: This station will provide tracking, telem-
etry, and voice communications coverage on all three passes of a
normal mission and transmit command functions as required. Track-
most accurate orbit determination.
If an emergency landing is required at the end of the first orbit.
the Australian station will be instructed fror he control center to
reset the capsule timer for firing of retrorockets at the proper time to
initiate reentry and landing into a prep recovery area off the
east coast of the United States.
(i) Woomera, Australia: The Woomer tion will provide C-
band tracking, telemetry, and voice communic verage on orbits
one and two. The NASA will make arrangements with the Weapons
Research Establishment of Australia for operation use of an
FPS-16 radar located at Woomera.
(j) Canton Island: This station will provide normal telemetry and
voice communications coverage sses one and two.
Kauai Island, Hawaii: The this station is to pro-
vide tracking, telemetry, and voice cations on passes two
and three and to transmit command functions as required. This
station also maintains voice communications with the control center.
) Point Arguello, Calif. : The function of this station is to provide
tracking, telemetry, and voice communication coverage for passes

whether the retrorockets have been fired ogramed time. If
not, this station will command retrofiring ate reentry.
(n) White Sands issile Range, N. Mex.: This station contributes
to the continuous tracking coverage in the United States on all three
orbital passes, using an existing FPS-16 radar at White Sands.
o) Corpus Christi, I The station in so uthern Texas provides
tracking, telemetry, and voice communication for all three passes and
contributes to continuou erage of the reentry trajectory.
p) Eglin Air F Force Base, Fla. : The function of this station is to
contribute to continuous tracking coverage in the United States on
all orbital passes. Data transmission is required from Eglin to
AFMrC to extend the reentry trajectory plot at the Mercury Control
Center. Teletype tracking data will be sent to the computing center.
NASA will use an existing FPS- band radar and MPQ-31
S-band radar at this station.
(q) Computing and Con Center, Goddard Space
Flight Center: The computing a unications center is located
at the Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md. The primary
functions of the computing and commu unications center will include:
(1) During orbital flight, the center will compute and transmit
(b) The predicted location of the capsule.
(c) The predicted location of impact for emergency re-
entry.
(d) Time to fire retrorockets to land in next recovery area.
(e) Time to fire retrore accomplish a normal
landing.
(2) During reentry, the center will provide and transmit to the
control center ontinuous prediction of the landing point on
essentially a real-time basis.
(3) Throughout the entire operation, the center will provide
acquisition information to all field sites.
(4) The center will serve as the main communications terminal
for the Mercury operations. Communications to all field sites
will pass through the center's communication area, and the ap-
propriate switching and monitoring faci ties will be provided.
(5) During launch and insertion the - outing center will re-
ceive tracking data from the Cape Canave eral tracking systems in-
cluding the GE Burroughs Guidance System Using these track-
ing data in combination with selected telemetry data, the center

48 PROJECT MERCURY
will compute and send data for displays at the control center
suitable for the following functions:
(a) Monitor the launch to determine if the orbit achieved
is satisfactory.
(b) If the orbit is not acceptable, determine times of retro-
fire to land in several designated recovery areas.
c) Determine capsule landing point and present position.
r) Control Center, Cape building at
A FMTC is used for the NASA Mercury Control Center.
The function of the control center will be to provide control and
coordination of all activities associated with the Project Mercury op-
eration. The necessary communicat ations, displays, and control equip-
ment will be provided to perform the following basic functions:
(1) Coordination with the blockhouse and central control dur-
ing launch, including monitoring of vehicle propulsion and guid-
ance, and assistance on range safety.
(2) Control of all stations outside Cape Canaveral.
3 Monitoring of pilot and capsule systems. .
4 Instructions to pilot.
5 Inflight trajectory monitoring.
6 Commands to capsule equipment.
7 Initiate emergency aborts during launch and insertion.
8) Initiate emergency landing at completion of first or second
passage.
(9) Initiate normal reentry and landing.
10) Supply nding location information for search and re-
covery team.
3. Function of the demonstration site.—Existing NASA buildings
and land at the NASA Wallops Station, Va., are being used to estab-
lish a temporary station consisting of selected items of equipment
identical to that used at remote sites. This equipment has been in-
stalled and tested to determine performance characteristics and suita-
bringall sites up to the performance required for the Mercury
mission.
Ground communication system
The purpose of the Mercury ground nication system is to
ions network range stations
light Center at Green-
belt, Md., and the Mercury Canaveral, Fla.,
as shown by the accompanying world map and circuit layout (figs. 18
and 19). The system will carry telephone, telet oewriter, and high-
speed data information. Electronic computers at Goddard will proc-
ess incoming data and provide as its output, acquisition messages and
other related informatio all range stations. Teletypewriter in-
formation, into and out Goddard, will be handled by an automatic
teletypewriter switchin significant traffic
over the system will nformation generated automatically by the
radars or computers and transmitted at teletypewriter speeds. Gen-
erally, 60 words per minute transmission will be employed. For high

0 AST LCSGITUCE 100 130° 120 EST LONGITUDE o LAST 20 LOWGIT.2E
-
PROJECT
MERCURY
ECUATON
0
:
.
or
FIGURE 18.—Map of communication links. 6

GROUND COMMUNICATIONS CIRCUIT LAYOUT
8
HAWAII
MILITARY
12 SERVICE
RECOVERY XANO NIGERIA
CANTON IV (S W AFRICA)
SAN FRANCISCO 1FOT
IPOT IV ZV IFDT WASHINGTON, D.C.
HAUNATIAN LUDT ATET 150T NEW YORK LONDON 5
11 TEL CO. CABLE CO. IV
IFOT COMPUTING E 589T ATET 2 FDT BRITISH 2FDT
COMMUNICATIONS CO. POST
CENTER OFFICE 2F0T
IV VANCOUVER
1FD2 3v ZANZI642
(SEAFRCA)
LE
N IFDT
2FOT
LE-
45TT IONOSPHERIC 7 INDIAN OCEAN
WOOMERA 9 SYDNEY ITRAAECTORY(CANVERN) SCATTER SHIP
INSERTIIN CANAVERAL
2COMMANDS LEOT
RV
2FDT
Iv 1V IFDT IV 1FOT WEST
2FOT IFOT 1FOT SFDT AUSTRALIA
IV
PERTH
TO WEST AUSTRALIA I MS DATA (DISPLAYS)
2.5TT [TM SUMMARY 2 FOT PROJECT MERCURY
(1 PRIME-1ALT)) Iv
3V (SUPERVISION) TO WOOMERA
IFOT IV. RECOVERY
FOT (BERMUDA) iFOT IV
2FOT
LE L13
1v
NASA
13 14 15 16 17. I DATA CONTROL 3
CENTER
50 GUAYMAS WHITE So EGLIN BERMUDA MID- GRAND
CALIFORNIA MEXICO SANDS TEXAS 3v ATLANTIC CANARY
LE SHIP ISLAND
LEGEND
V VOICE GRAND BAHAMA TA
STT SIMPLEX TELETYPE CANAVERAL GRAND TURK 18
FOT FULL DUPLEX TELETYPE 1
LE LOCAL EXCHANGE
PRIMARY ROUTE
ALTERNATE ROUTE
RADIO PATH
LAND LINE
SUBMARINE CABLE
FiGure 19.-Ground communications circuit layout.

as the need arises. Propagation studies have been made to select the
most reliable radio routes for both primary traffic and for backup use.
Backup facilities were provided for those routes 'e it appeared
economically feasible and necessary.
One of the requirem in setting up the mnication
system was that leased facilities would be util er possible.
To this extent, negotiations have been carried out continuing,
with communication car home and abroad. , outlining the re-
quirements for Project Me ne importance of safeguarding the
system against any foreseeabl uptions has been stressed and a
suitable program set up with carriers for handling Mercury traffic,
particularly with respect to the particularly with respect to the versea radio links. sea radio links.
Within the North America Within the North Americe atinent, practically all the circuit tinent, practically all the circuit
facilities will be provided by the facilities will be provided by th operating companies of the Bell Sys- perating companies of the Bell Sys-
tem and independent carriers. tem and independent carriers Outside the North American Con-
tinent the communication facilities will be a combination of leased
and constructed radio and wire circuits. The following organizations and constructed radio and wire circuits. Th he following organizations
are participating in supplying communications for Project Mercury:
American Telephone & Telegraph C ong Lines Department.
Bermuda Telephone Co.
British Columbia Telephone Co. British Columbia Telephone Co.
Cable & Wireless, Ltd.
Compania Telefonica National de Espana, Canary Islands. ie Telefoniee Netione
Canadian Overseas Telecommur nication Corp.
External Telecommunications Executive, General Post Office.
Federal Aviation Agency.
Hawaiian Telephone Co.
Overseas Telecommunications Ccmmission, Australia.
Postmaster General, Department of Supply, Australia.
Radio Corp.of America.
Telefonas de Mexico.
Transradio Espanola,S.A., Canary Islands.
Department of Defense.
Station phasing and implementation progress
The network as described in the foregoing material is being imple-
mented through a prime contract with the Western Electric Co., Inc.
Western Electric heads a team of subcontractors consisting of the
following:
1. Burns and Roe, Inc., responsible for architectural and engi-
neering design of the stations as well as construction phases of
station development.

52 PROJECT MERCURY
2The Bendix Corp., responsibl for the design, fabrication and
installation of most of th osystems such as the telem-
etry equipment.
3. International Business Iachines Corp., responsible for com-
putation equipment, p and operation.
4. Bell Telephone Labor atories, Inc., responsible for such items
as simulation equipn operational sequence procedures
including system check outines, communication traffic studies,
etc.
Western Electric not only se system manager and in the func-
tion of system integration responsible for network
communications.
As an example of specific progress and d to provide a report on how
the implementation of the net work has proceeded, milestones will be
given for the Kauai Island, Hawaii, station:
Event Completion
date
I. Site survey. Dec. 10,1959
2. Site design May 15,1960
Instrumentation equipment on site Nov. 5,1960
4. Site construction Nov. 5,1960
5. S-band tracking system installed. --- Jan. 20,1961
6. C-band tracking system installed Jan. 17,1961
7. Telemetry equipment installed and tested Feb. 1,1961
8. Vehicle-ground communication equipment installed and tested Feb. 8,1961
9. Ground ground I communication equipment installed and tested Jan. 25,1961
10. Station support equipment on site Nov. 7.1960
11. Station dynamic tests Mar. 20,1961
12. Ground-ground communications integrated with communications center Dec. 3,1960
13. Station operational Mar. 4,1961
Computations for Project Mercury flights
There are three major computer installations associated with the
Project Mercury flight computations; they are located at:
1. Cape Canaveral, Fla.
2. Bermuda.
3. Greenbelt, Md. (Goddard enter).
At Cape Canaveral and Goddard, re made which
The GE
performing its usual
Atlas guidance function; will feed data by ephone line to Goddard.
At Goddard, two computers will determine, in real time,
whether or not launch trajectory and the predicted orbit are
acceptable. This information will then be sent back to the Mercury
Control Center, where be displayed. A backup display is
provided through the Cape Canaveral Azuza or FPS-16 radar system,
together with an IBM 709 computer installation.
If the real time orbit predictions indicate an acceptable orbit [Go
decision], the capsule will be permitted to go into orbit. If the orbit
is definitely unacceptable [No-Go decision], the mission will be termi-
nated. If the decision is questionable at Cape Canaveral, the final
decision to abort will be turned over to Bermuda.
At Bermuda, an IBM 709 computer installation is utilized to ac-
complish the following computations:

functions are performed:
1. Determination of with Cape computers.
2. Processing of all radar iputs sites.
3. Defining and refining orbit.
4. Sending acquisitie to remote sites.
5. Providing data to Mercury Control ter at Cape
Canaveral, including information on time to fire retros.
6. Caleulates and updates final impact point during reentry.
Network checkout procedures
The Mercury network is the most complex and extensive set of
ground-support instrume ntation implemente far in space pro-
grams. To properly test each subsystem and en the integrated sys-
tem, both statically and dynamically, variou ekout procedures will
be employed.
Static component and subsystem tests are first accomplished. This
includes the individual units and subsystems, such as the telemetering
receiving equipment, the ground-to-capsule communications equip-
ment, command control, C-band tracker, S-band tracker, acquisition
aid equipment. to mention only a few.  This type of testing is accom-
self as malfunctioning equipment. This is actually the beginning of
full-station testing.
All subsystems are operated tic-station testing.
Dynamie testing begins against actual targets. The test targets are
aircraft that execute "fly by" tests, or dynamic tests at each station
throughout the entire network. These aircraft are outfitted with
equipment identical to the electronic gear in the Mercury capsule,
thereby allowing the station to determine electrical and mechanical
difficulties in a near-operaticnal situation. This type of testing also -
actual mission.
Magnetic tapes are prepared in advance for non These
tapes contain signals for the operators, the tracking radars are given
simulated target information, simulated telemetry data is "received,"
simulated "conversations" are held with the simulated astronaut.

VI CONTENTS
Page
Astronaut Program
Flight simulators
Pilot activities during flight
Program Management and Support Organization SSERKE
Project Mercury Funding_-
Conclusions
Appendix

Cape Canaveral airstrip, it o the NASA capsule checkout
area in hangar "S". leted capsule receives a pre-
liminary systems checko y, the final detailed systems
check is made at the Cape initial inspection check, the cap-
sule is placed in a specially constructed building in which the hydrogen
peroxide reaction control system is activated and functional checks are
accomplished. Because of the fire hazards accompanying a hydrogen
peroxide spill, this building is fully equipped with a water sprinkler
system and a remote console for the test conductors. All persons
handling the plumbing connections for the concentrated hydrogen
peroxide must wear goggles, plastic caps, coveralls, boots, and gloves.
Initially, both the peroxide and helium storage tanks within the cap-
sule are filled, and differentially pressurized, with helium. They are
then capped off and the pressure decay is monitored. This procedure
is used to check the hydrogen percxide and the helium plumbing sys-
e flexil ible bladder which will sepa-
rate the peroxide from the helium. The system is then filled with the
hydrogen peroxide and a 24-hour decomposition test is performed. If
the system is compatible with the peroxide, there will be only a low
rate of pressure increase. fter this check, the peroxide valves are
remotely actuated and thrust reaction time is monitored by measur-
ing the temperature rise in the nozzles.
Following the reaction control system tests, the capsule is returned
to a clean air-conditioned enclosure in the hangar and detailed checks
are made on: (1) the d.c. and a.e. electrieal systems; (2) the sequene-
ing system which automatically controls all the capsule events from
launch through capsule separation, tower jettison, capsule attitude,
retrofiring ccntrol system modes, parachute deployments, and recov-
ery beacon activation: (3) the communications system which includes
the high frequency and ultrahigh frequency radios, command receiv-
ers, telemeter transmitters, FPS-16 and Verlort Radio beacons, and
recovery beacons; and (4) the automatic stabilization and control sys-
tem which involves attitude sensing limits for the horizon scanners,
gyro-erection and precession, relays and logic circuits. The capsule
then undergoes a simulated flight test where all capsule systems are

gear m support capsule pre-
flight operations in the hangar and at each of the launch pads. Most
of the monitoring and libration equipment is contained in full-size
trailers. Connecting cable es are strung to the various checkout sites.
To check the automatic control system, for instance, the capsule is
installed in a two-axis test fixture and a heating element is used to
simulate the Earth's horizon. The capsule is sequentially rotated in
all three axes at various rates and attitudes. Signals from the gyro
signal amplifiers are monitored and recorded on strip charts in the
trailer. Calibrations o the telemetry system are also made while the
capsule is installed in the test fixture.
The last operations in the hangar involve installation of the various
rockets, explosive bolts, SOFAR bombs, and other oyrotechnics. The
environmental control system is charged with high-pressur
and the flight batteries are installed at this time.
Launch vehicle checkout
Coneurrent with the capsule hangar checkou priate Red-
In addition to determination of mechanical compatibility, the in-
stallation of the capsule or booster provides opportunity to
check the capsule grou ipment with the blockhouse
and launch gantry. Figures 13 show the g arrangements
and the capsule systems checkout trailers which are us sed during cap-
sule and booster checks at the launch pad. Figure 2 shows several
of the capsule monitoring consoles in the blockhouse. This support
control center to monitor the pilot and capsule systems when the cap-
sule is on the launch pad. During this period, the capsule radios,
telemetry, and beacons are energized simultaneously with booster
telemetry and beacons. Radio frequency interference checks are
accomplished at this time.

56 PROJECT MERCURY
CQ
1IW
FiGure 20.—Typical console installation in the blockhouse.

wide network of communications tracking stations is alerted and
routine tests are made on the telemetry, radar, the voice radio com-
munications, and the command radio. Concurrently, the Mercury
control center communications, telemetry, abort commands, and tra-
jectory displays are activated and checked out. Seven hours prior to
launch, the second half of the countdown is begun. A carefully de-
signed sequence of launch vehicle f fueling and LOXing, capsule,
rocket and pyrotechnic arming, and radio frequency interference
checks are accomplished. Extreme care must be taken to be cer-
tain that no stray voltages are applied when the pyrotechnics and
rockets are being armed. Care must also be taken to maintain Care must also
radio silence on certain critical frequencies. Approximately 4 hours radio silence on certain critical frequencies. Approximately 4 hours
before launch, the Navy recovery ships arrive on station in the impact before launch, the Navy recovery ships arrive on station in the impact
area and approximately 2 hours prior to launch, local launch site sur-
face vessels are called on station. fo The launch site helicopters and and
the search aircraft are phased-in just prior to launch. raned
shots, the pilot will enter the capsule approximately 2 hours prior to
launch and will pl an active part in the capsule check and count-
down.
Mercury control center
Overall control of the Mercury missions is conducted from the
Mercury control center at A photograph of the
control' center building is shown in ure 21. This complex also
serves as a telemetry receiving station; the large dish-shaped antenna
will receive telemetered information from the capsule subsystems.
The primary function of the center is to actively control the flight
phase of the Mercury missions. Figure 22 is a block diagram of the
flight control organization. The operations director is in charge
of the mission and also serves as chairman of the Flight Safety
Review Board. Immediately subordinate to the operations director
is the flight director who actively participates in the countdown,
coordinates the input from the systems controllers, and is responsible
for making the decision to abort the mission if a malfunction should

58 PROJECT MERCURY
*
day 185
Figure 21.—Mercury control center at Cape Canaveral.

FLIGHT CONTROL ORGANIZATION
OPERATIONS DIRECTOR
+
FLIGHT DIRECTOR
RANGE
SAFETY
OFFICER
BERMUDA CONTROL CENTER TYPICAL REMOTE SITE PROJECT MERCURY
+
FLIGHT FLIGHT CAPSULE CAPSULE CAPSULE RETRO FLIGHT MISSLE T/M CAPSULE
SUPERVISOR SURGEON ENVIRONMENT COMMUNICATOR SYSTEMS CONTROLLER DYNAMICS MONITOR COMMUNICATOR
MONITOR MONITOR OFFICER
↑
G.E.-
BURROUGHS
COMPUTER
FLIGHT CAPSULE CAPSULE CAPSULE FLIGHT GODDARD FLIGHT CAPSULE
ENVIRONMENT COMMUNICATOR SYSTEMS DYNAMICS COMPUTER SURGEON MONITOR
SURGEON MONITOR MONITOR OFFICER
BERMUDA
COMPUTER
+ COMMAND CAPABILITY
Ficure 22. Flight control organization. 6

(④) The capsule monit rves the capsule attitude
and the amount of fuel remaining in the hydrogen peroxide control
systems, and the status of the capsule electrical system.
(5) The retrocontroller panel displays the retrofiring times for
normal reentry, end of each orbit, and emerge landing areas.
These retrofiring times a calculated at the Goddard Computing
Center. The retrocontroller keeps the capsule synchro-
nized with the optimum retrofiring time which continually being
refined by calculations SOd on the latest tracking information.
Changes in the capsule retrofire clock setting can be accomplished
through voice instruction to the ast ronaut or by radio commands from
the retrofire controller's panel.
(6) The flight dynamics officer has the responsibility of evalu-
ating the capsule orbital rameters at the end of the launch phase.
He will use four plot boards which display flight path angle, velocity,
capsule position, and impact prediction. Based on predetermined lim-
its for these parameters, the flight dynamics officer will recommend
that the capsule be permitted to continue orbital flight (go decision)
or, if the capsule has not attained orbital velocity and flight path
2
bring the capsule d a planned rece ry area.
Figure 23 shows flight controller consoles and the net-
work status map in the Mercury control center.
The functions of the systems monite the Bermuda control center
are similar to those at Cape Canaveral owever, the flight dynamics
officer at Bermuda will make an ork or "no go" decision only if
the Cape control center cannot make a decision. The remote site sta-
aeromedical monitor, and capsule systems monitor. Figure 24 shows
the communicator's console which is installed at the remote sta-
tions. A mockup of the capsule control panel is included to aid the
communicator when he discusses panel displays with the pilot. This
console includes command radio capability at six of the remote sites;
that is, the communicator will be able to command changes in the
retrotimer and command retrofire. Some of these communicators
will be astronauts.

US
Figure 23.—Flight controller consoles at control center.

C
1
LA
=
5S SS8S
20 S
0e
Ficure 24. —Flight controller console at remote station.

At lift-off, control passes back to the Mercury
operations director at the control nter. The pilot determines
that his elapsed time clock starts at lift-off, thereby synchronizing
capsule time with ground elapsed time. During the launch, the pilot
sule rises through an altitude of 11,ooo feet, the capsule internal pres-
sure will start to vent overboard.' differential pressure
will maintain the capsule pressure 5 pounds per square inch above
surrounding atmospheric pressure. The pilot notes that the cabin
pressure does not decrease below 5 pounds per square inch. When
a guidance command shuts the engine down, the pilot manually
actuates an o yerride switch and separates the capsule if automatic cap-
He also checks that the capsule
attitude indicators display predetermined values. If the capsule
gyros have drifted excessively during launch, the automatic control
system will be inaccurate and he will manually control the capsule
using his periscope and window for attitude reference. The capsule
should be either automatically or manually turned to the retrofire posi-
orbital insertion when Mer
Atlas launch vehicle.
whether the mission should be allowed inue, or an abort should
be executed so that the capsule will land near a previously established
recovery area. An acceptable orb is considered to be one which
will insure the capability of a safe recovery at the end of the first
orbit; that is, the lifetime must be sufficient so that the retrorockets
can be fired within range of a command station near the end of the first
orbit in order to land in the planned recovery area. In addition, the
heating conditions must fall within acceptable limits in the region of
perigee, and the reentry loads must be within
has been assumed that if the conditions existing at orbit insertion are
such that the capsule completes one and one-half orbits, an adequate
margin of safety will have been attained. Therefore, any acceptable
combination of insertion conditions should guarantee the opportunity

plishments to date and acquaint the
feel for the tremendous complexity of th problem of putting a man
into Earth orbit, sustaining his life in as space environment and recov-
ering him safely.
Project Mercury is currently this N effort to place a man in
space at the earliest possible time. nception, both the Na-
tional Aeronauties and Space Administration and the Department
of Defense have mapped out more comprehensive manned space
flight programs. However, these later projects, named Apollo and
Dyna-Soar, must d depend upon the successful development of larger
space boosters such as Saturn, Titan II, Atlas G, or perhaps a newly
conceived large solid rocket arrangement. Because Apollo and Dyna-
Soar depend upon. vet unflown, larger boosters and are designed
in orbit for 6 to 8 years. Mereury is expected to provide
many answers for these future manned space programs -answers
which must be obtained concerning manned space flight envi nment,
and man's ability to perform a useful function in space as
possible. Consequently, Project Mercury is being prosecuted by
NASA, assisted by the DOD, with the utmost sense of urgency.
Mercury enjoys top national priority as approved by the President
of the United States. It carries DX priority rating.
Project Mercury represents the Wright Brothers phase of space
flight. It is sure to appear as crude and daring-do to future genera-
tions as the clumsy wood and cloth "kits" of aviation's bygone era.
Both represent major phases in man's technological development.
Both have experienced controversial criticism on the one hand and .
admiration for the courage, dedication and vision of the men who
strive for achievement on the other hand.
1

64 PROJECT MERCURY
EANR 111
181 111
30181 118
LLLI 111111
FiGure 25.-Procedures trainer console installation.

mation is calculated at the Goddard Computing Center and is sent
out to the remote sites. It will be an objective of the ontrol center
to keep the remote sites as fully informed on the cu situation as
possible. Thus, in the event of a breakdown in co ications, they
may be better able to make decisions independently itical situa-
tion develops. The various times of retrofire continuously
computed on the basis of new information as it becomes available, and
these items.
As the time of reentr proached, the control er will be sup-
plied with tracking data m the computers at Godd lard and the pres-
entation of impact prediction will be given in real time. The main
function of the control center at this time is to keep the recovery
forces up to date on impact prediction.
Recovery
The probability of capsule landing locale varies throughout the
different phases of a flight and is a major factor in establishing the
recovery requirements. The basic philosophy of recovery in the Mer-
cury program is to provide a rapid recovery capability (1) in the
each orbit. "Rapid recovery" implies that location and retrieval
vehicles are on station in these areas during orbital flight to assure re-
covery within a specified tin hat is in the order of from 3 to 6
hours. All of the recover resulting from this recovery philos-
ophy are located in the Nor c Ocean. The probability of
containing all landing points with these areas is very high.
The planned recovery areas n in figure 26. In addition to
the nine areas depicted, a la te recovery area exists at Cape
Canaveral in the event an irs during the final countdown
or early in the boost phase of flig The launch site recovery forces
will have the capability to effed covery for a capsule on land or in
shallow water.
Should an unsatisfactory condition develop during launch, a mis-
sion will be aborted so that landings from such conditions will be con-
tained in areas one through six. If the orbital parameters at insertion
are satisfactory and if the capsule systems are functioning properly,
the capsule will be permitted to continue in orbital flight. In case of
"no-go" decision at orbital insertion, the abort procedures will be such
that all landings will be contained in areas five or six.

64 PROJECT MERCURY
Car
11
T08 HH
-ii.in.. mm1 mm
iif if
17
FiGure 25.—Procedures trainer console installation.

out to the remote sites. It will be an objective of the control center
to keep the remote sites as fully informed on the current situation as
possible. Thus, in the event of a breakdown in communications, they
may be better able to make decisions independently if a critical situa-
tion develops. The various times of retrofire will be continuously
computed on the basis of w information as it becomes available, and
it is imperative that remote sites be kept up to date on these items.
As the time of reentry is approached, the control center will be sup-
plied with tracking data from the computers at Goddard and the pres-
entation of impact prediction will be given in real time. The main
function of the control center at this time is to keep the recovery
forces up to date on impact prediction.
Recovery
The probability of capsule landing locale varies throughout the
different phases of a ight and is a major factor in establishing the
recovery I requirements. The basic philosophy of recovery in the Mer-
cury program is to provide a rapid recovery capability (1) in the
vehicles are on station in these areas during orbital flight to assure re-
covery within a specified time that is in the order of from 3 to 6
hours. All of the recovery resulting from this recovery philos-
ophy are located in the Nor antic Ocean. The probability of
containing all landing points wit these areas is very high.
The planned recovery areas n in figure 26. addition to
the nine areas depicted, a laur
Canaveral in the event an abor ars during the final countdown
or early in the boost phase of flig The launch site recovery forces
will have the capability to effect recovery for a capsule on land or in
shallow water.
Should an unsatisfact develop during launch, a mis-
sion will be aborted so that landing om such conditions will be con-
tained in areas one through six. If the orbital parameters at insertion
are satisfactory and if the capsule systems are functioning properly,
the capsule will be permitted to continue in orbital fight. In case of
"no-go" decision at orbital insertion, the abort procedures will be such
that all landings will be contained in areas five or six.

8
-
#0
300 20 240 260 345 o a 4 60 80 100 120 140 160 8
B-282
FiGure 26.-Planned recovery areas.

Backup and redundant systems have been provided for all basic
capsule systems sucl hat the probability of a malfunction occurring
in orbit is consi remote and the standard operating procedure
will be to terminate the mission by landing in planned area if at all
possible. However, a planned course of action for effecting the re-
covery in a low-probability contingency area is also required. In
addition to the recovery forces in the Atlantic Ocean several standby
ships and aireraft stationed under the orbital flight paths will be
alerted for possible contingency recovery operations.
AstroNauT PRogRAM
The seven Mercury pilots participated in nume nerous training activi-
ties during the past ey also helped to establish many of the
Mercury operatin ures and subsystems design details. Each
is an engineer and has assigned to work in a specialty area. Each
man is intensely interested in the program and has a sincere desire to
be chosen for manned flight. The astronaut biographies were pre-
sented in House Report No. 1228.
1J
year:
1. Procedure trainer.-McDonnell has rocedures
trainers for Project Mer he of these
trainers is identical to th f the capsule. e displays within the
trainer are operated by -speed computers. One of the trainers
is located at the space task group and is used to familiarize the astro-
naut with operation of he capsule system. It is also used in con-
junction with a reme vork station console to provide training for
the capsule systems an romedical monitors. The second trainer is
located at Cape Canavera nd is used to provide mission simulation
training for the astronauts and the flight controll lers. It also aids in
the checkout of the computer circuits in the Goddard Computing Cen-
ter and the trajectory display equipment at the Mercury control cen-
ter. Figure 27 shows the instructor's console for the procedures trainer
and the astronauts' capsule simulator in the background.

68 PROJECT MERCURY
A
T5
Figure 27.—Procedures trainer, instructor station.

experienced 5 minutes of weightlessness during the N
adverse effects were realized.
4. Multiaxis simulator.—The multigimballed simulator at the
NASA Lewis Research Center was used for pilot indoctrination at
high values of angular acceleration and rotation. This facility was
operated at 30 revolutions per minute about all three angular axes.
The pilot used a manual reaction control system (compressed nitro-
gen) to stop the tions. The pilots successfully maintained orien-
tation at angular accelerations far in excess of any which will be en- 8
countered in Project Mercury. A picture of this facility is shown
in figure 30.
5. Egress training .-Although the pilot would normally stay within
the capsule until it had been placed aboard ship, there is a possibility
that he might desire to climb out after a water landing. Egress
might be desirable to facilitate rapid rescue, in the event of high tem-
peratures within the capsule, or if the ventilation system were not
functioning properly. To accomplish egress training under realistic
sea conditions, an egress capsule was taken to Pensacola, Fla. The
egress capsule is a boilerplate model manufactured by MeDonnell
his restraint harness, communications, oxygen hoses, a d bioinstru-
mentation connectors. He then raises partially ou of the couch and
removes the 3-foot-diameter Ikhead top of the pressurized
compartment.. he must parachute container out
of the cylindrical neck of the capsule and work himsel out the top.
He then inflates his liferaft and ties it to the capsule to maintain the
capsule adjacent to the liferaft and take advantage of the capsule
recovery beacons. photograph of one of the pilots emerging from
the egress trainer capsule is shown in figure 31.
For normal helicopter recovery a procedure has been developed
whereby a hovering helicopter lowers two lines: one attaches to the
capsule and holds it erect while the second line lowers a sling near the
side hatch. The pilot then crawls through the side hatch into the sling
and is lifted into the helicopter. This is the procedure that was used
after Alan Shepard's Redstone flight.
Under emergency conditions, much more rapid egress is possible
through the capsule's side hatch.

70 PROJECT MERCURY
8IM41T
2
X
FiGURE 28. -Human centrifuge at U.S. Navy, AMAL. Johnsville, Pa.

PROJECT MERCURY 71
|
FiGURE 29.-Mercury astronaut in the AMAL centrifuge cabin.

2 PROJECT MERCURY
Background
Project Mercury is now 21/2 years old. Since its inception, an ex-
tensive windt tunnel and flight test program has been carried out,
involving hundreds of wind tunnel and airplane drop tests and 12
successful major rocket including the first manned sub-
orbital flight with Astronaut Jan Shepard, out of 15 attempts.
The box score is contained in table I. The Mercury production cap-
sules have been designed, engineered and tested. A major network
of communications and tracking stations is nearing completion (table
II), and training exercises of both the systems and the astronauts are
progressing. Table III contains the current manning level require-
ments for the worldwide tracking and communications network.
TanLe I.-Project Mercury major rocket tests
Booster vehicle Objectives
Purpose of test
Achleved Not achieved
Little Joe I.. Test launch vehicle.
Little Joe II XXK 1 Test capsule escape system.
Little Joe III........ High altitude abort and capsule sta-
bllity. bility.
Little Joe IV... X X Repent of Little Joe II.
Little Joe V. Little Joe V Capsule did not sepa- Capsule abort test under severe condi-
rate. tions.
Little Joe V-A Little Joe V-A.. Production capsule qualification test. Production capsule qunlification test.
Little Joe V-B Little Joe V-B.. Repeat of Little Joe V-A.
Atlas Big Joe...... Atlas Big Joe... Validation of ablation heat shield and
capsule dynamic stability during capsule dynamic stability during
hypersonic reentry.
Mereury Atlas I...... Mercury Atlas I.... Atlas destroyed.... Atlas destroyed.... Maximum reentry heat test.
Mereury Atlas II... X -- Repeat of Mercury Atlas I. Repeat t of Mercury Atlas I.
Mercury Athas III.. Atlas destroyed Unmanned orbital attempt.
Mercury Redstone I.......... Mercury Redstone I........ x X Capsule qualifieation under normal qualifieation under normal
ballistic flight conditions. flight conditions.
Mereury Redstone II......... Merecury Redstone II....... X Test of capsule life support system with capsule life support system with
chimpanzee"Ham. chimpanzee Ham.
Mercury Redstone Booster x X Flight qualify booster control system
Development. changes.
Mercury Redstone III........ X x First manned I suborbital flight with suborbital flight with
Astronaut Shepard.
1 Partially achieved.

Ficure 30. -Multiaxis motion simulation at Lewis rescarch center.

PROJECT MERCURY 73
FiGURe 31.—Mercury astronaut undergoing training in capsule egress procedures.

the automatic system by electrically linking the hand-control stick to
the peroxide valves. During the retrofiring maneuver, the pilot would
normally choose to augment the automatic system by the use of the
open position, the pilot would shut off that particular axis of the auto-
matic system and manually control the capsule attitude about that
axis. The pilot would normally use the automatie mode while in orbit,
thereby permitting fu ill attention to ground and sky observations and
to reporting the behavior of the various capsule systems. In all, the
pilot can select any of 20 different modes for the capsule control
system.
The attitude control system is only one of the capsule subsystems.
escape rocket firing,
capsule separation, and tower separation providing the pilot
with complete control over the capsule ope eration, a high degree of
safety has been built inte othe Mercury concept.
During Shepard's ht in MR-3, the manual control system was
The
retrofire maneuver was accomplished by using the manual control sys-
tem and observing the rate and attitude indicators. Shepard re-
ported that the rocket thrust misalinement was small and caused rela-
tively low torques on the capsule. He felt that the actual angular
acceleration imparted to the capsule provided motion cues which made
attitude control easier than in the fixed-base simulators.
Shepard's flight proceeded very much as planned. I He did, how-
ever, notice a mild vibration during launch as the capsule progressed
through the transonic speed range and continued until the maximum
dynamie pressure region had been encountered. He felt that, although
his vision was somewhat blurred during this 10-second vibration
period, he could have improved his vision by raising his head from the

The program man: is shown
in figure 32. The (fig.33), at eld, Va.,
has the responsibility for overall project direction.
Space Task Group is under the direction of Mr. Robert R. Gilruth,
and his two associ iates, Mr. Charles J. Donlan and Mr. . Walter C.
Williams. Within the NASA organization, project support is provided by the
Langley, Ames, Lewis, and Flight Research The Marshall
and launching Redstone launch vehicles. and launching Redstone launch vehicles. d to NASA speci-
The Mercury capsules or The Mercury capsules or spacecraft are produced
fieations by the McDonnell Aireraft Corp. and associated subcontrae- fications by the McDonnell Aireraft Corp. and associated subcontrae-
tors. In addition to producing addition to producing the the capsules, McDonnell Aircraft capsules, McDonnell Aircraft
Corp. provides personnel Corp. provides personnel services for services for preparation and preparation and launch of the I launch of the
spacecraft, associated ground support spacecraft, associated ground support equipment, research and devel-
opment hardware, flight simulators, and other training equipment.
Major subcontractors to McDonnell are as follows:
Minneapolis-Honeywell : Automatic stabilization and control sys-
tem.
AiResearch: Environmental control system.
Bell Aircraft Corp.:Hydrogen-peroxide control system.
Eagle-PicherCo.:Batteries.
Collins Radio:Con ations system.
Cincinnati Testing Laboratories: Ablation heat shield.
Brush Beryllium: Beryllium heat shield.
Radiophone Division of Northrop: Landing system.
Grand Central Rocket Co.: Escape rocket.
Thiokol Chemical Corp. : Retro and posigrade rockets.
Perkin-Elmer Co.:Periscope.
Barnes Instrument Co.: Horizon scanner.
The Atlas launch vehicles for Project Mereury are produced by
Convair Astronautics and associated contractors under the manage-
ment of the Air Force Ballistic Missiles Division and its associ-
ated management contractor, Aerospace Corp. Launch of the Atlas
vehicle is the responsibility of USAF-BMD.

NAS A 1
SPACE TASK GROUP
NASA NASA
RESEARCH MSFC
CENTERS
PROJECT
ATLAS SPACECRAFT DOD SUPPORT NETWORK MERCURY
LAUNCH FOR
VEHICLES OPERATIONS
I
USAF McDONNELL RECOVERY -WESTERN
AIRCRAFT ELECTRIC
-BMD COMPANY COMPANY
NETWORK
CONVAIR
MEDICAL SUPPORT
FIGURE 32.-Project Mercury management organization.

SPACE TASK GROUP
Office of Director
BUSINESS MANAGEMENT STAFF OFFICES
Procurement and Supply Office Astronauts and Training
Personnel Office Digital Computing Group
Budget and Finance Office Public Affairs Office
Administrative Services Office Technical Services
Security Office
FLIGHT SYSTEMS DIVISION FLIGHT SYSTEMS DIVISION ENGINEERING DIVISION OPERATIONS DIVISION
APOLLO MERCURY MERCURY McDONNELL CAPSULE AMR
PROJECT SUPPORT SUPPORT FIELD FIELD COORDINATION
OFFICE OFFICE
MISSION ANALYSIS BRANCH
ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS BRANCH CONTRACTS AND SCHEDULING BRANCH Trajectory Analysis Section
Communications Systems Section Contracts Section Operational Analysis Section
Instrument Systems Section Scheduling Section Mathematical Analysis Section
FLIGHT DYNAMICS BRANCH PROJECT ENGINEERING BRANCH FLIGHT CONTROL BRANCH
Flight Control Section Control Central and Flight Safety
Dynamics Analysis Section Section
Space Mechanics Section Training Aids Section
Aerodynamics Section RECOVERY OPERATIONS BRANCH
LIFE SYSTEMS BRANCH
Aerospace Medical Section
Crew Equipment Section
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING BRANCH
Systems Integration Section LOCATED AT CANAVERAL
Equipment Engineering Section
Mechanical Systems Section
LAUNCH OPERATIONS BRANCH
(9 ag19 -0 8020 STRUCTURES BRANCH Instrumentation Section
Structural Analysis Section Capsule Systems Section
Loads Section Technical Services Section
Heat Transfer Section
FIGUre 33.—NASA space task group organization.

with the Department of Defense representatives use of existing
range facilities and has participated angements with foreign
governments to establish Mercury stations leasing foreign com-
munications facilities.
The Department of Defense provides broad range of sup-
port to Project Mercury Already is the part played
by the Air Force Ballistic Missiles Division pplying and launch-
ing Atlas vehicles. The Air Force also provides Air Rescue Service
aireraft for capsule search and recovery operations, map-making
services of the Aeronautical Chart Information Center, loan aircraft
for network station checkout, and astronaut normal flight and zero-g
training, AMR launch facilities, control enter facilities. medical
existing
network facilities and manpower at several of the Mercury network
White Sands Proving Ground fad for network use,
will provide a substantial sh upport to Project
Mercury, has supplied and has supplied,
amphibious vehicles for use i possible launch recovery opera-
tions. The Army Redstone launch vehicle will be used for unmanned
and manned ballistie flights.
The Navy has been given responsibility for the Mercury spacecraft
recovery operations. will have ele-
ments of the Atlantic Fleet and Air Rescue Service at his command
for effecting rapid recovery of the capsule. I Destroyers, LSD's, mis-
cellaneous service vessels, Marine helicopters, patrol aireraft and
early warning aireraft will all be utilized for search and recovery
operations.
The Navy is alse providing assistance in the construction of the
Canton Island network station, has loaned command transmitter
equipment to NASA, and has given a number of tracking radar to
NASA.

call for reimbursement by support or services rendered
over and above normal m tions.
Overall coordination of D epartment Defense support for Project
Mercury operations is between Gen. Leighton I. Davis,
USAF, Department representative for Project Mereury
operations, and Mr. . Williams, Associate Director of Project
Mercury.
In addition, scores working-level committees and coordinating
groups have been organized, to effect day-by-day coordination be-
Fween NASA, the military services, and industry.
Project Mercury Funding
Initial funding for Project Mercu provided in fiseal year
1959, when $46,416,333 was obligate Mercury research and de-
velopment, and $2,425,000 for construction and equipment.
In fiscal year 1960, the obligation for research and development In fiscal year 1960, the obligation for research and development
totaled $84,328,370, and for construction and totaled $84,328,370, and for construction and equipment $35,795,000. uipment $35,795,000.
The fiscal year 1960 figures The fiscal year 1960 figures include supplemental funding of $12, include supplemental funding of $12,
200,o00 for research and development, and $6 200,o00 for research and development, and $6, 0 for construc-
tion and equipment.
Early in fiscal y Early in fiscal year 1960, Congress was year 1960, Congress was advised that NASA in- advised that NASA Ain-
tended to transfer $15 million from the research and development ap- tended to transfer $15 million from the resear arch and development ap-
propriation to construction and equipment for construction of the propriation to construction and equipment for construction of the
Mercury 1 network. The fiscal year 1960 figures reflect this fund
transfer.
For fiscal year 1961, the current allocation of funds is $109,525,000
for research and development and $15 million for construction and
equipment.

PROJECT MERCURY 79
Total Project Mercury funding obligations for fiscal year 1959 and
1960, and current allocation for fiscal year 1961, is, therefore, as
follows:
Research and development:
Fiscal year 1959 $46, 416, 333
Fiscal year 1960 - 84.328,370
Fiscal year 1961 110,051,000
Total. 240, 795, 703
Construction and ed
Fiscal year 195t 2,425,000
Fiscal year 1960 35,795, 000
Fiscal year 196 15,000,000
Total.. n k 53, 220, 000
Total through fiscal year 1961_. 294, 015, 703
Proposed "Research and development", fiscal year 1962-- 74,245,000
Proposed "Construction of facilities", fiscal year 1962 none
Grand total through fiscal year 1962. 368, 260, 703
CONcLusIONs
Project Mercury is a tremendously complex undertaking. It in-
volves concurrent efforts in research, development, engineering, manu-
facturing, test, and training. It is a team effort on a national scale,
directed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and
supported by Defense, industry, and research
institutions.
Project Mercury is one of the most comprehensive research and
to manned flight. A major problem is the necessity to attempt to
"man rate" the Redstone and Atlas rocket vehicles which were not
designed for manned reliability. The reliability of these two vehi-
Redstone, and the orbital program izing Atlas. The suborbital
and orbital phases of Mercury each have different complex problems
to solve and'each contribute equally achieving the ultimate goal of
manned-orbital flight.
Project Mercury is progressing satisfactorily. Some slippage has
occurred, but it is not out of line when considering the complexity of
the development st history of other large research and de-
velopment programs.
Project Mercury will make a valuable pioneering contribution to
followon manned-space flight
and the DOD Dyna-Soar projects.
DOD-NASA'coordination in the on of Project Mercury
is outstanding in every respect. anizations are dedicated to
the success of this country's onl arrent man-in-space program.

space programs indicates no
negate the value of Project Mercury. Although decisions for the
configuration of the capsule and the boosters were made several years
ago, technology has not advanced to the extent of overtaking the basic
Mercury concept which is o achieve an early capability for orbiting
man in space.
Project Mercury is now 21/2 years old. Since its inception, an ex-
tensive wind tunnel and flight-test tensive wind tunnel and flight-test program has been carried out, in- program has been carried out, in-
volving hundreds of wind tunnel hundreds of wind tunnel and and I airplane drop tests, and 15 airplane drop tests, and 15
major r major rocket launchings; the Mercury rocket launchings; the Mercury production capsules were de- production capsules were de-
signed, engineered, and tested-12 were signed, engineered, and tested -12 were delivered by the end of April
1961; a major network of communications and tracking stations was 1961; a major network of con nications and tracking stations was
completed; and training exercises completed; and training exercise of both the systems and the astro- both the systems and the astro-
nauts are progressing. A maj ma flight-test program has begun, in- ght-test program has begun, in-
volving manned and unmanned-ballistic flights, leading to manned- volving manned and unmanned llistic flights, leading to manned-
orbital flight.
Project Mercury continues to move forward in an atmosphere of Project Mercury continues to move forward in an atmosphere of
confidence apparent to all concerned. Morale is high, hours are long, confidence apparent to all concerned. Morale is high, hours are long,
the astronauts are busy and fit. The team is dedicated to a single -
goal—the achievement of successful manned-orbital flight.

702580-
TaBLe II.-Ground instrumentation plan for Project Mercury
612 Radar Acquisition Ground communications
Teleme- Commu- Com-
Station name Coverage, passes try re- nication mand SSB Timing
s c ception (capsule) control FA SA M Voice TTY
radio
Canaveral 1,2and 3 (X) X X x (X) X
Grand Bahama - 1, 2 and 3 (X) XX XXXK AMR
- 1, 2and 3 -
Grand Turk X X X
Bermuda 1. 2and 3 XXX
Atlantic ship 1, 2and 3
Grand Canary Island I and 2 X PROJECT MERCURY
Kano, Nigeria 1 and 2... XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XXXXXX
Zanzibar 1 and 2 W
Indian Ocean ship 1, 2and 3 X XXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Muchea, Australia 1.2 and 3 X x
Woomera, Australia 1 and 2 X x
Canton Island 1 and 2
Kauai Island, Hawaii 2 and 3 X x
Point Arguello, Calif 2 and 3 X x XXX
Guaymas, Mexico 1,2 and 3 X KKX XXXKXX
White Sands, N. Mex 1. 2 and 3. X
Corpus Christi. Tex 1.2and 3 X X X
Eglin, Fla 1, 2and 3 () x
Goddard Space Flight Center
MPQ-31. 2 Ground communications
Site functions: FA -fully automatic; SA-semiautomatic; M-manual; SSB-single sideband.
∞

APPENDIX
NASA-DOD agreements: Page
Air Proving Ground Center-NASA space task group
Air Force Missile Test Center (AMR)-NASA space task group 3000
Chief of Naval Operations-NASA space task group.. Chief of Naval Operations-NASA space task group 857
NASA-Foreign government agreement NASA-Foreign government agreements.
81

and facilities and in transferring equipment and supplies. The DOD-
NASA document is the authority and bas reference under which
this agreement is established.
(2) Agreement.- is agreed that the Air Proving Ground Center
(EAFB) will bill the NASA-Space Task Group for cost of support
peculiar to Project Mercury which is in addition to common range
support. Common range support is defined, for the purposes of this
agreement, to include but is not limited to: APGC services as a test
range for probes, missiles, drones, and related equip-
ment, and orting tests and training organizations. Evaluation
of test results determined by data acquisition and reduction.
(A) Common range range
support is that normally provided as part of the range service, com-
mon to the majority of range users. It will be programed, budgeted,
and funded by APGC on a nonreimbursable basis. The cost of oper-
ating existing stations wil l, in general, be nonreimbursable.
(1) Examples of nonreimbursable items:
(a) Salaries of radar operators at existing stations. (a) Salaries.ofradar operators at existing stations.
(b) Range time used during normally scheduled periods.
(B) Support peculiar to Project Mercury—reimbursable.—Support
peculiar to Project Mercury is that support which w would not other-
wise be required to be provided by the erange except for Project Mer-
cury requirements.
(1) Examples of reimbur ursable support are:
ect Mercury.
nication costs incurred on behalf of Project Mercury.
c)Direct increased cost of operating existing stations.
(C) Differences.—Conflicts or inconsistencies in b billings, or any
special cases which arise, will be brought to the attention of the DOD
representative whose group will establish an appropriate position for
NASA consideration.
administration.-
(1) Two copies of
Mercury and fiscal year 1961 financial plan for Project Mercury and
82

submitted to NASA through AFMTC AMR) for review of format
and content. (Flash estimate.)
(2) Service order and billings.-NASA Space Task Group will
issue an order requesting range services authorizing billings there-
fore based on range estimates. In accordance with this policy, APGC
will submit monthly billings on S.F. 1 ) showing actual costs broken
down in the same way as estimates prepared directly to:
NASA-Space Task Group
Budget and Finance Office
Langley Field, Va.
(3) Effective date and duration of agreement.This agreement is
effective immediately, but the provisions may, by mutual agreement, be
revised at any time based upon experience of the two organizations.
RoberT R. Gilruth,
Director of Project Mercury.
JOE W. KELLY,
General USAF.
APRIL 11, 1960.
Agreement Between the Air Force Missile Test Center (AMr)
AND THE N SPACE ASK GROUP
CONCERNIN REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS
(1) Purpose.- DOD-NASA agreement, signed November 12,
1959, by Deputy Secretary of Defense Gates and NASA Adminis-
trator Glennan, under the provision of section 205 (b) (6) of the Na-
tional Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, set forth the general prin-
port peculiar to P ject Mercury which is in addition to Common
Range Support. Common Range Support is de ined, for purposes of
this agreement, to include but is not limited AFMTC (AMR)
services as a test range for satellites, space probes, missiles, drones, and
related equipment, and supporting tests and training organization;
evaluation of test results determined by data acquisition and redue-
tion; utilities, security, and fueling of missiles on pad.
A. Common nde
Support is that normally provided as part of the range service, com-
mon to majority range users. It will be programed, budgeted, and
funded by AFMTC (AMR) on a nonreimbursable basis. The costs
of operating existing stations will, in general, be nonreimbursable.

nication costs incurred on behalf of Project Mercury.
() Operating costs of Atlantie Ocean and Indian Ocean ships.
Port facility expenses for the Atlantic Ocean ship will be non-
reimbursable, since it will be based at Trinidad where AFMTC
(AMR) facilities already exist as common use support. Port
facility expenses for the Indian Ocean ship will be reimbursable
since AFMTC (AMR) has no available I Indian Ocean port
facilities.
(C) Differences.-Conflicts or inconsistencies in billings or any
special cases which arise will be brought to the attention of the DOD
representative whose group will establish an appropriate position for representative whose group will establish an appropriate position for
NASA consideration.
D) Budget estimates and financial administration.-(1) Two (D) Budget estimates and financial administration.—(1) Two
and fiscal year 1961 financial plan for Project Mercury and two copies
of future budget estimates and financial plans will 'be submitted to of future budget estimates and financial plans will be submitted to
NASA at the time of normal submission to Headquarters ARDC.
NASA reimbursable costs will be reflected therein. Note: The initial NASA reimbursable costs will be reflected therein. Note: The initial
fiscal year 1960 and 1961 estimates from all ranges were submitted to fiscal year 1960 and 1961 estimates from all ranges were submitted to
NASA through AFMTC (AMR) for review of format and content. NASA through AFMTC (AMR) for review of format and content.
(Flash estimate). (②) Serrice order and billings.-NASA Space Task Group will
(2) Serrice order and billings.-NASA Space Task Group will
issue an order requesting 1 range services and authorizing - billings
therefor based on range estimates. In accordance with this policy,
AFMTC (AMR) will submit monthly billings on S.F. 1080 showing
actual costs broken down in the same way as estimates were prepared
directly to:
NASA—Space Task Group
Budget and Finance Office
Langley Field, Va.
(3) Effective date and duration of agreement. Ihis agreement is
effective immediately, but the provisions may, by mutual agreement,
be revised at any time based upon experience of the two organizations.
ROBerT R. GIlruTH,
Director of Project Mercury.
March 28, 1960.
Donald W. Yates.
Major General,USAF.

services, equipment, personne el, and facilities of other Federal agencies
with or without reimbursement and requires such agencies to coop-
erate fully with NASA in such regard. Reference (b), sets forth
the general principles governing the reimbursement of costs incurred
by DOD or NASA in providing for use by the other of its services,
and supplies.
2. Purpose.—It is the purpose of this agreement to-
a. Outline the participation
in recovery operations, outside the scope of the mutuality of interest
provision of reference (b), and therefore subject to reimbursement
byNASA.
b. Outline the general procedures for such reimbursement.
e.1 Provide a sound basis for budgetary planning and to insure
that the additional costs involved are adequately funded.
3. Definitions.
a. Recovery operations ude, but are not necessarily limited
to, positioning g of ships, craft, and aireraft various types at pre-
determined bases or areas in relation to the particular mission, search
and pickup of the payload, and delivery to an agreed location; train-
ect Mercury
can most logically be determined by the fleet commander (or his
designated representative( operating force(s) involved.
In computing the ship days and hours subject to the fore-
going reimbursement, it is recognize that a portion of the days
steamed or portion of the total hours flown, incident to direct sup-
port of Project Mereury may, in some instances, be properly allo-
cable to unique Navy effort such as training and other activity con-
tributory to fleet readiness. Such portion is funded in regular Navy
programs and is not subject to reimbursement by N.ASA and the de-
termination thereof shall be made, as above, by the fleet commander
or his designated representative(s).
b. Based upon prevailing Bureau of Ships and Bureau of Weapons
cost factors, the following elements shall be included in arriving at

c. Special equipment, including stallation and removal,
as applicable, purchased by the Navy for direct support of Project
Mercury. Title to such equipment will be held by NASA.
d. Cost on installation and removal of NASA furnished equipment.
e. Travel, per diem, telephone costs, photography, and other addi-
tional out of pocket expenses.
f. Special" costs i incidental to aircraft deployment for Mercury
support. administration.a.Estimates.
5. Budget estimates and financial
Fiscal year 1960 budget estimates of the cost of
support of Project Mercury and future budget estimates will be sub-
mitted to NASA as required. mitted to NASA as required. NA SA space task group will issue, to space task group will issue, to
each cognizant Navy bureau, reimbursable Government orders based each cognizant Navy bureau, rei bursable Government orders based
on the above estimates. It is recognized that these estimates are on the above estimates. It is recognized that these estimates are
not limitations. Accordingly, both estimates and orders are subject
to amendment based on changing operational requirements.
b. Billings.—(1) Charges for actual ship days and aircraft hours,
subject to reimbursement, plus other costs, subject to reimbursement,
financed from funds available to fleet activities will be billed quarterly
by BuWeps and BuShips on S.F. 10s0, showing actual costs, broken
down in the same way as estimates are prepared.
(2) Charges for costs incurred by a field activity of the Shore Es-
tablishment will be billed by the field activity concerned on a funded
basis. S.F. 1oso will be prepared as outlined above but will be
submitted monthly.
(3) Billings on S.F. 1080 will be submitted to : NASA-Space Task
Group Budget and F ce Office, Langley Field, Virginia.
RoBerT R. GIlruth,
Director of Project Mercury.
James S. RusselL,
Admiral,U.S.Nacy,
Vice Chief of Naval Operations.
Dated March 30, 1960.

Excellency : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your
note No. 1097, dated March 11, the Spanish translation of which
reads as follows:
"ExceLLency: I have the honor to refer to recen discussions be-
tween our two Government my Gov-
ernment be authorized to estal and operate jointly with the Gov-
ernment of Spain, for scien military purposes, a facility for
space vehicle tracking and cor tions on Grand Canary Island.
Such a facility is required by Inited States as part of a world-
wide tracking range being established in connection with its manned
satellite program, known as Project Mercury, under which the United
States plans to place a manned earth satellite into orbital flight and
to recover it.
"The Government of Spain, desirin ng to cooperate with t United
contribute to the
knowledge of man's spatial enviro ent and its properties, has au-
thorized the establishment of a tracking and communications facility
on the Island of Grand Canary. Accordingly. the two Governments
agree on the following general principles and procedures:
". The Government of Spain shall furnish land areas and rights-
of-way for use bv the National Aerona aanvdShavee
The specific sit
land shall be as agreed upon by the authorized representatives of our
two Governments. The United States Government shall be repre-
sented by NASA. The Government of Spain shall be represented
by the Instituto Nacional de Técnica Aeronáutica, hereinafter referred
to as INTA.
"2. The Government of the United States, for its part, shall con-
struct, at its the station that is the object of this agreement.
All eost of instal , equipping and operating the facility shall also
be borne by the vernment of the United States, including the cost
of constructing the necessary highways and access roads. The fore-
going activities shall be carried out in accordance with applicable
Spanish laws and the provisions of Article 9 relating to the ownership
of property.
3. The facility shall consist of installations for an S-Band radar,
telemetry, a ground-to-air transmitter, and a ground receiver; sub-
point-to-point communications to the extent that communications

required for the construction of the facility.
"7. The special electronic equipmenta and related equipment re-
be installed by United States technicians.
"8. The Government of Spain shall, upon request, take the neces-
sary steps to facilitate the admission into Spain of material, equip-
ment, supplies, goods or other items of property furnished by the Gov-
ernment of the United States for the purposes of the facility. Span-
ish authorities shall be informed in advance through INTA of the
contents of such shipments. No tax, duty or charge shall be levied
or assessed, either by the Government of Spain or by any other
facility on the Island of Grand Canary.
". Title to all materials, equipment or other items of movable
property used in connection with the facility shall remain vested in
the Government of the United States. Title to all other property shall
or other Spanish
owners. Material, equipment and property of the Government of the
United States at the facility may be removed free of taxes or duties
by the Government of the United States at any time.
"10. The facility shall be operated by NASA, either directly or by
contract with a United States firm. To the maximum extent feasible,
qualified Spanish personnel shall be utilized in connection with the
operation and maintenance of the facility, in addition to United States
technicians and specialists assigned by NASA or the contracting firm.
NASA and INTA shall cooperate closely to ensure full access by
INTA to the facility in order to make possible a full exchange of
information concerning both the techniques employed and the uses
to which the facility is being put.

to taxation, either on income or property. However, such personnel
shall not be exempt from indirect taxes on goods or services purchased
by them in Spain.
The Gover nment of Spain agrees
that the facility may be operate under the general principles and
procedures provided herein unt that date, and for such additional
period as the two Governments ma y agree upon.
( Should changed conditions alter the requirement of the Gov-
ernment of the United States for the facility prior to July 1, 1963,
the Government of the United States shall have the right to terminate
Government of Spain.
(c) If, upon terminating its use of the facility, the United States
Government'should desire to dispose of all or part of the materials,
equipment or other items of property to which it holds title on the
Island of Grand Canary, the two Governments shall enter into con-
purposes and provisions of this Agreement.
"i4. It is understood that to the extent the implementation of this
Agreement will depend on fund ppropriated by the Congress of the
United States, it is subject to the availability of such funds.
"If the foregoing general principles and procedures are acceptable
to Your Excellency's Government, I have propose that
this note and Your Excellency's note in reply to that effect shall con-
stitute an Agreement between our two Governments on this matter
which shall enter into force on the date of your note in reply."
On informing you of the Spanish Government's acceptance of the
consideration.
(Signed) FERNANDO CASTIELLA.
O

INFLATABLE STRUCTURES IN SPACE
y
HEARING 4 JUL 2 51960
Copy-
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EIGHTY- EVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
MAY 19, 1961 MAY 19, 1961
[No. 12]
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science and Astronauties Printed for the use of the Committee on Science and Astronautics
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
70468 0 WASHINGTON : 1961