a_v_bw_o_n (July 1962, unnumbered NAA/NASA photo)
A rare & candid photograph of Virgil “Gus” Grissom, in an unidentified Apollo Command Module mockup. I’m almost certain this photograph was taken during his July 10, 1962 visit to North American Aviation (NAA) Space & Information Systems Division in Downey, CA. Grissom, accompanied by Robert R. Gilruth, Director, MSC and Charles W. Frick, Apollo Program Manager, MSC, were at NAA to conduct the first Apollo spacecraft mockup review/inspection.
If so, and if the following is also correct, the tragic irony is heartbreaking to this day.
An interesting & informative extract from a discussion at “The Space Review” website, by user “oldengg”. While not authoritative, he/she is refreshingly articulate & seemingly very knowledgeable:
“ Sure, NAA had a lot of explaining to do regarding the inferior workmanship and the flammable clutter in the AS-204 CM. But there's a lot of history that needs to be understood to make sense of what happened that day.
In the 1961 Apollo Command and Service Module (CSM) Request for Proposal, NASA baselined an oxygen/nitrogen cabin atmosphere and North American Aviation (NAA) had complied with that requirement in its CSM proposal to NASA. NASA awarded the CSM contract to NAA on that basis and later directed NAA to use a 100% oxygen atmosphere.
In the early CSM preliminary design period, NAA had proposed a single, outward-opening explosive hatch for the Command Module (CM) main entry, one similar to the Mercury hatch design. Again NASA changed the design and directed NAA to develop the inward-opening, dual-hatch system that was used on AS-204.
From Lee Atwood's viewpoint, NAA had done as its customer, NASA, had directed and was now, during his congressional testimony, was being pilloried unfairly for NASA engineering decisions over which NAA had no control. Ironically, AS-204 Commander Gus Grissom was present when the NAA hatch design was discussed at the 10 July 1962 CM mockup review at NAA's Downey plant. Grissom agreed with the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center (now Johnson Space Center, Houston) engineers that the NAA single-piece, outwardly-opening, explosive hatch design should be changed to the presumably safer, inward-opening, dual-hatch configuration. Liberty Bell 7 hangs over AS-204 like a spectre.
And as far as the messy condition of the AS-204 CM, that was clearly NASA's responsibility because NASA had formally taken delivery of that vehicle from NAA in 1966. Many people who were not employed by NAA were involved in preparing the spacecraft for that ill-fated test. NAA had no control over those people or over any flammable material that they might have left in the spacecraft.”
At/From:
www.thespacereview.com/article/3904/1
Also:
apolloproject.com/sp-4009/asc-v1-p013.htm
Credit: “APOLLOPROJECT.COM” website
www.astronautix.com/g/grissom.html
Credit: Astronautix website
Last, but NOT least:
www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=770226892127511&set=gm.1...
Credit: Mitchell Rothman/"Manned Space History" FB group
a_v_bw_o_n (July 1962, unnumbered NAA/NASA photo)
A rare & candid photograph of Virgil “Gus” Grissom, in an unidentified Apollo Command Module mockup. I’m almost certain this photograph was taken during his July 10, 1962 visit to North American Aviation (NAA) Space & Information Systems Division in Downey, CA. Grissom, accompanied by Robert R. Gilruth, Director, MSC and Charles W. Frick, Apollo Program Manager, MSC, were at NAA to conduct the first Apollo spacecraft mockup review/inspection.
If so, and if the following is also correct, the tragic irony is heartbreaking to this day.
An interesting & informative extract from a discussion at “The Space Review” website, by user “oldengg”. While not authoritative, he/she is refreshingly articulate & seemingly very knowledgeable:
“ Sure, NAA had a lot of explaining to do regarding the inferior workmanship and the flammable clutter in the AS-204 CM. But there's a lot of history that needs to be understood to make sense of what happened that day.
In the 1961 Apollo Command and Service Module (CSM) Request for Proposal, NASA baselined an oxygen/nitrogen cabin atmosphere and North American Aviation (NAA) had complied with that requirement in its CSM proposal to NASA. NASA awarded the CSM contract to NAA on that basis and later directed NAA to use a 100% oxygen atmosphere.
In the early CSM preliminary design period, NAA had proposed a single, outward-opening explosive hatch for the Command Module (CM) main entry, one similar to the Mercury hatch design. Again NASA changed the design and directed NAA to develop the inward-opening, dual-hatch system that was used on AS-204.
From Lee Atwood's viewpoint, NAA had done as its customer, NASA, had directed and was now, during his congressional testimony, was being pilloried unfairly for NASA engineering decisions over which NAA had no control. Ironically, AS-204 Commander Gus Grissom was present when the NAA hatch design was discussed at the 10 July 1962 CM mockup review at NAA's Downey plant. Grissom agreed with the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center (now Johnson Space Center, Houston) engineers that the NAA single-piece, outwardly-opening, explosive hatch design should be changed to the presumably safer, inward-opening, dual-hatch configuration. Liberty Bell 7 hangs over AS-204 like a spectre.
And as far as the messy condition of the AS-204 CM, that was clearly NASA's responsibility because NASA had formally taken delivery of that vehicle from NAA in 1966. Many people who were not employed by NAA were involved in preparing the spacecraft for that ill-fated test. NAA had no control over those people or over any flammable material that they might have left in the spacecraft.”
At/From:
www.thespacereview.com/article/3904/1
Also:
apolloproject.com/sp-4009/asc-v1-p013.htm
Credit: “APOLLOPROJECT.COM” website
www.astronautix.com/g/grissom.html
Credit: Astronautix website
Last, but NOT least:
www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=770226892127511&set=gm.1...
Credit: Mitchell Rothman/"Manned Space History" FB group