In the SpaceX Payload Processing Facility at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, scientists and engineers are completing encapsulation of the Jason-3 satellite in its payload fairing. Once the encapsulating is complete, it will be mated to a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket at Vandenberg's Space Launch Complex 4. Built by Thales Alenia of France, Jason-3 will measure the topography of the ocean surface for a four-agency international partnership consisting of NOAA, NASA, Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales, France’s space agency, and the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites.

Photo credit: NASA/Thiep Nguyen and Christopher Wiant

NASA image use policy.

 

PictionID:53761712 - Catalog:14_031939 - Title:Atlas 5001 Details: OAO/A-1 Being Placed in Palette and Encapsulated Date: 02/28/1966 - Filename:14_031939.tif - Images from the Convair/General Dynamics Astronautics Atlas Negative Collection. The processing, cataloging and digitization of these images has been made possible by a generous National Historical Publications and Records grant from the National Archives and Records Administration---Please Tag these images so that the information can be permanently stored with the digital file.---Repository: San Diego Air and Space Museum

In the SpaceX Payload Processing Facility at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, the Jason-3 satellite is prepared for encapsulation in its payload faring. Launched by a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, Jason-3 will be the fourth in a series of spacecraft providing scientists with essential information about global and regional changes in the seas.

Photo credit: NASA

NASA image use policy.

 

Inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, the agency’s Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security-Regolith Explorer, or OSIRIS-REx spacecraft is prepared for encapsulation in its payload fairing. Targeted for liftoff Sept. 8, 2016, OSIRIS-Rex will be the first U.S. mission to sample an asteroid, retrieve at least two ounces of surface material and return it to Earth for study. The asteroid, Bennu, may hold clues to the origin of the solar system and the source of water and organic molecules found on Earth.

Photo credit: NASA/Glenn Benson

NASA image use policy.

 

Thalia Patrinos, and Jason Townsend from NASA's Social Media Team monitor questions coming in from social media during an event where nine U.S. companies where named as eligible to bid on NASA delivery services to the lunar surface through Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) contracts, Thursday, Nov. 29, 2018 at NASA Headquarters in Washington. The companies will be able to bid on delivering science and technology payloads for NASA, including payload integration and operations, launching from Earth and landing on the surface of the Moon. NASA expects to be one of many customers that will use these commercial landing services. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls)

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – Inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, engineers and technicians begin inspections of the payload fairing for the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution, or MAVEN, spacecraft. MAVEN is being prepared for its scheduled launch on Nov 18, 2013 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla. atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket. Positioned in an orbit above the Red Planet, MAVEN will study the upper atmosphere of Mars in unprecedented detail. For more information, visit: www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/maven/main/index.html Photo credit: NASA/Kim Shiflett

John M. Grunsfeld (right), payload commander, assists Richard M. Linnehan, STS-109 mission specialist, in using virtual reality hardware at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) to rehearse some of his duties on the upcoming STS-109 mission, NASA’s fourth servicing visit to the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). They joined five other astronauts for the servicing mission, which launched on March 1, 2002.

 

Credit: NASA

Saturn IB SA-209

 

Dominating the Rocket Garden is a Saturn IB, SA-209. This booster, designated as the booster for a Skylab rescue mission should it prove necessary and later as a backup booster for the ASTP mission, it was never used for its intended purpose and today is one of two remaining Saturn IBs.

 

•General Specifications

oFunction: Apollo spacecraft development; S-IVB stage development in support of Saturn V; Skylab crew launcher

oManufacturer: Chrysler (S-IB); Douglas (S-IVB)

oCountry of Origin: United States

•Size

oHeight141.6 ft (43.2 m) without payload

oDiameter: 21.67 ft (6.61 m)

oMass: 1,300,220 lb (589,770 kg) without payload

oStages: 2

•Capacity

oPayload to LEO: 46,000 lb (21,000 kg)

•Launch History

oStatus: Retired

oLaunch Sites: LC-37 & LC-34, Cape Canaveral; LC-39B, Kennedy Space Center

oTotal Launches: 9

oSuccesses: 9

oFailures: 0

oFirst Flight: February 26, 1966

oLast Flight: July 15, 1975

oNotable Payloads: Unmanned Apollo CSM; Unmanned Apollo LM; Manned Apollo CSM

•First Stage – S-IB

oLength: 80.17 feet (24.44 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 92,500 pounds (42,000 kg)

oGross mass: 973,000 pounds (441,000 kg)

oPropellant mass: 880,500 pounds (399,400 kg)

oEngines: 8 × Rocketdyne H-1

oThrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

oSpecific impulse: 272 seconds (2.67 km/s)

oBurn time: 150 seconds

oFuel: RP-1/LOX

•Second Stage – S-IVB-200

oLength: 58.42 feet (17.81 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 23,400 pounds (10,600 kg)

oGross mass: 251,900 pounds (114,300 kg)

oPropellant mass: 228,500 pounds (103,600 kg)

oEngines: Rocketdyne J-2

oThrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

oSpecific Impulse: 420 seconds (4.1 km/s)

oBurn Time: 480 seconds

oFuel: LH2 / LOX

 

The Saturn IB (pronounced “one B”, also known as the Uprated Saturn I) was an American launch vehicle commissioned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the Apollo program. It replaced the S-IV second stage of the Saturn I with the much more powerful S-IVB, able to launch a partially fueled Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) or a fully fueled Lunar Module (LM) into low Earth orbit for early flight tests before the larger Saturn V needed for lunar flight was ready.

 

By sharing the S-IVB upper stage, the Saturn IB and Saturn V provided a common interface to the Apollo spacecraft. The only major difference was that the S-IVB on the Saturn V burned only part of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit, so it could be restarted for trans-lunar injection. The S-IVB on the Saturn IB needed all of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit.

 

The Saturn IB launched two unmanned CSM suborbital flights, one unmanned LM orbital flight, and the first manned CSM orbital mission (first planned as Apollo 1, later flown as Apollo 7). It also launched one orbital mission, AS-203, without a payload so the S-IVB would have residual liquid hydrogen fuel. This mission supported the design of the restartable version of the S-IVB used in the Saturn V, by observing the behavior of the liquid hydrogen in weightlessness.

 

In 1973, the year after the Apollo lunar program ended, three Apollo CSM/Saturn IBs ferried crews to the Skylab space station. In 1975, one last Apollo/Saturn IB launched the Apollo portion of the joint US-USSR Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP). A backup Apollo CSM/Saturn IB was assembled and made ready for a Skylab rescue mission, but never flown.

 

The remaining Saturn IBs in NASA’s inventory were scrapped after the ASTP mission, as no use could be found for them and all heavy lift needs of the US space program could be serviced by the cheaper and more versatile Titan III family.

 

History

 

In 1959, NASA’s Silverstein Committee issued recommendations to develop the Saturn class launch vehicles, growing from the C-1. When the Apollo program was started in 1961 with the goal of landing men on the Moon, NASA chose the Saturn I for Earth orbital test missions. However, the Saturn I’s payload limit of 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg) would allow testing of only the Command Module with a smaller propulsion module attached, as the Apollo Command/Service Module would have a dry weight of at least 26,300 pounds (11,900 kg), in addition to service propulsion and reaction control fuel. In July 1962, NASA announced selection of the C-5 for the lunar landing mission, and decided to develop another launch vehicle by upgrading the Saturn I, replacing its S-IV second stage with the S-IVB, which would also be modified for use as the Saturn V third stage. The S-I first stage would also be upgraded to the S-IB by improving the thrust of its engines and removing some weight. The new Saturn IB, with a payload capability of at least 35,000 pounds (16,000 kg), would replace the Saturn I for Earth orbit testing, allowing the Command/Service Module to be flown with a partial fuel load. It would also allow launching the 32,000-pound (15,000 kg) Lunar Excursion Module separately for unmanned and manned Earth orbital testing, before the Saturn V was ready to be flown. It would also give early development to the third stage.

 

On May 12, 1966, NASA announced the vehicle’s name would be changed to the “Uprated Saturn I”, at the same time the “Lunar Excursion Module” was renamed the Lunar Module. However, the “Uprated Saturn I” name was reverted to Saturn IB on December 2, 1967.

 

By the time it was developed, the Saturn IB payload capability had increased to 41,000 pounds (19,000 kg). By 1973, when it was used to launch three Skylab missions, the first-stage engine had been upgraded further, raising the payload capability to 46,000 pounds (21,000 kg).

 

Specifications

 

Launch vehicle

 

ParameterS-IB 1st StageS-IVB-200 2nd StageInstrument Unit

Height80.17 ft (24.44 m)58.42 ft (17.81 m)3.00 ft (0.91 m)

Diameter21.42 ft (6.53 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)

Structural mass92,500 lb (42,000 kg)23,400 lb (10,600 kg)4,400 lb (2,000 kg)

PropellantRP-1 / LOXLH2 / LOXN/A

Propellant mass880,500 lb (399,400 kg)228,500 lb (103,600 kg)N/A

EnginesEight - H-1One - J-2N/A

Thrust1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN) sea level200,000 lbf (890 kN) vacuumN/A

Burn duration150 s480 sN/A

Specific impulse272 s (2.66 kN·s/kg) sea level420 s (4.12 kN·s/kg) vacuumN/A

ContractorChryslerDouglasIBM

 

Payload Configurations

 

ParameterCommand/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Launch Escape System mass9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

Payload Configurations

 

Command/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Parameter: Launch Escape System mass

Command/Service Module 9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Parameter: Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Parameter: Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

 

S-IB Stage

 

The S-IB stage was built by the Chrysler corporation at the Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans. It was powered by eight Rocketdyne H-1 rocket engines burning RP-1 fuel with liquid oxygen (LOX). Eight Redstone tanks (four holding fuel and four holding LOX) were clustered around a Jupiter rocket LOX tank. The four outboard engines were mounted on gimbals, allowing them to be steered to control the rocket. Eight fins surrounding the base thrust structure provided aerodynamic stability and control.

 

•Height: 80.17 ft. (24.44 m)

•Diameter: 21.42 ft. (6.53 m)

•Number of fins: 8

•Finspan: 39.42 ft. (12.02 m)

•Engines: 8 Rocketdyne H-1

•Thrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

•Fuel: RP-1 (Refined kerosene) 41,000 US gal (155 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 66,277 US gal (251 m3) nominal capacity including 1.5% ullage volume (43,284 US gal/163 m3 in four outer tanks plus 22,993 US gal/87 m3 in center tank)

•Burn time: 2.5 min

•Burnout altitude: 37 nmi (69 km)

 

S-IVB-200 Stage

 

The S-IVB was built by the Douglas Aircraft Company at Huntington Beach, California. The S-IVB-200 model was similar to the S-IVB-500 third stage used on the Saturn V, with the exception of the interstage adapter, smaller auxiliary propulsion control modules, and lack of on-orbit engine restart capability. It was powered by a single Rocketdyne J-2 engine. The fuel and oxidizer tanks shared a common bulkhead, which saved about ten tons of weight and reduced vehicle length over ten feet.

 

•Height: 58.42 ft. (17.81 m)

•Diameter: 21.67 ft. (6.61 m)

•Engine: single J-2

•Thrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

•Fuel: Liquid hydrogen (LH2) 64,000 US gal (242 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 20,000 US gal (76 m3)

•Burn time: approx. 7 min

•Burnout altitude (for Saturn IB): orbit

 

Instrument Unit

 

Main article: Saturn V Instrument Unit

 

IBM built the Instrument Unit at the Space Systems Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Located at the top of the S-IVB stage, it consisted of a Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), an inertial platform, accelerometers, a tracking, telemetry and command system and associated environmental controls. It controlled the entire rocket from just before liftoff until battery depletion. Like other rocket guidance systems, it maintained its state vector (position and velocity estimates) by integrating accelerometer measurements, sent firing and steering commands to the main engines and auxiliary thrusters, and fired the appropriate ordnance and solid rocket motors during staging and payload separation events.

 

As with other rockets, a completely independent and redundant range safety system could be invoked by ground radio command to terminate thrust and to destroy the vehicle should it malfunction and threaten people or property on the ground. In the Saturn IB and V, the range safety system was permanently disabled by ground command after safely reaching orbit. This was done to ensure that the S-IVB stage would not inadvertently rupture and create a cloud of debris in orbit that could endanger the crew of the Apollo CSM.

 

Launch Sequence Events

 

•Launch Event: Ignition Command

oTime (s): -3.02

•Launch Event: First Motion

oTime (s): -0.19

•Launch Event: Liftoff

oTime (s): 0.00

•Launch Event: Initiate Pitch Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: Initiate Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: End Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 38.0

•Launch Event: Mach One

oTime (s): 62.18

oAltitude (km): 7.63

•Launch Event: Max Q

oTime (s): 75.5

oAltitude (km): 12.16.

•Launch Event: Freeze Tilt

oTime: 134.40..

•Launch Event: Inboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 140.65..

•Launch Event: Outboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 144.32

•Launch Event: Ullage Rockets Ignition

oTime (s): 145.37

•Launch Event: S-IB / S-IVB Separation

oTime (s): 145.59

•Launch Event: S-IVB Ignition

oTime (s): 146.97

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Burnout

oTime (s): 148.33

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Jettison

oTime (s): 156.58

•Launch Event: Jettison LES

oTime (s): 163.28

•Launch Event: Start Pitch Over

oTime (s): 613.95

•Launch Event: S-IVB Cutoff

oTime (s): 616.76

•Launch Event: Orbit Insertion

oTime (s): 626.76

•Launch Event: Start S/C Sep Sequence

oTime (s): 663.11

•Launch Event: Spacecraft Separation

oTime (s): 728.31

 

Saturn IB Vehicles and Launches

 

The first five Saturn IB launches for the Apollo program were made from LC-34 and LC-37, Cape Kennedy Air Force Station.

 

The Saturn IB was used between 1973 and 1975 for three manned Skylab flights, and one Apollo-Soyuz Test Project flight. This final production run did not have alternating black and white S-IB stage tanks, or vertical stripes on the S-IVB aft tank skirt, which were present on the earlier vehicles. Since LC-34 and 37 were inactive by then, these launches utilized Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39B. Mobile Launcher Platform No. 1 was modified, adding an elevated platform known as the “milkstool” to accommodate the height differential between the Saturn IB and the much larger Saturn V. This enabled alignment of the Launch Umbilical Tower’s access arms to accommodate crew access, fueling, and ground electrical connections for the Apollo spacecraft and S-IVB upper stage. The tower’s second stage access arms were modified to service the S-IB first stage.

 

SA-201

 

•Mission: AS-201

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,820

oLaunch Date: February 26, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM (Command/Service Module).

 

SA-203

 

•Mission: AS-203

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): None

oLaunch Date: July 5, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned test of unburned LH2 behavior in orbit to support S-IVB-500 restart design

 

SA-202

 

•Mission: AS-202

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 25,810

oLaunch Date: August 25, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM

 

SA-204

 

•Mission: Apollo 1

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,412

oNotes: Was to be first manned orbital test of Block I CSM. Cabin fire killed astronauts and damaged CM during dress rehearsal for planned February 21, 1967 launch.

•Mission: Apollo 5

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 14,360

oLaunch Date: January 22, 1968

oNotes: Unmanned orbital test of Lunar Module, used Apollo 1 launch vehicle.

 

SA-205

 

•Mission: Apollo 7

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,520

oLaunch Date: October 11, 1968

oNotes: Manned orbital test of Block II CSM.

 

SA-206

 

•Mission: Skylab 2

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 19,979

oLaunch Date: May 25, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried first crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-207

 

•Mission: Skylab 3

•Spacecraft Mass (kg): 20,121

•Launch Date: July 28, 1973

•Notes: Block II CSM ferried second crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-208

 

•Mission: AS-208

oNotes: Standby Skylab 3 rescue CSM-119; not needed.

•Mission: Skylab 4

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,847

oLaunch Date: November 16, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried third crew to Skylab orbital workshop.

 

SA-209

 

•Mission: AS-209

oNotes: Standby Skylab 4 and later Apollo-Soyuz rescue CSM-119. Not needed, currently on display in the KSC rocket garden.

•Mission: Skylab 5

oNotes: Planned CSM mission to lift Skylab workshop’s orbit to endure until Space Shuttle ready to fly; cancelled.

 

SA-210

 

•Mission: ASTP

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,780

oLaunch Date: July 15, 1975

oNotes: Apollo CSM with special docking adapter module, rendezvoused with Soyuz 19. Last Saturn IB flight.

 

SA-211

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage at the Alabama Welcome Center on I-65 in Ardmore, Alabama. S-IVB stage rests with Skylab underwater training simulator hardware and is on display outdoors at the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

SA-212

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage scrapped. S-IVB stage converted to Skylab space station.

 

SA-213:

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

SA-214

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

For earlier launches of vehicles in the Saturn I series, see the list in the Saturn I article.

 

Saturn IB Rockets on Display

 

Currently there are three locations where Saturn IB vehicles (or parts thereof) are on display:

 

•SA-209 is on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, with the Apollo Facilities Verification Vehicle. Due to severe corrosion, the first stage engines and Service Module were replaced with fabricated duplicates in 1993–1994.

•The SA-211 first stage is on display with the S-IVB-S “Battleship” static test stage stacked in a launch-ready condition at the Alabama Welcome Center on Interstate 65 in Ardmore, Alabama. 34.954548°N 86.89193°W

•The SA-211 S-IVB stage was mated with the Skylab underwater training docking adapter and Apollo Telescope Mount and is on display in the Rocket Garden of the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

 

Cost

 

In 1972, the cost of a Saturn IB including launch was US$55,000,000 (equivalent to $315,000,000 in 2016).

 

AS 209

 

Black-and-white picture from inside a tall building with a space capsule being lifted from the top of a rocket

 

The Skylab Rescue CSM is removed from its Saturn IB Launch vehicle following the successful recovery of Skylab 4.

 

After the Skylab 4 launch, another rescue flight was assembled as a backup contingency. The Saturn IB rocket AS 209 was assembled in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39 for possible use. It also used the CSM 119 Command Module that was to be launched with Brand and Lind.

 

There were also plans for a short 20-day Skylab 5 flight that would use this backup CSM. The crew, likely consisting of Brand, Lind, and Skylab backup Science Pilot William B. Lenoir, would have performed some scientific research and closed out the station until the Space Shuttle was operational. However, the extension of Skylab 4 from fifty-six to eighty-four days obviated the need for the additional mission.

 

AS 209 and CSM 119 were later used as a backup to the ASTP mission. Both are now on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex. CSM 119 is located in the Apollo/Saturn V Center. The Saturn IB booster for AS 209 is currently located in the Visitor Complex’s Rocket Garden. It is displayed horizontally, mated to an Apollo FVV (Facilities Verification Vehicle) which was formerly displayed at the VAB’s Visitor Complex c. October 1968. In 2007, after sitting untouched for over 30 years, NASA engineers used the command module for studies on the spacecraft’s life support adapter assembly—the projecting aerodynamic fairing that allows oxygen, water, and electricity to flow from the Service Module to the Command Module. This was in support of the design and construction of a similar system on the new Orion spacecraft, which resembles the Skylab Rescue configuration.

NASA’s Pegasus barge arrives at the Launch Complex 39 turn basin at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida carrying NASA’s Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope on Sunday, June 21, 2026. Teams will offload and transport the observatory to the spaceport’s Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility where it will undergo processing ahead of launch, targeted no earlier than Sunday, Aug. 30, 2026. Named for NASA’s first chief astronomer and “mother of the Hubble Space Telescope,” Roman will offer a field of view over 100 times larger than Hubble’s to study up to a billion galaxies, directly image exoplanets and planet‑forming disks, and address fundamental questions about dark energy, exoplanets, and infrared astrophysics. Photo credit: NASA/Amber Jean Notvest

NASA image use policy.

Astronaut John M. Grunsfeld, STS-109 payload commander, uses virtual reality hardware at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) to rehearse some of his duties on the upcoming STS-109 mission, NASA’s fourth servicing visit to the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). He joined six other astronauts for the servicing mission, which launched on March 1, 2002.

 

Credit: NASA

Saturn IB SA-209

 

Dominating the Rocket Garden is a Saturn IB, SA-209. This booster, designated as the booster for a Skylab rescue mission should it prove necessary and later as a backup booster for the ASTP mission, it was never used for its intended purpose and today is one of two remaining Saturn IBs.

 

•General Specifications

oFunction: Apollo spacecraft development; S-IVB stage development in support of Saturn V; Skylab crew launcher

oManufacturer: Chrysler (S-IB); Douglas (S-IVB)

oCountry of Origin: United States

•Size

oHeight141.6 ft (43.2 m) without payload

oDiameter: 21.67 ft (6.61 m)

oMass: 1,300,220 lb (589,770 kg) without payload

oStages: 2

•Capacity

oPayload to LEO: 46,000 lb (21,000 kg)

•Launch History

oStatus: Retired

oLaunch Sites: LC-37 & LC-34, Cape Canaveral; LC-39B, Kennedy Space Center

oTotal Launches: 9

oSuccesses: 9

oFailures: 0

oFirst Flight: February 26, 1966

oLast Flight: July 15, 1975

oNotable Payloads: Unmanned Apollo CSM; Unmanned Apollo LM; Manned Apollo CSM

•First Stage – S-IB

oLength: 80.17 feet (24.44 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 92,500 pounds (42,000 kg)

oGross mass: 973,000 pounds (441,000 kg)

oPropellant mass: 880,500 pounds (399,400 kg)

oEngines: 8 × Rocketdyne H-1

oThrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

oSpecific impulse: 272 seconds (2.67 km/s)

oBurn time: 150 seconds

oFuel: RP-1/LOX

•Second Stage – S-IVB-200

oLength: 58.42 feet (17.81 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 23,400 pounds (10,600 kg)

oGross mass: 251,900 pounds (114,300 kg)

oPropellant mass: 228,500 pounds (103,600 kg)

oEngines: Rocketdyne J-2

oThrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

oSpecific Impulse: 420 seconds (4.1 km/s)

oBurn Time: 480 seconds

oFuel: LH2 / LOX

 

The Saturn IB (pronounced “one B”, also known as the Uprated Saturn I) was an American launch vehicle commissioned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the Apollo program. It replaced the S-IV second stage of the Saturn I with the much more powerful S-IVB, able to launch a partially fueled Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) or a fully fueled Lunar Module (LM) into low Earth orbit for early flight tests before the larger Saturn V needed for lunar flight was ready.

 

By sharing the S-IVB upper stage, the Saturn IB and Saturn V provided a common interface to the Apollo spacecraft. The only major difference was that the S-IVB on the Saturn V burned only part of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit, so it could be restarted for trans-lunar injection. The S-IVB on the Saturn IB needed all of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit.

 

The Saturn IB launched two unmanned CSM suborbital flights, one unmanned LM orbital flight, and the first manned CSM orbital mission (first planned as Apollo 1, later flown as Apollo 7). It also launched one orbital mission, AS-203, without a payload so the S-IVB would have residual liquid hydrogen fuel. This mission supported the design of the restartable version of the S-IVB used in the Saturn V, by observing the behavior of the liquid hydrogen in weightlessness.

 

In 1973, the year after the Apollo lunar program ended, three Apollo CSM/Saturn IBs ferried crews to the Skylab space station. In 1975, one last Apollo/Saturn IB launched the Apollo portion of the joint US-USSR Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP). A backup Apollo CSM/Saturn IB was assembled and made ready for a Skylab rescue mission, but never flown.

 

The remaining Saturn IBs in NASA’s inventory were scrapped after the ASTP mission, as no use could be found for them and all heavy lift needs of the US space program could be serviced by the cheaper and more versatile Titan III family.

 

History

 

In 1959, NASA’s Silverstein Committee issued recommendations to develop the Saturn class launch vehicles, growing from the C-1. When the Apollo program was started in 1961 with the goal of landing men on the Moon, NASA chose the Saturn I for Earth orbital test missions. However, the Saturn I’s payload limit of 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg) would allow testing of only the Command Module with a smaller propulsion module attached, as the Apollo Command/Service Module would have a dry weight of at least 26,300 pounds (11,900 kg), in addition to service propulsion and reaction control fuel. In July 1962, NASA announced selection of the C-5 for the lunar landing mission, and decided to develop another launch vehicle by upgrading the Saturn I, replacing its S-IV second stage with the S-IVB, which would also be modified for use as the Saturn V third stage. The S-I first stage would also be upgraded to the S-IB by improving the thrust of its engines and removing some weight. The new Saturn IB, with a payload capability of at least 35,000 pounds (16,000 kg), would replace the Saturn I for Earth orbit testing, allowing the Command/Service Module to be flown with a partial fuel load. It would also allow launching the 32,000-pound (15,000 kg) Lunar Excursion Module separately for unmanned and manned Earth orbital testing, before the Saturn V was ready to be flown. It would also give early development to the third stage.

 

On May 12, 1966, NASA announced the vehicle’s name would be changed to the “Uprated Saturn I”, at the same time the “Lunar Excursion Module” was renamed the Lunar Module. However, the “Uprated Saturn I” name was reverted to Saturn IB on December 2, 1967.

 

By the time it was developed, the Saturn IB payload capability had increased to 41,000 pounds (19,000 kg). By 1973, when it was used to launch three Skylab missions, the first-stage engine had been upgraded further, raising the payload capability to 46,000 pounds (21,000 kg).

 

Specifications

 

Launch vehicle

 

ParameterS-IB 1st StageS-IVB-200 2nd StageInstrument Unit

Height80.17 ft (24.44 m)58.42 ft (17.81 m)3.00 ft (0.91 m)

Diameter21.42 ft (6.53 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)

Structural mass92,500 lb (42,000 kg)23,400 lb (10,600 kg)4,400 lb (2,000 kg)

PropellantRP-1 / LOXLH2 / LOXN/A

Propellant mass880,500 lb (399,400 kg)228,500 lb (103,600 kg)N/A

EnginesEight - H-1One - J-2N/A

Thrust1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN) sea level200,000 lbf (890 kN) vacuumN/A

Burn duration150 s480 sN/A

Specific impulse272 s (2.66 kN·s/kg) sea level420 s (4.12 kN·s/kg) vacuumN/A

ContractorChryslerDouglasIBM

 

Payload Configurations

 

ParameterCommand/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Launch Escape System mass9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

Payload Configurations

 

Command/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Parameter: Launch Escape System mass

Command/Service Module 9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Parameter: Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Parameter: Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

 

S-IB Stage

 

The S-IB stage was built by the Chrysler corporation at the Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans. It was powered by eight Rocketdyne H-1 rocket engines burning RP-1 fuel with liquid oxygen (LOX). Eight Redstone tanks (four holding fuel and four holding LOX) were clustered around a Jupiter rocket LOX tank. The four outboard engines were mounted on gimbals, allowing them to be steered to control the rocket. Eight fins surrounding the base thrust structure provided aerodynamic stability and control.

 

•Height: 80.17 ft. (24.44 m)

•Diameter: 21.42 ft. (6.53 m)

•Number of fins: 8

•Finspan: 39.42 ft. (12.02 m)

•Engines: 8 Rocketdyne H-1

•Thrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

•Fuel: RP-1 (Refined kerosene) 41,000 US gal (155 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 66,277 US gal (251 m3) nominal capacity including 1.5% ullage volume (43,284 US gal/163 m3 in four outer tanks plus 22,993 US gal/87 m3 in center tank)

•Burn time: 2.5 min

•Burnout altitude: 37 nmi (69 km)

 

S-IVB-200 Stage

 

The S-IVB was built by the Douglas Aircraft Company at Huntington Beach, California. The S-IVB-200 model was similar to the S-IVB-500 third stage used on the Saturn V, with the exception of the interstage adapter, smaller auxiliary propulsion control modules, and lack of on-orbit engine restart capability. It was powered by a single Rocketdyne J-2 engine. The fuel and oxidizer tanks shared a common bulkhead, which saved about ten tons of weight and reduced vehicle length over ten feet.

 

•Height: 58.42 ft. (17.81 m)

•Diameter: 21.67 ft. (6.61 m)

•Engine: single J-2

•Thrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

•Fuel: Liquid hydrogen (LH2) 64,000 US gal (242 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 20,000 US gal (76 m3)

•Burn time: approx. 7 min

•Burnout altitude (for Saturn IB): orbit

 

Instrument Unit

 

Main article: Saturn V Instrument Unit

 

IBM built the Instrument Unit at the Space Systems Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Located at the top of the S-IVB stage, it consisted of a Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), an inertial platform, accelerometers, a tracking, telemetry and command system and associated environmental controls. It controlled the entire rocket from just before liftoff until battery depletion. Like other rocket guidance systems, it maintained its state vector (position and velocity estimates) by integrating accelerometer measurements, sent firing and steering commands to the main engines and auxiliary thrusters, and fired the appropriate ordnance and solid rocket motors during staging and payload separation events.

 

As with other rockets, a completely independent and redundant range safety system could be invoked by ground radio command to terminate thrust and to destroy the vehicle should it malfunction and threaten people or property on the ground. In the Saturn IB and V, the range safety system was permanently disabled by ground command after safely reaching orbit. This was done to ensure that the S-IVB stage would not inadvertently rupture and create a cloud of debris in orbit that could endanger the crew of the Apollo CSM.

 

Launch Sequence Events

 

•Launch Event: Ignition Command

oTime (s): -3.02

•Launch Event: First Motion

oTime (s): -0.19

•Launch Event: Liftoff

oTime (s): 0.00

•Launch Event: Initiate Pitch Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: Initiate Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: End Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 38.0

•Launch Event: Mach One

oTime (s): 62.18

oAltitude (km): 7.63

•Launch Event: Max Q

oTime (s): 75.5

oAltitude (km): 12.16.

•Launch Event: Freeze Tilt

oTime: 134.40..

•Launch Event: Inboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 140.65..

•Launch Event: Outboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 144.32

•Launch Event: Ullage Rockets Ignition

oTime (s): 145.37

•Launch Event: S-IB / S-IVB Separation

oTime (s): 145.59

•Launch Event: S-IVB Ignition

oTime (s): 146.97

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Burnout

oTime (s): 148.33

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Jettison

oTime (s): 156.58

•Launch Event: Jettison LES

oTime (s): 163.28

•Launch Event: Start Pitch Over

oTime (s): 613.95

•Launch Event: S-IVB Cutoff

oTime (s): 616.76

•Launch Event: Orbit Insertion

oTime (s): 626.76

•Launch Event: Start S/C Sep Sequence

oTime (s): 663.11

•Launch Event: Spacecraft Separation

oTime (s): 728.31

 

Saturn IB Vehicles and Launches

 

The first five Saturn IB launches for the Apollo program were made from LC-34 and LC-37, Cape Kennedy Air Force Station.

 

The Saturn IB was used between 1973 and 1975 for three manned Skylab flights, and one Apollo-Soyuz Test Project flight. This final production run did not have alternating black and white S-IB stage tanks, or vertical stripes on the S-IVB aft tank skirt, which were present on the earlier vehicles. Since LC-34 and 37 were inactive by then, these launches utilized Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39B. Mobile Launcher Platform No. 1 was modified, adding an elevated platform known as the “milkstool” to accommodate the height differential between the Saturn IB and the much larger Saturn V. This enabled alignment of the Launch Umbilical Tower’s access arms to accommodate crew access, fueling, and ground electrical connections for the Apollo spacecraft and S-IVB upper stage. The tower’s second stage access arms were modified to service the S-IB first stage.

 

SA-201

 

•Mission: AS-201

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,820

oLaunch Date: February 26, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM (Command/Service Module).

 

SA-203

 

•Mission: AS-203

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): None

oLaunch Date: July 5, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned test of unburned LH2 behavior in orbit to support S-IVB-500 restart design

 

SA-202

 

•Mission: AS-202

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 25,810

oLaunch Date: August 25, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM

 

SA-204

 

•Mission: Apollo 1

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,412

oNotes: Was to be first manned orbital test of Block I CSM. Cabin fire killed astronauts and damaged CM during dress rehearsal for planned February 21, 1967 launch.

•Mission: Apollo 5

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 14,360

oLaunch Date: January 22, 1968

oNotes: Unmanned orbital test of Lunar Module, used Apollo 1 launch vehicle.

 

SA-205

 

•Mission: Apollo 7

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,520

oLaunch Date: October 11, 1968

oNotes: Manned orbital test of Block II CSM.

 

SA-206

 

•Mission: Skylab 2

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 19,979

oLaunch Date: May 25, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried first crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-207

 

•Mission: Skylab 3

•Spacecraft Mass (kg): 20,121

•Launch Date: July 28, 1973

•Notes: Block II CSM ferried second crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-208

 

•Mission: AS-208

oNotes: Standby Skylab 3 rescue CSM-119; not needed.

•Mission: Skylab 4

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,847

oLaunch Date: November 16, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried third crew to Skylab orbital workshop.

 

SA-209

 

•Mission: AS-209

oNotes: Standby Skylab 4 and later Apollo-Soyuz rescue CSM-119. Not needed, currently on display in the KSC rocket garden.

•Mission: Skylab 5

oNotes: Planned CSM mission to lift Skylab workshop’s orbit to endure until Space Shuttle ready to fly; cancelled.

 

SA-210

 

•Mission: ASTP

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,780

oLaunch Date: July 15, 1975

oNotes: Apollo CSM with special docking adapter module, rendezvoused with Soyuz 19. Last Saturn IB flight.

 

SA-211

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage at the Alabama Welcome Center on I-65 in Ardmore, Alabama. S-IVB stage rests with Skylab underwater training simulator hardware and is on display outdoors at the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

SA-212

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage scrapped. S-IVB stage converted to Skylab space station.

 

SA-213:

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

SA-214

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

For earlier launches of vehicles in the Saturn I series, see the list in the Saturn I article.

 

Saturn IB Rockets on Display

 

Currently there are three locations where Saturn IB vehicles (or parts thereof) are on display:

 

•SA-209 is on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, with the Apollo Facilities Verification Vehicle. Due to severe corrosion, the first stage engines and Service Module were replaced with fabricated duplicates in 1993–1994.

•The SA-211 first stage is on display with the S-IVB-S “Battleship” static test stage stacked in a launch-ready condition at the Alabama Welcome Center on Interstate 65 in Ardmore, Alabama. 34.954548°N 86.89193°W

•The SA-211 S-IVB stage was mated with the Skylab underwater training docking adapter and Apollo Telescope Mount and is on display in the Rocket Garden of the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

 

Cost

 

In 1972, the cost of a Saturn IB including launch was US$55,000,000 (equivalent to $315,000,000 in 2016).

 

AS 209

 

Black-and-white picture from inside a tall building with a space capsule being lifted from the top of a rocket

 

The Skylab Rescue CSM is removed from its Saturn IB Launch vehicle following the successful recovery of Skylab 4.

 

After the Skylab 4 launch, another rescue flight was assembled as a backup contingency. The Saturn IB rocket AS 209 was assembled in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39 for possible use. It also used the CSM 119 Command Module that was to be launched with Brand and Lind.

 

There were also plans for a short 20-day Skylab 5 flight that would use this backup CSM. The crew, likely consisting of Brand, Lind, and Skylab backup Science Pilot William B. Lenoir, would have performed some scientific research and closed out the station until the Space Shuttle was operational. However, the extension of Skylab 4 from fifty-six to eighty-four days obviated the need for the additional mission.

 

AS 209 and CSM 119 were later used as a backup to the ASTP mission. Both are now on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex. CSM 119 is located in the Apollo/Saturn V Center. The Saturn IB booster for AS 209 is currently located in the Visitor Complex’s Rocket Garden. It is displayed horizontally, mated to an Apollo FVV (Facilities Verification Vehicle) which was formerly displayed at the VAB’s Visitor Complex c. October 1968. In 2007, after sitting untouched for over 30 years, NASA engineers used the command module for studies on the spacecraft’s life support adapter assembly—the projecting aerodynamic fairing that allows oxygen, water, and electricity to flow from the Service Module to the Command Module. This was in support of the design and construction of a similar system on the new Orion spacecraft, which resembles the Skylab Rescue configuration.

Saturn IB SA-209

 

Dominating the Rocket Garden is a Saturn IB, SA-209. This booster, designated as the booster for a Skylab rescue mission should it prove necessary and later as a backup booster for the ASTP mission, it was never used for its intended purpose and today is one of two remaining Saturn IBs.

 

•General Specifications

oFunction: Apollo spacecraft development; S-IVB stage development in support of Saturn V; Skylab crew launcher

oManufacturer: Chrysler (S-IB); Douglas (S-IVB)

oCountry of Origin: United States

•Size

oHeight141.6 ft (43.2 m) without payload

oDiameter: 21.67 ft (6.61 m)

oMass: 1,300,220 lb (589,770 kg) without payload

oStages: 2

•Capacity

oPayload to LEO: 46,000 lb (21,000 kg)

•Launch History

oStatus: Retired

oLaunch Sites: LC-37 & LC-34, Cape Canaveral; LC-39B, Kennedy Space Center

oTotal Launches: 9

oSuccesses: 9

oFailures: 0

oFirst Flight: February 26, 1966

oLast Flight: July 15, 1975

oNotable Payloads: Unmanned Apollo CSM; Unmanned Apollo LM; Manned Apollo CSM

•First Stage – S-IB

oLength: 80.17 feet (24.44 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 92,500 pounds (42,000 kg)

oGross mass: 973,000 pounds (441,000 kg)

oPropellant mass: 880,500 pounds (399,400 kg)

oEngines: 8 × Rocketdyne H-1

oThrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

oSpecific impulse: 272 seconds (2.67 km/s)

oBurn time: 150 seconds

oFuel: RP-1/LOX

•Second Stage – S-IVB-200

oLength: 58.42 feet (17.81 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 23,400 pounds (10,600 kg)

oGross mass: 251,900 pounds (114,300 kg)

oPropellant mass: 228,500 pounds (103,600 kg)

oEngines: Rocketdyne J-2

oThrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

oSpecific Impulse: 420 seconds (4.1 km/s)

oBurn Time: 480 seconds

oFuel: LH2 / LOX

 

The Saturn IB (pronounced “one B”, also known as the Uprated Saturn I) was an American launch vehicle commissioned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the Apollo program. It replaced the S-IV second stage of the Saturn I with the much more powerful S-IVB, able to launch a partially fueled Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) or a fully fueled Lunar Module (LM) into low Earth orbit for early flight tests before the larger Saturn V needed for lunar flight was ready.

 

By sharing the S-IVB upper stage, the Saturn IB and Saturn V provided a common interface to the Apollo spacecraft. The only major difference was that the S-IVB on the Saturn V burned only part of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit, so it could be restarted for trans-lunar injection. The S-IVB on the Saturn IB needed all of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit.

 

The Saturn IB launched two unmanned CSM suborbital flights, one unmanned LM orbital flight, and the first manned CSM orbital mission (first planned as Apollo 1, later flown as Apollo 7). It also launched one orbital mission, AS-203, without a payload so the S-IVB would have residual liquid hydrogen fuel. This mission supported the design of the restartable version of the S-IVB used in the Saturn V, by observing the behavior of the liquid hydrogen in weightlessness.

 

In 1973, the year after the Apollo lunar program ended, three Apollo CSM/Saturn IBs ferried crews to the Skylab space station. In 1975, one last Apollo/Saturn IB launched the Apollo portion of the joint US-USSR Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP). A backup Apollo CSM/Saturn IB was assembled and made ready for a Skylab rescue mission, but never flown.

 

The remaining Saturn IBs in NASA’s inventory were scrapped after the ASTP mission, as no use could be found for them and all heavy lift needs of the US space program could be serviced by the cheaper and more versatile Titan III family.

 

History

 

In 1959, NASA’s Silverstein Committee issued recommendations to develop the Saturn class launch vehicles, growing from the C-1. When the Apollo program was started in 1961 with the goal of landing men on the Moon, NASA chose the Saturn I for Earth orbital test missions. However, the Saturn I’s payload limit of 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg) would allow testing of only the Command Module with a smaller propulsion module attached, as the Apollo Command/Service Module would have a dry weight of at least 26,300 pounds (11,900 kg), in addition to service propulsion and reaction control fuel. In July 1962, NASA announced selection of the C-5 for the lunar landing mission, and decided to develop another launch vehicle by upgrading the Saturn I, replacing its S-IV second stage with the S-IVB, which would also be modified for use as the Saturn V third stage. The S-I first stage would also be upgraded to the S-IB by improving the thrust of its engines and removing some weight. The new Saturn IB, with a payload capability of at least 35,000 pounds (16,000 kg), would replace the Saturn I for Earth orbit testing, allowing the Command/Service Module to be flown with a partial fuel load. It would also allow launching the 32,000-pound (15,000 kg) Lunar Excursion Module separately for unmanned and manned Earth orbital testing, before the Saturn V was ready to be flown. It would also give early development to the third stage.

 

On May 12, 1966, NASA announced the vehicle’s name would be changed to the “Uprated Saturn I”, at the same time the “Lunar Excursion Module” was renamed the Lunar Module. However, the “Uprated Saturn I” name was reverted to Saturn IB on December 2, 1967.

 

By the time it was developed, the Saturn IB payload capability had increased to 41,000 pounds (19,000 kg). By 1973, when it was used to launch three Skylab missions, the first-stage engine had been upgraded further, raising the payload capability to 46,000 pounds (21,000 kg).

 

Specifications

 

Launch vehicle

 

ParameterS-IB 1st StageS-IVB-200 2nd StageInstrument Unit

Height80.17 ft (24.44 m)58.42 ft (17.81 m)3.00 ft (0.91 m)

Diameter21.42 ft (6.53 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)

Structural mass92,500 lb (42,000 kg)23,400 lb (10,600 kg)4,400 lb (2,000 kg)

PropellantRP-1 / LOXLH2 / LOXN/A

Propellant mass880,500 lb (399,400 kg)228,500 lb (103,600 kg)N/A

EnginesEight - H-1One - J-2N/A

Thrust1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN) sea level200,000 lbf (890 kN) vacuumN/A

Burn duration150 s480 sN/A

Specific impulse272 s (2.66 kN·s/kg) sea level420 s (4.12 kN·s/kg) vacuumN/A

ContractorChryslerDouglasIBM

 

Payload Configurations

 

ParameterCommand/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Launch Escape System mass9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

Payload Configurations

 

Command/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Parameter: Launch Escape System mass

Command/Service Module 9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Parameter: Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Parameter: Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

 

S-IB Stage

 

The S-IB stage was built by the Chrysler corporation at the Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans. It was powered by eight Rocketdyne H-1 rocket engines burning RP-1 fuel with liquid oxygen (LOX). Eight Redstone tanks (four holding fuel and four holding LOX) were clustered around a Jupiter rocket LOX tank. The four outboard engines were mounted on gimbals, allowing them to be steered to control the rocket. Eight fins surrounding the base thrust structure provided aerodynamic stability and control.

 

•Height: 80.17 ft. (24.44 m)

•Diameter: 21.42 ft. (6.53 m)

•Number of fins: 8

•Finspan: 39.42 ft. (12.02 m)

•Engines: 8 Rocketdyne H-1

•Thrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

•Fuel: RP-1 (Refined kerosene) 41,000 US gal (155 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 66,277 US gal (251 m3) nominal capacity including 1.5% ullage volume (43,284 US gal/163 m3 in four outer tanks plus 22,993 US gal/87 m3 in center tank)

•Burn time: 2.5 min

•Burnout altitude: 37 nmi (69 km)

 

S-IVB-200 Stage

 

The S-IVB was built by the Douglas Aircraft Company at Huntington Beach, California. The S-IVB-200 model was similar to the S-IVB-500 third stage used on the Saturn V, with the exception of the interstage adapter, smaller auxiliary propulsion control modules, and lack of on-orbit engine restart capability. It was powered by a single Rocketdyne J-2 engine. The fuel and oxidizer tanks shared a common bulkhead, which saved about ten tons of weight and reduced vehicle length over ten feet.

 

•Height: 58.42 ft. (17.81 m)

•Diameter: 21.67 ft. (6.61 m)

•Engine: single J-2

•Thrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

•Fuel: Liquid hydrogen (LH2) 64,000 US gal (242 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 20,000 US gal (76 m3)

•Burn time: approx. 7 min

•Burnout altitude (for Saturn IB): orbit

 

Instrument Unit

 

Main article: Saturn V Instrument Unit

 

IBM built the Instrument Unit at the Space Systems Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Located at the top of the S-IVB stage, it consisted of a Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), an inertial platform, accelerometers, a tracking, telemetry and command system and associated environmental controls. It controlled the entire rocket from just before liftoff until battery depletion. Like other rocket guidance systems, it maintained its state vector (position and velocity estimates) by integrating accelerometer measurements, sent firing and steering commands to the main engines and auxiliary thrusters, and fired the appropriate ordnance and solid rocket motors during staging and payload separation events.

 

As with other rockets, a completely independent and redundant range safety system could be invoked by ground radio command to terminate thrust and to destroy the vehicle should it malfunction and threaten people or property on the ground. In the Saturn IB and V, the range safety system was permanently disabled by ground command after safely reaching orbit. This was done to ensure that the S-IVB stage would not inadvertently rupture and create a cloud of debris in orbit that could endanger the crew of the Apollo CSM.

 

Launch Sequence Events

 

•Launch Event: Ignition Command

oTime (s): -3.02

•Launch Event: First Motion

oTime (s): -0.19

•Launch Event: Liftoff

oTime (s): 0.00

•Launch Event: Initiate Pitch Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: Initiate Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: End Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 38.0

•Launch Event: Mach One

oTime (s): 62.18

oAltitude (km): 7.63

•Launch Event: Max Q

oTime (s): 75.5

oAltitude (km): 12.16.

•Launch Event: Freeze Tilt

oTime: 134.40..

•Launch Event: Inboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 140.65..

•Launch Event: Outboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 144.32

•Launch Event: Ullage Rockets Ignition

oTime (s): 145.37

•Launch Event: S-IB / S-IVB Separation

oTime (s): 145.59

•Launch Event: S-IVB Ignition

oTime (s): 146.97

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Burnout

oTime (s): 148.33

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Jettison

oTime (s): 156.58

•Launch Event: Jettison LES

oTime (s): 163.28

•Launch Event: Start Pitch Over

oTime (s): 613.95

•Launch Event: S-IVB Cutoff

oTime (s): 616.76

•Launch Event: Orbit Insertion

oTime (s): 626.76

•Launch Event: Start S/C Sep Sequence

oTime (s): 663.11

•Launch Event: Spacecraft Separation

oTime (s): 728.31

 

Saturn IB Vehicles and Launches

 

The first five Saturn IB launches for the Apollo program were made from LC-34 and LC-37, Cape Kennedy Air Force Station.

 

The Saturn IB was used between 1973 and 1975 for three manned Skylab flights, and one Apollo-Soyuz Test Project flight. This final production run did not have alternating black and white S-IB stage tanks, or vertical stripes on the S-IVB aft tank skirt, which were present on the earlier vehicles. Since LC-34 and 37 were inactive by then, these launches utilized Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39B. Mobile Launcher Platform No. 1 was modified, adding an elevated platform known as the “milkstool” to accommodate the height differential between the Saturn IB and the much larger Saturn V. This enabled alignment of the Launch Umbilical Tower’s access arms to accommodate crew access, fueling, and ground electrical connections for the Apollo spacecraft and S-IVB upper stage. The tower’s second stage access arms were modified to service the S-IB first stage.

 

SA-201

 

•Mission: AS-201

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,820

oLaunch Date: February 26, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM (Command/Service Module).

 

SA-203

 

•Mission: AS-203

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): None

oLaunch Date: July 5, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned test of unburned LH2 behavior in orbit to support S-IVB-500 restart design

 

SA-202

 

•Mission: AS-202

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 25,810

oLaunch Date: August 25, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM

 

SA-204

 

•Mission: Apollo 1

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,412

oNotes: Was to be first manned orbital test of Block I CSM. Cabin fire killed astronauts and damaged CM during dress rehearsal for planned February 21, 1967 launch.

•Mission: Apollo 5

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 14,360

oLaunch Date: January 22, 1968

oNotes: Unmanned orbital test of Lunar Module, used Apollo 1 launch vehicle.

 

SA-205

 

•Mission: Apollo 7

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,520

oLaunch Date: October 11, 1968

oNotes: Manned orbital test of Block II CSM.

 

SA-206

 

•Mission: Skylab 2

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 19,979

oLaunch Date: May 25, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried first crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-207

 

•Mission: Skylab 3

•Spacecraft Mass (kg): 20,121

•Launch Date: July 28, 1973

•Notes: Block II CSM ferried second crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-208

 

•Mission: AS-208

oNotes: Standby Skylab 3 rescue CSM-119; not needed.

•Mission: Skylab 4

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,847

oLaunch Date: November 16, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried third crew to Skylab orbital workshop.

 

SA-209

 

•Mission: AS-209

oNotes: Standby Skylab 4 and later Apollo-Soyuz rescue CSM-119. Not needed, currently on display in the KSC rocket garden.

•Mission: Skylab 5

oNotes: Planned CSM mission to lift Skylab workshop’s orbit to endure until Space Shuttle ready to fly; cancelled.

 

SA-210

 

•Mission: ASTP

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,780

oLaunch Date: July 15, 1975

oNotes: Apollo CSM with special docking adapter module, rendezvoused with Soyuz 19. Last Saturn IB flight.

 

SA-211

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage at the Alabama Welcome Center on I-65 in Ardmore, Alabama. S-IVB stage rests with Skylab underwater training simulator hardware and is on display outdoors at the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

SA-212

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage scrapped. S-IVB stage converted to Skylab space station.

 

SA-213:

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

SA-214

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

For earlier launches of vehicles in the Saturn I series, see the list in the Saturn I article.

 

Saturn IB Rockets on Display

 

Currently there are three locations where Saturn IB vehicles (or parts thereof) are on display:

 

•SA-209 is on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, with the Apollo Facilities Verification Vehicle. Due to severe corrosion, the first stage engines and Service Module were replaced with fabricated duplicates in 1993–1994.

•The SA-211 first stage is on display with the S-IVB-S “Battleship” static test stage stacked in a launch-ready condition at the Alabama Welcome Center on Interstate 65 in Ardmore, Alabama. 34.954548°N 86.89193°W

•The SA-211 S-IVB stage was mated with the Skylab underwater training docking adapter and Apollo Telescope Mount and is on display in the Rocket Garden of the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

 

Cost

 

In 1972, the cost of a Saturn IB including launch was US$55,000,000 (equivalent to $315,000,000 in 2016).

 

AS 209

 

Black-and-white picture from inside a tall building with a space capsule being lifted from the top of a rocket

 

The Skylab Rescue CSM is removed from its Saturn IB Launch vehicle following the successful recovery of Skylab 4.

 

After the Skylab 4 launch, another rescue flight was assembled as a backup contingency. The Saturn IB rocket AS 209 was assembled in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39 for possible use. It also used the CSM 119 Command Module that was to be launched with Brand and Lind.

 

There were also plans for a short 20-day Skylab 5 flight that would use this backup CSM. The crew, likely consisting of Brand, Lind, and Skylab backup Science Pilot William B. Lenoir, would have performed some scientific research and closed out the station until the Space Shuttle was operational. However, the extension of Skylab 4 from fifty-six to eighty-four days obviated the need for the additional mission.

 

AS 209 and CSM 119 were later used as a backup to the ASTP mission. Both are now on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex. CSM 119 is located in the Apollo/Saturn V Center. The Saturn IB booster for AS 209 is currently located in the Visitor Complex’s Rocket Garden. It is displayed horizontally, mated to an Apollo FVV (Facilities Verification Vehicle) which was formerly displayed at the VAB’s Visitor Complex c. October 1968. In 2007, after sitting untouched for over 30 years, NASA engineers used the command module for studies on the spacecraft’s life support adapter assembly—the projecting aerodynamic fairing that allows oxygen, water, and electricity to flow from the Service Module to the Command Module. This was in support of the design and construction of a similar system on the new Orion spacecraft, which resembles the Skylab Rescue configuration.

Credit: ESA-CNES-Arianespace / Optique Vidéo du CSG - S. Martin

The payload fairing containing the Orbital ATK Cygnus pressurized cargo module is lifted by crane at the United Launch Alliance (ULA) Vertical Integration Facility at Space Launch Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. The payload will be hoisted up and mated to the ULA Atlas V rocket. The Orbital ATK CRS-7 commercial resupply services mission to the International Space Station is scheduled to launch atop the Atlas V from pad 41. Cygnus will deliver 7,600 pounds of supplies, equipment and scientific research materials to the space station. Photo credit: United Launch Alliance

NASA image use policy.

 

Hoisting the upper composite with the payloads to be launched on the first Ariane 6 at Europe’s Spaceport in French Guiana, 14 June 2024.

 

Inside the rocket’s fairing – a nosecone that splits into two vertically after liftoff – is hardware from experiments, deployers, satellites and reentry capsules. This plethora of missions are being supplied by space agencies, commercial companies, research institutes, universities and young professionals.

 

Europe’s newest rocket soon launches, taking with it many space missions, each with a unique objective, destination and team at home, cheering them on. Whether launching new satellites to look back and study Earth, peer out to deep space or test important new technologies in orbit, Ariane 6’s first flight will showcase the versatility and flexibility of this impressive, heavy-lift launcher.

 

Ariane 6 is Europe’s newest heavy-lift rocket, designed to provide great power and flexibility at a lower cost than its predecessors. The launcher’s configuration – with an upgraded main stage, a choice of either two or four powerful boosters and a new restartable upper stage – will provide Europe with greater efficiency and possibility as it can launch multiple missions into different orbits on a single flight, while its upper stage will deorbit itself at the end of mission.

 

CREDIT: ESA–L. Bourgeon

They called her the Flying Fortress; she was a mighty fighter capable of carrying a lethal payload of two to four tons of bombs into hostile territory. She bristled with defensive machine guns, so much so that the Germans called her the "flying porcupine." Even though the Flying Fortress would be eclipsed by increasingly leviathan machines in the form of the B-29, B-36, and B-52, the majestic airplane to this day commands respect. Some 12,731 examples were built. To those who love her, she is still the Queen of the Skies. Yet, inconceivable as it may seem, only 47 survive today. (Final Cut lists 48 aircraft; however, not long after this edition was published, "Liberty Bell" was destroyed in an emergency landing after a catastrophic engine failure.) These four dozen airplanes are the lucky few that made the Final Cut. Even more remarkable, only two of these bombers actually served in combat; the heroic survivors after the War ended up being unceremoniously scrapped or used as target practice during the Cold War.

 

It is important to understand what this book is and what it is not. "Final Cut" is not a history of the development of the B-17. It is, however, a highly detailed chronicle of the live of the bomber *after* the War, something very few other books cover. It is not a coffee table book with glossy pictures; none are in color. It's not eye candy. Rather, it's something much more substantial, an expertly researched chronology of those lucky few survivors. It is a book for die-hard fans of the Boeing B-17, those of us nerdy enough to want to know about those 48 airplanes. My five-star rating is an indication that I count myself among those B-17 geeks.

 

Each individual aircraft gets her own chapter, documenting its history and current status, both museum pieces and flying warbirds. Appendices cover all the B-17s that were transferred to the civil register, with additional information on specific roles, such as tankers and movie stars. This, the fourth (2011) edition contains important updates over the previous three and is, therefore, the best one to have. As of this writing (November 2015), a new edition is in the planning. Does that mean that the fourth edition will be obsolete? Currently, in the world of the B-17, there have been very few changes. The most significant development is the loss of "Liberty Belle." However, having the history of that aircraft offers an important memorial. Work continues on the painstaking rebuilding of "Desert Rat" and "Champaign Lady." So labor-intensive are these masterful restorations, it will be quite a time before either one takes to the sky again. So this, the fourth edition, should be reasonably current for some years to come, making it a worthwhile investment.

Inside a clean room in Building 1555 at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, technicians install the second half of the Northrop Grumman Pegasus XL payload fairing around NASA's Ionospheric Connection Explorer (ICON) on Oct. 4, 2018. ICON is being prepared for its launch on the Pegasus XL, which is attached to the company's L-1011 Stargazer aircraft, from the Skid Strip at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. Launch is scheduled for Oct. 26. ICON will study the frontier of space - the dynamic zone high in Earth's atmosphere where terrestrial weather from below meets space weather above. The explorer will help determine the physics of Earth's space environment and pave the way for mitigating its effects on our technology, communications systems and society. Photo credit: NASA/Dan Quinajon

NASA image use policy.

 

Copyright © Daniel Ruyle

Burying beetles exhibit complex behavior. The orange tips of this beetle's antennae are chemoreceptors capable of detecting a dead animal from miles away. When detected, the beetle flies to the carcass, for example a dead mouse, and waits for another beetle of the opposite sex to arrive. When it has found a mate they dig and bury the animal together and the female lays eggs in a quantity suitable to the size of the food source. The parents will cull excess larvae if too many eggs have been laid. Together the parents will protect their progeny from ants, etc., and even feed the larvae with regurgitated food. Such eusocial behavior is very uncommon in insects, except among wasps, bees, and ants.

The payload of mites have a symbiotic relationship. In most cases, they feed on any competing larvae, such as blowflies, while leaving the burying beetle larvae alone.

The Air Force's Orbital Test Vehicle (OTV) mission, encapsulated inside a 5-meter payload fairing, is mated to its United Launch Alliance (ULA) Atlas V booster inside the Mobile Service Tower at Cape Canaveral's Space Launch Complex-41. Photo credit: United Launch Alliance

Inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, illumination testing is underway on the power-producing solar arrays for the agency’s Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security-Regolith Explorer, or OSIRIS-REx spacecraft. Targeted for liftoff Sept. 8, 2016, OSIRIS-Rex will be the first U.S. mission to sample an asteroid, retrieve at least two ounces of surface material and return it to Earth for study. The asteroid, Bennu, may hold clues to the origin of the solar system and the source of water and organic molecules found on Earth.

Photo credit: NASA/Cory Huston

NASA image use policy.

 

A United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket blasts off from Space Launch Complex-41 with NASAs Tracking and Data Relay Satellite (TDRS-K) payload. This was the first of 13 ULA launches scheduled for 2013, the 35th Atlas V mission, and the 67th ULA launch.

 

Photo courtesy United Launch Alliance

 

-----

 

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -- The first of NASA's three next-generation

Tracking and Data Relay Satellites (TDRS), known as TDRS-K, launched

at 8:48 p.m. EST Wednesday from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in

Florida.

 

"TDRS-K bolsters our network of satellites that provides essential

communications to support space exploration," said Badri Younes,

deputy associate administrator for Space Communications and

Navigation at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "It will improve the

overall health and longevity of our system."

 

The TDRS system provides tracking, telemetry, command and

high-bandwidth data return services for numerous science and human

exploration missions orbiting Earth. These include the International

Space Station and NASA's Hubble Space Telescope.

 

"With this launch, NASA has begun the replenishment of our aging space

network," said Jeffrey Gramling, TDRS project manager. "This addition

to our current fleet of seven will provide even greater capabilities

to a network that has become key to enabling many of NASA's

scientific discoveries."

 

TDRS-K was lifted into orbit aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas V

rocket from Space Launch Complex-41. After a three-month test phase,

NASA will accept the spacecraft for additional evaluation before

putting the satellite into service.

 

The TDRS-K spacecraft includes several modifications from older

satellites in the TDRS system, including redesigned

telecommunications payload electronics and a high-performance solar

panel designed for more spacecraft power to meet growing S-band

requirements. Another significant design change, the return to

ground-based processing of data, will allow the system to service

more customers with evolving communication requirements.

 

The next TDRS spacecraft, TDRS-L, is scheduled for launch in 2014.

TDRS-M's manufacturing process will be completed in 2015.

 

NASA's Space Communications and Navigation Program, part of the Human

Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate at the agency's

Headquarters in Washington, is responsible for the space network. The

TDRS Project Office at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in

Greenbelt, Md., manages the TDRS development program. Launch services

were provided by United Launch Alliance. NASA's Launch Services

Program at the Kennedy Space Center was responsible for acquisition

of launch services.

 

For more information about TDRS, visit:

 

www.nasa.gov/tdrs

 

NASA image use policy.

 

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center enables NASA’s mission through four scientific endeavors: Earth Science, Heliophysics, Solar System Exploration, and Astrophysics. Goddard plays a leading role in NASA’s accomplishments by contributing compelling scientific knowledge to advance the Agency’s mission.

 

Follow us on Twitter

 

Like us on Facebook

 

Find us on Instagram

Saturn IB SA-209

 

Dominating the Rocket Garden is a Saturn IB, SA-209. This booster, designated as the booster for a Skylab rescue mission should it prove necessary and later as a backup booster for the ASTP mission, it was never used for its intended purpose and today is one of two remaining Saturn IBs.

 

•General Specifications

oFunction: Apollo spacecraft development; S-IVB stage development in support of Saturn V; Skylab crew launcher

oManufacturer: Chrysler (S-IB); Douglas (S-IVB)

oCountry of Origin: United States

•Size

oHeight141.6 ft (43.2 m) without payload

oDiameter: 21.67 ft (6.61 m)

oMass: 1,300,220 lb (589,770 kg) without payload

oStages: 2

•Capacity

oPayload to LEO: 46,000 lb (21,000 kg)

•Launch History

oStatus: Retired

oLaunch Sites: LC-37 & LC-34, Cape Canaveral; LC-39B, Kennedy Space Center

oTotal Launches: 9

oSuccesses: 9

oFailures: 0

oFirst Flight: February 26, 1966

oLast Flight: July 15, 1975

oNotable Payloads: Unmanned Apollo CSM; Unmanned Apollo LM; Manned Apollo CSM

•First Stage – S-IB

oLength: 80.17 feet (24.44 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 92,500 pounds (42,000 kg)

oGross mass: 973,000 pounds (441,000 kg)

oPropellant mass: 880,500 pounds (399,400 kg)

oEngines: 8 × Rocketdyne H-1

oThrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

oSpecific impulse: 272 seconds (2.67 km/s)

oBurn time: 150 seconds

oFuel: RP-1/LOX

•Second Stage – S-IVB-200

oLength: 58.42 feet (17.81 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 23,400 pounds (10,600 kg)

oGross mass: 251,900 pounds (114,300 kg)

oPropellant mass: 228,500 pounds (103,600 kg)

oEngines: Rocketdyne J-2

oThrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

oSpecific Impulse: 420 seconds (4.1 km/s)

oBurn Time: 480 seconds

oFuel: LH2 / LOX

 

The Saturn IB (pronounced “one B”, also known as the Uprated Saturn I) was an American launch vehicle commissioned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the Apollo program. It replaced the S-IV second stage of the Saturn I with the much more powerful S-IVB, able to launch a partially fueled Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) or a fully fueled Lunar Module (LM) into low Earth orbit for early flight tests before the larger Saturn V needed for lunar flight was ready.

 

By sharing the S-IVB upper stage, the Saturn IB and Saturn V provided a common interface to the Apollo spacecraft. The only major difference was that the S-IVB on the Saturn V burned only part of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit, so it could be restarted for trans-lunar injection. The S-IVB on the Saturn IB needed all of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit.

 

The Saturn IB launched two unmanned CSM suborbital flights, one unmanned LM orbital flight, and the first manned CSM orbital mission (first planned as Apollo 1, later flown as Apollo 7). It also launched one orbital mission, AS-203, without a payload so the S-IVB would have residual liquid hydrogen fuel. This mission supported the design of the restartable version of the S-IVB used in the Saturn V, by observing the behavior of the liquid hydrogen in weightlessness.

 

In 1973, the year after the Apollo lunar program ended, three Apollo CSM/Saturn IBs ferried crews to the Skylab space station. In 1975, one last Apollo/Saturn IB launched the Apollo portion of the joint US-USSR Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP). A backup Apollo CSM/Saturn IB was assembled and made ready for a Skylab rescue mission, but never flown.

 

The remaining Saturn IBs in NASA’s inventory were scrapped after the ASTP mission, as no use could be found for them and all heavy lift needs of the US space program could be serviced by the cheaper and more versatile Titan III family.

 

History

 

In 1959, NASA’s Silverstein Committee issued recommendations to develop the Saturn class launch vehicles, growing from the C-1. When the Apollo program was started in 1961 with the goal of landing men on the Moon, NASA chose the Saturn I for Earth orbital test missions. However, the Saturn I’s payload limit of 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg) would allow testing of only the Command Module with a smaller propulsion module attached, as the Apollo Command/Service Module would have a dry weight of at least 26,300 pounds (11,900 kg), in addition to service propulsion and reaction control fuel. In July 1962, NASA announced selection of the C-5 for the lunar landing mission, and decided to develop another launch vehicle by upgrading the Saturn I, replacing its S-IV second stage with the S-IVB, which would also be modified for use as the Saturn V third stage. The S-I first stage would also be upgraded to the S-IB by improving the thrust of its engines and removing some weight. The new Saturn IB, with a payload capability of at least 35,000 pounds (16,000 kg), would replace the Saturn I for Earth orbit testing, allowing the Command/Service Module to be flown with a partial fuel load. It would also allow launching the 32,000-pound (15,000 kg) Lunar Excursion Module separately for unmanned and manned Earth orbital testing, before the Saturn V was ready to be flown. It would also give early development to the third stage.

 

On May 12, 1966, NASA announced the vehicle’s name would be changed to the “Uprated Saturn I”, at the same time the “Lunar Excursion Module” was renamed the Lunar Module. However, the “Uprated Saturn I” name was reverted to Saturn IB on December 2, 1967.

 

By the time it was developed, the Saturn IB payload capability had increased to 41,000 pounds (19,000 kg). By 1973, when it was used to launch three Skylab missions, the first-stage engine had been upgraded further, raising the payload capability to 46,000 pounds (21,000 kg).

 

Specifications

 

Launch vehicle

 

ParameterS-IB 1st StageS-IVB-200 2nd StageInstrument Unit

Height80.17 ft (24.44 m)58.42 ft (17.81 m)3.00 ft (0.91 m)

Diameter21.42 ft (6.53 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)

Structural mass92,500 lb (42,000 kg)23,400 lb (10,600 kg)4,400 lb (2,000 kg)

PropellantRP-1 / LOXLH2 / LOXN/A

Propellant mass880,500 lb (399,400 kg)228,500 lb (103,600 kg)N/A

EnginesEight - H-1One - J-2N/A

Thrust1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN) sea level200,000 lbf (890 kN) vacuumN/A

Burn duration150 s480 sN/A

Specific impulse272 s (2.66 kN·s/kg) sea level420 s (4.12 kN·s/kg) vacuumN/A

ContractorChryslerDouglasIBM

 

Payload Configurations

 

ParameterCommand/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Launch Escape System mass9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

Payload Configurations

 

Command/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Parameter: Launch Escape System mass

Command/Service Module 9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Parameter: Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Parameter: Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

 

S-IB Stage

 

The S-IB stage was built by the Chrysler corporation at the Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans. It was powered by eight Rocketdyne H-1 rocket engines burning RP-1 fuel with liquid oxygen (LOX). Eight Redstone tanks (four holding fuel and four holding LOX) were clustered around a Jupiter rocket LOX tank. The four outboard engines were mounted on gimbals, allowing them to be steered to control the rocket. Eight fins surrounding the base thrust structure provided aerodynamic stability and control.

 

•Height: 80.17 ft. (24.44 m)

•Diameter: 21.42 ft. (6.53 m)

•Number of fins: 8

•Finspan: 39.42 ft. (12.02 m)

•Engines: 8 Rocketdyne H-1

•Thrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

•Fuel: RP-1 (Refined kerosene) 41,000 US gal (155 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 66,277 US gal (251 m3) nominal capacity including 1.5% ullage volume (43,284 US gal/163 m3 in four outer tanks plus 22,993 US gal/87 m3 in center tank)

•Burn time: 2.5 min

•Burnout altitude: 37 nmi (69 km)

 

S-IVB-200 Stage

 

The S-IVB was built by the Douglas Aircraft Company at Huntington Beach, California. The S-IVB-200 model was similar to the S-IVB-500 third stage used on the Saturn V, with the exception of the interstage adapter, smaller auxiliary propulsion control modules, and lack of on-orbit engine restart capability. It was powered by a single Rocketdyne J-2 engine. The fuel and oxidizer tanks shared a common bulkhead, which saved about ten tons of weight and reduced vehicle length over ten feet.

 

•Height: 58.42 ft. (17.81 m)

•Diameter: 21.67 ft. (6.61 m)

•Engine: single J-2

•Thrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

•Fuel: Liquid hydrogen (LH2) 64,000 US gal (242 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 20,000 US gal (76 m3)

•Burn time: approx. 7 min

•Burnout altitude (for Saturn IB): orbit

 

Instrument Unit

 

Main article: Saturn V Instrument Unit

 

IBM built the Instrument Unit at the Space Systems Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Located at the top of the S-IVB stage, it consisted of a Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), an inertial platform, accelerometers, a tracking, telemetry and command system and associated environmental controls. It controlled the entire rocket from just before liftoff until battery depletion. Like other rocket guidance systems, it maintained its state vector (position and velocity estimates) by integrating accelerometer measurements, sent firing and steering commands to the main engines and auxiliary thrusters, and fired the appropriate ordnance and solid rocket motors during staging and payload separation events.

 

As with other rockets, a completely independent and redundant range safety system could be invoked by ground radio command to terminate thrust and to destroy the vehicle should it malfunction and threaten people or property on the ground. In the Saturn IB and V, the range safety system was permanently disabled by ground command after safely reaching orbit. This was done to ensure that the S-IVB stage would not inadvertently rupture and create a cloud of debris in orbit that could endanger the crew of the Apollo CSM.

 

Launch Sequence Events

 

•Launch Event: Ignition Command

oTime (s): -3.02

•Launch Event: First Motion

oTime (s): -0.19

•Launch Event: Liftoff

oTime (s): 0.00

•Launch Event: Initiate Pitch Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: Initiate Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: End Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 38.0

•Launch Event: Mach One

oTime (s): 62.18

oAltitude (km): 7.63

•Launch Event: Max Q

oTime (s): 75.5

oAltitude (km): 12.16.

•Launch Event: Freeze Tilt

oTime: 134.40..

•Launch Event: Inboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 140.65..

•Launch Event: Outboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 144.32

•Launch Event: Ullage Rockets Ignition

oTime (s): 145.37

•Launch Event: S-IB / S-IVB Separation

oTime (s): 145.59

•Launch Event: S-IVB Ignition

oTime (s): 146.97

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Burnout

oTime (s): 148.33

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Jettison

oTime (s): 156.58

•Launch Event: Jettison LES

oTime (s): 163.28

•Launch Event: Start Pitch Over

oTime (s): 613.95

•Launch Event: S-IVB Cutoff

oTime (s): 616.76

•Launch Event: Orbit Insertion

oTime (s): 626.76

•Launch Event: Start S/C Sep Sequence

oTime (s): 663.11

•Launch Event: Spacecraft Separation

oTime (s): 728.31

 

Saturn IB Vehicles and Launches

 

The first five Saturn IB launches for the Apollo program were made from LC-34 and LC-37, Cape Kennedy Air Force Station.

 

The Saturn IB was used between 1973 and 1975 for three manned Skylab flights, and one Apollo-Soyuz Test Project flight. This final production run did not have alternating black and white S-IB stage tanks, or vertical stripes on the S-IVB aft tank skirt, which were present on the earlier vehicles. Since LC-34 and 37 were inactive by then, these launches utilized Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39B. Mobile Launcher Platform No. 1 was modified, adding an elevated platform known as the “milkstool” to accommodate the height differential between the Saturn IB and the much larger Saturn V. This enabled alignment of the Launch Umbilical Tower’s access arms to accommodate crew access, fueling, and ground electrical connections for the Apollo spacecraft and S-IVB upper stage. The tower’s second stage access arms were modified to service the S-IB first stage.

 

SA-201

 

•Mission: AS-201

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,820

oLaunch Date: February 26, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM (Command/Service Module).

 

SA-203

 

•Mission: AS-203

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): None

oLaunch Date: July 5, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned test of unburned LH2 behavior in orbit to support S-IVB-500 restart design

 

SA-202

 

•Mission: AS-202

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 25,810

oLaunch Date: August 25, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM

 

SA-204

 

•Mission: Apollo 1

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,412

oNotes: Was to be first manned orbital test of Block I CSM. Cabin fire killed astronauts and damaged CM during dress rehearsal for planned February 21, 1967 launch.

•Mission: Apollo 5

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 14,360

oLaunch Date: January 22, 1968

oNotes: Unmanned orbital test of Lunar Module, used Apollo 1 launch vehicle.

 

SA-205

 

•Mission: Apollo 7

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,520

oLaunch Date: October 11, 1968

oNotes: Manned orbital test of Block II CSM.

 

SA-206

 

•Mission: Skylab 2

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 19,979

oLaunch Date: May 25, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried first crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-207

 

•Mission: Skylab 3

•Spacecraft Mass (kg): 20,121

•Launch Date: July 28, 1973

•Notes: Block II CSM ferried second crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-208

 

•Mission: AS-208

oNotes: Standby Skylab 3 rescue CSM-119; not needed.

•Mission: Skylab 4

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,847

oLaunch Date: November 16, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried third crew to Skylab orbital workshop.

 

SA-209

 

•Mission: AS-209

oNotes: Standby Skylab 4 and later Apollo-Soyuz rescue CSM-119. Not needed, currently on display in the KSC rocket garden.

•Mission: Skylab 5

oNotes: Planned CSM mission to lift Skylab workshop’s orbit to endure until Space Shuttle ready to fly; cancelled.

 

SA-210

 

•Mission: ASTP

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,780

oLaunch Date: July 15, 1975

oNotes: Apollo CSM with special docking adapter module, rendezvoused with Soyuz 19. Last Saturn IB flight.

 

SA-211

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage at the Alabama Welcome Center on I-65 in Ardmore, Alabama. S-IVB stage rests with Skylab underwater training simulator hardware and is on display outdoors at the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

SA-212

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage scrapped. S-IVB stage converted to Skylab space station.

 

SA-213:

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

SA-214

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

For earlier launches of vehicles in the Saturn I series, see the list in the Saturn I article.

 

Saturn IB Rockets on Display

 

Currently there are three locations where Saturn IB vehicles (or parts thereof) are on display:

 

•SA-209 is on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, with the Apollo Facilities Verification Vehicle. Due to severe corrosion, the first stage engines and Service Module were replaced with fabricated duplicates in 1993–1994.

•The SA-211 first stage is on display with the S-IVB-S “Battleship” static test stage stacked in a launch-ready condition at the Alabama Welcome Center on Interstate 65 in Ardmore, Alabama. 34.954548°N 86.89193°W

•The SA-211 S-IVB stage was mated with the Skylab underwater training docking adapter and Apollo Telescope Mount and is on display in the Rocket Garden of the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

 

Cost

 

In 1972, the cost of a Saturn IB including launch was US$55,000,000 (equivalent to $315,000,000 in 2016).

 

AS 209

 

Black-and-white picture from inside a tall building with a space capsule being lifted from the top of a rocket

 

The Skylab Rescue CSM is removed from its Saturn IB Launch vehicle following the successful recovery of Skylab 4.

 

After the Skylab 4 launch, another rescue flight was assembled as a backup contingency. The Saturn IB rocket AS 209 was assembled in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39 for possible use. It also used the CSM 119 Command Module that was to be launched with Brand and Lind.

 

There were also plans for a short 20-day Skylab 5 flight that would use this backup CSM. The crew, likely consisting of Brand, Lind, and Skylab backup Science Pilot William B. Lenoir, would have performed some scientific research and closed out the station until the Space Shuttle was operational. However, the extension of Skylab 4 from fifty-six to eighty-four days obviated the need for the additional mission.

 

AS 209 and CSM 119 were later used as a backup to the ASTP mission. Both are now on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex. CSM 119 is located in the Apollo/Saturn V Center. The Saturn IB booster for AS 209 is currently located in the Visitor Complex’s Rocket Garden. It is displayed horizontally, mated to an Apollo FVV (Facilities Verification Vehicle) which was formerly displayed at the VAB’s Visitor Complex c. October 1968. In 2007, after sitting untouched for over 30 years, NASA engineers used the command module for studies on the spacecraft’s life support adapter assembly—the projecting aerodynamic fairing that allows oxygen, water, and electricity to flow from the Service Module to the Command Module. This was in support of the design and construction of a similar system on the new Orion spacecraft, which resembles the Skylab Rescue configuration.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The Messerschmitt Me 262 F was a series of multi-purpose jet planes designed by Messerschmitt for the Luftwaffe that entered service during the final phase of the Second World War in Europe. The aircraft’s design was begun in the summer of 1943 under the project handle P.1099, intended as an improvement to the successful Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighter and also as a replacement for the Arado Ar 234 bomber/reconnaissance aircraft. The primary focus was on more payload, being either usable for more fuel (since early jet engines had poor mileage and therefore range and endurance) or for weapons, including bombs in an internal bomb bay that would enable the aircraft to fulfil a similar tactical role as the British de Havilland Mosquito. Beyond this high-speed bomber (Schnellbomber) variant, the P.1099 would also be a suitable basis for a fast reconnaissance plane, interceptors and night fighters, and trainer versions were also planned.

 

The Messerschmitt P.1099 was a 12 m long, conventional-looking aircraft with a wingspan of 12.6 m. It had a much wider fuselage than the Messerschmitt Me 262. It had a circular shape with a diameter of 1.7m (5 ft 6¾ in) and the cockpit was now moved closer to the aircraft’s nose, above the front landing gear well. The baseline aircraft featured a side-by-side cockpit for a crew of two, even though different layouts were envisioned for the specialized variants, including single-seaters. To save development time and to use existing jigs and tools as much as possible, the P.1099 retained the wings and the tail section of the Me 262A-2a. Despite a higher total weight (the P.1099’ MTOW was about 3 tons higher), the planned powerplants were initially two uprated Junkers Jumo 004 turbojet engines, later to be replaced by more powerful Heinkel HeS 011 turbojets.

 

In January 1944 the P.1099 was accepted by the RLM and received, despite the aircraft’s different structure, the designation “Me 262 F”. The first variant, the Me 262 F-1 (internally designated P.1099A), was the baseline aircraft under the handle “Jäger I”, a jet-powered single seat daytime fighter. There were three planned versions, differing mainly in armament: Version F-1a was armed with four MK 108 30 mm cannon in the lower fuselage, comparable with the earlier Me 262 A fighter, just with more fuel and ammunition. Version F-1b carried two MK 103 30 mm cannon with longer range, firepower and ammunition supply, and Version F-1c was a heavy daytime fighter with two MK 108 and two MK 103 cannon in the nose.

In parallel the Me 262 F-2 was developed as a more heavily armed and armored variant, as a dedicated heavy bomber interceptor (“Pulkjäger” or “Zerstörer”) under the handle “Jäger II”. Again, three versions were foreseen: Version F-2a would be armed with a single MK 108 cannon and a heavy MK 112 55 mm cannon in the nose. Version F-2b was the same, but it was armed with a MK 114 50 mm cannon instead of the Mk 112. Both were single seaters with a heavily armored cockpit and canopy.

The F-2c was a more thoroughly modified two-seater version; it was armed with a single MG151/20 in a small nose turret, a pair of Mk 103 in the rear of the cockpit firing up- and backwards and two defensive MG 131 in remote-controlled FDL 151 barbettes in the tail. Due to the significant changes this model had the internal project designation P.1099B.

Another two-seater, the F-2d, remained very close to the original baseline aircraft with a crew of two in a side-by-side cockpit. This aircraft was armed with the standard four MK 108 in the nose, plus one launch rail under each wing for Ruhrstahl X-4 guided missiles, which were launched and steered by the second crewman via a wire connection with the mothership. This variant did not come to fruition, however, after the X-4 missile project had been cancelled in early 1945.

 

All P.1099 fighters also had hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles each, a detail taken over from the Me 262 A, even though the fuel load had to be reduced to carry them. The radio equipment of all these versions would be a FuG 16, Peil G6, FuG 101 radio altimeter, FuBl 2 blind landing equipment, as well as the FuG 25a Erstling identification friend or foe transceiver.

 

Beyond these initial day fighter variants, further types based on the P.1099 airframe were envisioned, too. The F-3 was a dedicated night fighter version, developed in parallel to the Me 262 G. It was based on the F-2a heavy day fighter, but it carried a crew of two (the pilot and a rearward-facing radar operator) and was equipped with a FuG 240 “Berlin” radar set and a rotating dish antenna under a streamlined plywood cover in the nose. The armament consisted of four MK 108 under the nose, similar to the F-1a day fighter, plus two additional, upward-firing MK 108 cannon (“Schräge Musik”) in the rear fuselage.

Other proposed variants (with less priority, though) were the F-4 and the F-5, which were to become the basis for fast bombers and reconnaissance aircraft with only light defensive armament, typically only a pair of MG 131 in remote-controlled tail barbettes was to be carried. The F-4 resembled the baseline P.1099A, with two bomb bays in front of and behind the main landing gear wells and a crew of two seated side-by-side in a pressurized cockpit. Two MK 108 were carried in the nose, plus the MG 131 tail barbettes. The F-5 was similar but featured a glazed bomb aimer/navigator station in the nose instead of the MK 108’s and the glazing above the pilot’s station was reduced and asymmetrical. In both bomber variants the fuselage tanks were re-arranged to make room for a single SC 1.200 in the front bomb bay, but combinations of smaller bombs could be carried, too. Alternatively, mounts for up to three cameras or a 1.350 l auxiliary tank for extended range could be carried in the bays, too.

 

Initial flight tests of the Me 262 F in late 1944 showed severe directional instability: especially after fuel and ammunition had been depleted and the center of gravity shifted the aircraft tended to become nose-heavy and ditch down if it was not carefully monitored and trimmed by the pilot. To cope with this problem, the engine mounts were modified, so that the CoG was shifted back. Compared with the original Me 262 the engines were placed roughly 900 mm (35.5 in) further back under the wings. The emptying sequence of the fuselage tanks was also changed, and this mostly mended the problems. Another measure to mend the directional instability issues was the enlargement of the tail surfaces, even though later production aircraft frequently had smaller Me 262 A stabilizers fitted due to material shortages and simple lack of parts.- However, due to the higher weight the Me 262 F’s handling and agility were very limited – but most of its intended roles rather relied on speed, anyway, so that dogfights could be avoided.

 

From 1944 on the war situation worsened considerably, and production of the new Me 262 F superseded the A variant only on selected production lines. A disused mine complex under the Walpersberg mountain was adapted for the production of complete aircraft. These were hauled to the flat top of the hill where a runway had been cleared and flown out. Between 20 and 30 Me 262 Fs were built here until early 1946, primarily fighters, the underground factory being overrun by Allied troops before it could reach a meaningful output. Wings were produced in Germany's oldest motorway tunnel at Engelberg, to the west of Stuttgart. At B8 Bergkristall-Esche II, a vast network of tunnels was excavated beneath St. Georgen/Gusen, Austria, where fully equipped fuselages for the Me 262 at a planned monthly rate of 450 units on large assembly lines were to be produced from early 1945.

 

After the type’s introduction to frontline units in early 1945 further handling problems arose through the aircraft’ weight, resulting from its high wing load. Both starting and landing run were excessive, so that the number of airfields from which it could be operated was relatively small. No real short-term solution could be found without fully re-designing the wings, so that RATO bottles were frequently used to get a fully loaded Me 262 F up into the air from standard airfields. These were typically fitted to racks which were mounted under the fuselage, flanking the rear bomb bay.

The Me 262 F’s landing speed was dangerously high, too. A retrofittable brake parachute, housed in a simple tubular fairing under the tail, was developed to reduce the landing distance and save brakes, which frequently overheated and could set the landed aircraft aflame.

 

From the Me 262 F-2a “Pulkzerstörer I”, only a small number were built and eventually entered service. Its main armament, the MK 112, was a heavy German machine cannon produced by Rheinmetall-Borsig from 1945 on – in fact, the MK 112 was basically a scaled-up MK 108, a very compact weapon with relatively low weight. The MK 112 had a caliber of 55 mm and thus fired much larger shells than the 30 mm MK 108, but the rate of fire was significantly lower (300 rounds / min compared to about 600-660 rounds / min of the MK 108). This large-caliber gun was designed primarily to combat heavy bombers, its rate of fire would have been too slow for effective aerial battles with escort fighters – but the Me 262 F would not have been a dogfighter, anyway, so that the “hit-and-run” mission profile suited the aircraft well. Fire tests showed that a single MK 112 hit with mine grenades could destroy a bomber, and with a rate of fire of five shells per second this weapon could inflict considerably higher losses on the incoming streams of Allied bombers compared to other on-board weapons used on the German side. Only the unguided R4M missiles were as effective, but the MK 112 offered considerably higher accuracy and the opportunity to execute more than just a single attack run on an incoming bomber formation.

The MK 112 was mounted in the lower starboard section of the Me 262 F-2a’s nose, its barrel protruded more than 2 m (7 ft) from its nose. The gun’s drum magazine with sixty rounds partly took up the rear space of the cockpit behind the pilot and the gun mount even used up space of the weapon bay on port side, so that only a single MK 108 with 100 rounds as an additional weapon was mounted in the lower port side weapon bay.

Its sister, the Me 262 F-2b, remained on the drawing board, because its main weapon, the 50 mm MK 114 autocannon that had been derived from the 5 cm Pak 38 anti-tank gun, had turned out to be over-complicated, overweight and unreliable. A refined version was developed as the MK 214A, though, but after flight test from February 1945, but the weapon was not deployed operationally.

 

Only a handful Me 262 F-2a Pulkzerstörer were eventually fielded and operated before the end of hostilities – beyond the low production numbers the lack of fuel and loss of suitable airfields highly limited the aircraft’s potential. Probably less than ten were used by operational units, including JG 53 “Pik As”, in which they served alongside other interceptors, including other Me 262 variants. Typically, bomber formations were approached from the side of a bomber formation, where their silhouettes were widest, and while still out of range of the bombers' machine guns. This broadside-attack tactic was very effective, and the aircraft’s high speed allowed the interceptors to turn around 180° and make at least a second attack run from the opposite side, before the machines dashed off and returned to their bases.

  

General characteristics

Crew: One

Length: 14,32 m (46 ft 11 in) overall

12,00 m (39 ft 3¾ in) fuselage only, w/o brake parachute housing

Wingspan: 12,61 m (41 ft 3¾ in)

Height: 4,43 m (14 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 24,2 m² (236 sq ft)

Empty weight: 5.061 kg (11,148 lb)

Loaded weight: 8.762 kg (19,300 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 10.062 kg (22,163 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Junkers Jumo 004 C turbojets with 12 kN (2,697 lb st) each

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 930 km/h (577 mph, 505 kn)

Cruising speed: 805 km/h (500 mph, 438 kn) at 6.500 m (21,290 ft)

Range: 1.340 km (830 ml, 728 nm) at 6000 m with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 11,450 m (37,570 ft)

Rate of climb: 18 m/s (3,540 ft/min) at max. weight

 

Armament:

1× 55 mm (1.96 in) MK 112 machine cannon with 60 rounds

1× 30 mm (1.18 in) MK 108 machine cannon with 100 rounds

Hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles

  

The kit and its assembly:

This became a submission to the late 2021 “Gunships” group build at whatifmodellers.com – what would such a competition be without at least one gun-toting German Luft ’46 interceptor? The Messerschmitt P.1099 lent itself for such a build. Since 1996 Revell offers a 1:72 IP model kit of this paper aircraft, depicting more or less the two planned versions: a basic single-seat day fighter and a heavy two-seater Zerstörer, both based on the same basis.

 

This what-if model was based on Revell’s interpretation of the P.1099A, and the kit goes together well. Fit is very good, even though some designs are IMHO a bit dubious. The kit’s weakest point: Revell unfortunately missed the important detail of the modified engine nacelles: the kit comes with standard Me 262 wings and engines, but due to CoG reasons the P.1099 would have had its engines moved back by about 900 mm, as mentioned in the background. I corrected this on this build with some PSR – sounds simple, but since the nacelles are not expected to be stuck to the wings in their new position roughly 1 cm further back, some serious bodywork had to be done.

 

Otherwise the kit was basically built OOB. I just left away the inner wheels from the main landing gear because I found the twin wheels to be “too much” for this upgraded Me 262. The P.1099 might have been heavier than the Me 262, but…? And the wheels’ tractor-like tread design looks IMHO out of place, too, so that I replaced them with a pair of MiG-21 wheels, left over from a KP kit.

 

The cockpit was taken OOB, even though I have doubts concerning the canopy. And when you look at mockup pictures of the P.1099 you realize that cockpit access had been facilitated through a side door at starboard, similar to the D. H. Mosquito. The cockpit tub does not consider this hatch at all, and the engraved door on the fuselage (it’s actually there!) is so tiny that only a Halfling might use it?

Well, I stuck with it “as is” and just added a pilot figure (specifically from a Matchbox Hawker tempest, because it is one of the rare cases that you get a WWII pilot wearing an oxygen mask) and a “barrel” behind the bulbous pilot seat because there’s a lot of free space in this single seat variant that is otherwise occupied by a rear gunner in Revell’s P.1099B kit. I also have doubts concerning the kit’s canopy, since the original P.1099 had a cockpit for two seated side-by-side, with a canopy that resembled the D.H. Mosquito’s a lot. I am also not certain about the stabilizers – the kit comes with standard Me 262 parts, but trustworthy sources I consulted suggest that not only the fin had been enlarged (depicted well in Revell’s kit), but also the stabilizers? To improve this, I implanted a pair of modified stabilizers that came from a Heller PZL P.23 light bomber. Sounds odd, but they were a very good match in size, shape and thickness!

 

The only major modification concerns the armament, even though it became just a “graft-on” solution. On the lower left side, the upper gun port was PSRed away. On the right side I added a bulged fairing for the MK 112. It was sculpted from a Matchbox Saab J29 drop tank and blended into the hull with PSR. Protruding spent cases fairings were added for both guns. The MK 112 gun barrel is a resin piece, left over from a ModelTrans tank conversion set and actually depicts a German 55 mm gun, so that this became a perfect donor piece.

 

Since the airframe still looked rather clean and boring I finally added a pair of JATO bottle racks to the rear fuselage (scratched from styrene profile but left empty) and a brake parachute fairing under the fin, carved from a piece of sprue.

 

Furthermore, a display adapter was installed into the fuselage for in-flight pictures.

  

Painting and markings:

This became a challenge, because I wanted a rather unusual livery, neither a standard RLM 81/82/76 late-war combo nor an improvised-cammo-over-bare-metal finish. After some research I settled upon something that was actually carried by some He 177 bombers around 1944: a uniform RLM 74 (Graugrün, Humbrol 245) upper surface with “cloudy” mottles in RLM 76 (Humbrol 247). This appears like a winter camouflage, but it’s actually quite effective at medium altitude, esp. over a cloudy landscape. The original bombers had light blue (RLM 65) undersides, but for the P.1099 from a later period and as a fighter I rather used a darker shade of RLM76 in the form of Tamiya XF-23 (Light Blue). The model received a black ink washing and some post-panel-shading.

 

The cockpit interior became RLM 66 (Schwarzgrau, Humbrol 67) while the landing gear and the well were painted in uniform RLM 02 (I used Revell 45, a slightly more greenish tone), with wheel discs in RLM 66, too.

 

Unit markings became minimal and quite sober. I gave the aircraft a typical late-war “Reichsverteidigung” fuselage band, and in JG 53’s case it is plain black. The black band was deliberately chosen because it is a good, much darker contrast to the murky RLM 74, so that the latter appears lighter than it actually is, lowering the contrast to the RLM 76 spots.

 

The decals were puzzled together from various sources. As an aircraft of the 3rd group the unit’s ID color would be yellow, reflected in the tactical code and the fin tip. For some contrast and to emphasize the long gun barrel I gave it white and black stripes – as a security measure for ground handling. For some more variety I painted one air intake in very dark grey (Revell 06, Anthracite) and the other one in steel Metallizer, simulating replacement parts. The Balkenkreuze come from various sheets – I used simplified “low viz” versions all around. The undulating yellow bar for the 3rd group comes from a TL Modellbau sheet, while the yellow “4” came from a Fw 190 A sheet from Sky Models. A small “4” on the nose was added as a wacky detail, too, the “Pik As” unit markings came IIRC from a Hobby Boss Bf 109 sheet. Since they turned out to have poor contrast/opacity I only used a few stencils from the P.1099A sheet, but due to the disruptive paint scheme this is not apparent.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and a wire antenna, scratched from heated black sprue material, was added between cockpit and fin.

  

Well, this modified Messerschmitt P.1099A looks simple, but the modified engine nacelles as well as the gun fairing under the nose called for serious PSR. The result looks quite natural, though, and AFAIK this weapon configuration was actually on German drawing boards. However, I am not certain about the cockpit canopy and other details on Revell’s kit, reference information is contradictive.

The paint scheme looks good, even though it was lent from a heavy bomber, and the poor Humbrol enamels did not yield a finish that I had hoped for – the paintwork could certainly have been better, but the overall impression of a late-war Pulkzerstörer is O.K., and this eventually counts.

Saturn IB SA-209

 

Dominating the Rocket Garden is a Saturn IB, SA-209. This booster, designated as the booster for a Skylab rescue mission should it prove necessary and later as a backup booster for the ASTP mission, it was never used for its intended purpose and today is one of two remaining Saturn IBs.

 

•General Specifications

oFunction: Apollo spacecraft development; S-IVB stage development in support of Saturn V; Skylab crew launcher

oManufacturer: Chrysler (S-IB); Douglas (S-IVB)

oCountry of Origin: United States

•Size

oHeight141.6 ft (43.2 m) without payload

oDiameter: 21.67 ft (6.61 m)

oMass: 1,300,220 lb (589,770 kg) without payload

oStages: 2

•Capacity

oPayload to LEO: 46,000 lb (21,000 kg)

•Launch History

oStatus: Retired

oLaunch Sites: LC-37 & LC-34, Cape Canaveral; LC-39B, Kennedy Space Center

oTotal Launches: 9

oSuccesses: 9

oFailures: 0

oFirst Flight: February 26, 1966

oLast Flight: July 15, 1975

oNotable Payloads: Unmanned Apollo CSM; Unmanned Apollo LM; Manned Apollo CSM

•First Stage – S-IB

oLength: 80.17 feet (24.44 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 92,500 pounds (42,000 kg)

oGross mass: 973,000 pounds (441,000 kg)

oPropellant mass: 880,500 pounds (399,400 kg)

oEngines: 8 × Rocketdyne H-1

oThrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

oSpecific impulse: 272 seconds (2.67 km/s)

oBurn time: 150 seconds

oFuel: RP-1/LOX

•Second Stage – S-IVB-200

oLength: 58.42 feet (17.81 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 23,400 pounds (10,600 kg)

oGross mass: 251,900 pounds (114,300 kg)

oPropellant mass: 228,500 pounds (103,600 kg)

oEngines: Rocketdyne J-2

oThrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

oSpecific Impulse: 420 seconds (4.1 km/s)

oBurn Time: 480 seconds

oFuel: LH2 / LOX

 

The Saturn IB (pronounced “one B”, also known as the Uprated Saturn I) was an American launch vehicle commissioned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the Apollo program. It replaced the S-IV second stage of the Saturn I with the much more powerful S-IVB, able to launch a partially fueled Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) or a fully fueled Lunar Module (LM) into low Earth orbit for early flight tests before the larger Saturn V needed for lunar flight was ready.

 

By sharing the S-IVB upper stage, the Saturn IB and Saturn V provided a common interface to the Apollo spacecraft. The only major difference was that the S-IVB on the Saturn V burned only part of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit, so it could be restarted for trans-lunar injection. The S-IVB on the Saturn IB needed all of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit.

 

The Saturn IB launched two unmanned CSM suborbital flights, one unmanned LM orbital flight, and the first manned CSM orbital mission (first planned as Apollo 1, later flown as Apollo 7). It also launched one orbital mission, AS-203, without a payload so the S-IVB would have residual liquid hydrogen fuel. This mission supported the design of the restartable version of the S-IVB used in the Saturn V, by observing the behavior of the liquid hydrogen in weightlessness.

 

In 1973, the year after the Apollo lunar program ended, three Apollo CSM/Saturn IBs ferried crews to the Skylab space station. In 1975, one last Apollo/Saturn IB launched the Apollo portion of the joint US-USSR Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP). A backup Apollo CSM/Saturn IB was assembled and made ready for a Skylab rescue mission, but never flown.

 

The remaining Saturn IBs in NASA’s inventory were scrapped after the ASTP mission, as no use could be found for them and all heavy lift needs of the US space program could be serviced by the cheaper and more versatile Titan III family.

 

History

 

In 1959, NASA’s Silverstein Committee issued recommendations to develop the Saturn class launch vehicles, growing from the C-1. When the Apollo program was started in 1961 with the goal of landing men on the Moon, NASA chose the Saturn I for Earth orbital test missions. However, the Saturn I’s payload limit of 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg) would allow testing of only the Command Module with a smaller propulsion module attached, as the Apollo Command/Service Module would have a dry weight of at least 26,300 pounds (11,900 kg), in addition to service propulsion and reaction control fuel. In July 1962, NASA announced selection of the C-5 for the lunar landing mission, and decided to develop another launch vehicle by upgrading the Saturn I, replacing its S-IV second stage with the S-IVB, which would also be modified for use as the Saturn V third stage. The S-I first stage would also be upgraded to the S-IB by improving the thrust of its engines and removing some weight. The new Saturn IB, with a payload capability of at least 35,000 pounds (16,000 kg), would replace the Saturn I for Earth orbit testing, allowing the Command/Service Module to be flown with a partial fuel load. It would also allow launching the 32,000-pound (15,000 kg) Lunar Excursion Module separately for unmanned and manned Earth orbital testing, before the Saturn V was ready to be flown. It would also give early development to the third stage.

 

On May 12, 1966, NASA announced the vehicle’s name would be changed to the “Uprated Saturn I”, at the same time the “Lunar Excursion Module” was renamed the Lunar Module. However, the “Uprated Saturn I” name was reverted to Saturn IB on December 2, 1967.

 

By the time it was developed, the Saturn IB payload capability had increased to 41,000 pounds (19,000 kg). By 1973, when it was used to launch three Skylab missions, the first-stage engine had been upgraded further, raising the payload capability to 46,000 pounds (21,000 kg).

 

Specifications

 

Launch vehicle

 

ParameterS-IB 1st StageS-IVB-200 2nd StageInstrument Unit

Height80.17 ft (24.44 m)58.42 ft (17.81 m)3.00 ft (0.91 m)

Diameter21.42 ft (6.53 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)

Structural mass92,500 lb (42,000 kg)23,400 lb (10,600 kg)4,400 lb (2,000 kg)

PropellantRP-1 / LOXLH2 / LOXN/A

Propellant mass880,500 lb (399,400 kg)228,500 lb (103,600 kg)N/A

EnginesEight - H-1One - J-2N/A

Thrust1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN) sea level200,000 lbf (890 kN) vacuumN/A

Burn duration150 s480 sN/A

Specific impulse272 s (2.66 kN·s/kg) sea level420 s (4.12 kN·s/kg) vacuumN/A

ContractorChryslerDouglasIBM

 

Payload Configurations

 

ParameterCommand/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Launch Escape System mass9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

Payload Configurations

 

Command/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Parameter: Launch Escape System mass

Command/Service Module 9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Parameter: Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Parameter: Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

 

S-IB Stage

 

The S-IB stage was built by the Chrysler corporation at the Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans. It was powered by eight Rocketdyne H-1 rocket engines burning RP-1 fuel with liquid oxygen (LOX). Eight Redstone tanks (four holding fuel and four holding LOX) were clustered around a Jupiter rocket LOX tank. The four outboard engines were mounted on gimbals, allowing them to be steered to control the rocket. Eight fins surrounding the base thrust structure provided aerodynamic stability and control.

 

•Height: 80.17 ft. (24.44 m)

•Diameter: 21.42 ft. (6.53 m)

•Number of fins: 8

•Finspan: 39.42 ft. (12.02 m)

•Engines: 8 Rocketdyne H-1

•Thrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

•Fuel: RP-1 (Refined kerosene) 41,000 US gal (155 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 66,277 US gal (251 m3) nominal capacity including 1.5% ullage volume (43,284 US gal/163 m3 in four outer tanks plus 22,993 US gal/87 m3 in center tank)

•Burn time: 2.5 min

•Burnout altitude: 37 nmi (69 km)

 

S-IVB-200 Stage

 

The S-IVB was built by the Douglas Aircraft Company at Huntington Beach, California. The S-IVB-200 model was similar to the S-IVB-500 third stage used on the Saturn V, with the exception of the interstage adapter, smaller auxiliary propulsion control modules, and lack of on-orbit engine restart capability. It was powered by a single Rocketdyne J-2 engine. The fuel and oxidizer tanks shared a common bulkhead, which saved about ten tons of weight and reduced vehicle length over ten feet.

 

•Height: 58.42 ft. (17.81 m)

•Diameter: 21.67 ft. (6.61 m)

•Engine: single J-2

•Thrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

•Fuel: Liquid hydrogen (LH2) 64,000 US gal (242 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 20,000 US gal (76 m3)

•Burn time: approx. 7 min

•Burnout altitude (for Saturn IB): orbit

 

Instrument Unit

 

Main article: Saturn V Instrument Unit

 

IBM built the Instrument Unit at the Space Systems Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Located at the top of the S-IVB stage, it consisted of a Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), an inertial platform, accelerometers, a tracking, telemetry and command system and associated environmental controls. It controlled the entire rocket from just before liftoff until battery depletion. Like other rocket guidance systems, it maintained its state vector (position and velocity estimates) by integrating accelerometer measurements, sent firing and steering commands to the main engines and auxiliary thrusters, and fired the appropriate ordnance and solid rocket motors during staging and payload separation events.

 

As with other rockets, a completely independent and redundant range safety system could be invoked by ground radio command to terminate thrust and to destroy the vehicle should it malfunction and threaten people or property on the ground. In the Saturn IB and V, the range safety system was permanently disabled by ground command after safely reaching orbit. This was done to ensure that the S-IVB stage would not inadvertently rupture and create a cloud of debris in orbit that could endanger the crew of the Apollo CSM.

 

Launch Sequence Events

 

•Launch Event: Ignition Command

oTime (s): -3.02

•Launch Event: First Motion

oTime (s): -0.19

•Launch Event: Liftoff

oTime (s): 0.00

•Launch Event: Initiate Pitch Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: Initiate Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: End Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 38.0

•Launch Event: Mach One

oTime (s): 62.18

oAltitude (km): 7.63

•Launch Event: Max Q

oTime (s): 75.5

oAltitude (km): 12.16.

•Launch Event: Freeze Tilt

oTime: 134.40..

•Launch Event: Inboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 140.65..

•Launch Event: Outboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 144.32

•Launch Event: Ullage Rockets Ignition

oTime (s): 145.37

•Launch Event: S-IB / S-IVB Separation

oTime (s): 145.59

•Launch Event: S-IVB Ignition

oTime (s): 146.97

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Burnout

oTime (s): 148.33

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Jettison

oTime (s): 156.58

•Launch Event: Jettison LES

oTime (s): 163.28

•Launch Event: Start Pitch Over

oTime (s): 613.95

•Launch Event: S-IVB Cutoff

oTime (s): 616.76

•Launch Event: Orbit Insertion

oTime (s): 626.76

•Launch Event: Start S/C Sep Sequence

oTime (s): 663.11

•Launch Event: Spacecraft Separation

oTime (s): 728.31

 

Saturn IB Vehicles and Launches

 

The first five Saturn IB launches for the Apollo program were made from LC-34 and LC-37, Cape Kennedy Air Force Station.

 

The Saturn IB was used between 1973 and 1975 for three manned Skylab flights, and one Apollo-Soyuz Test Project flight. This final production run did not have alternating black and white S-IB stage tanks, or vertical stripes on the S-IVB aft tank skirt, which were present on the earlier vehicles. Since LC-34 and 37 were inactive by then, these launches utilized Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39B. Mobile Launcher Platform No. 1 was modified, adding an elevated platform known as the “milkstool” to accommodate the height differential between the Saturn IB and the much larger Saturn V. This enabled alignment of the Launch Umbilical Tower’s access arms to accommodate crew access, fueling, and ground electrical connections for the Apollo spacecraft and S-IVB upper stage. The tower’s second stage access arms were modified to service the S-IB first stage.

 

SA-201

 

•Mission: AS-201

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,820

oLaunch Date: February 26, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM (Command/Service Module).

 

SA-203

 

•Mission: AS-203

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): None

oLaunch Date: July 5, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned test of unburned LH2 behavior in orbit to support S-IVB-500 restart design

 

SA-202

 

•Mission: AS-202

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 25,810

oLaunch Date: August 25, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM

 

SA-204

 

•Mission: Apollo 1

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,412

oNotes: Was to be first manned orbital test of Block I CSM. Cabin fire killed astronauts and damaged CM during dress rehearsal for planned February 21, 1967 launch.

•Mission: Apollo 5

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 14,360

oLaunch Date: January 22, 1968

oNotes: Unmanned orbital test of Lunar Module, used Apollo 1 launch vehicle.

 

SA-205

 

•Mission: Apollo 7

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,520

oLaunch Date: October 11, 1968

oNotes: Manned orbital test of Block II CSM.

 

SA-206

 

•Mission: Skylab 2

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 19,979

oLaunch Date: May 25, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried first crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-207

 

•Mission: Skylab 3

•Spacecraft Mass (kg): 20,121

•Launch Date: July 28, 1973

•Notes: Block II CSM ferried second crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-208

 

•Mission: AS-208

oNotes: Standby Skylab 3 rescue CSM-119; not needed.

•Mission: Skylab 4

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,847

oLaunch Date: November 16, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried third crew to Skylab orbital workshop.

 

SA-209

 

•Mission: AS-209

oNotes: Standby Skylab 4 and later Apollo-Soyuz rescue CSM-119. Not needed, currently on display in the KSC rocket garden.

•Mission: Skylab 5

oNotes: Planned CSM mission to lift Skylab workshop’s orbit to endure until Space Shuttle ready to fly; cancelled.

 

SA-210

 

•Mission: ASTP

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,780

oLaunch Date: July 15, 1975

oNotes: Apollo CSM with special docking adapter module, rendezvoused with Soyuz 19. Last Saturn IB flight.

 

SA-211

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage at the Alabama Welcome Center on I-65 in Ardmore, Alabama. S-IVB stage rests with Skylab underwater training simulator hardware and is on display outdoors at the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

SA-212

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage scrapped. S-IVB stage converted to Skylab space station.

 

SA-213:

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

SA-214

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

For earlier launches of vehicles in the Saturn I series, see the list in the Saturn I article.

 

Saturn IB Rockets on Display

 

Currently there are three locations where Saturn IB vehicles (or parts thereof) are on display:

 

•SA-209 is on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, with the Apollo Facilities Verification Vehicle. Due to severe corrosion, the first stage engines and Service Module were replaced with fabricated duplicates in 1993–1994.

•The SA-211 first stage is on display with the S-IVB-S “Battleship” static test stage stacked in a launch-ready condition at the Alabama Welcome Center on Interstate 65 in Ardmore, Alabama. 34.954548°N 86.89193°W

•The SA-211 S-IVB stage was mated with the Skylab underwater training docking adapter and Apollo Telescope Mount and is on display in the Rocket Garden of the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

 

Cost

 

In 1972, the cost of a Saturn IB including launch was US$55,000,000 (equivalent to $315,000,000 in 2016).

 

AS 209

 

Black-and-white picture from inside a tall building with a space capsule being lifted from the top of a rocket

 

The Skylab Rescue CSM is removed from its Saturn IB Launch vehicle following the successful recovery of Skylab 4.

 

After the Skylab 4 launch, another rescue flight was assembled as a backup contingency. The Saturn IB rocket AS 209 was assembled in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39 for possible use. It also used the CSM 119 Command Module that was to be launched with Brand and Lind.

 

There were also plans for a short 20-day Skylab 5 flight that would use this backup CSM. The crew, likely consisting of Brand, Lind, and Skylab backup Science Pilot William B. Lenoir, would have performed some scientific research and closed out the station until the Space Shuttle was operational. However, the extension of Skylab 4 from fifty-six to eighty-four days obviated the need for the additional mission.

 

AS 209 and CSM 119 were later used as a backup to the ASTP mission. Both are now on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex. CSM 119 is located in the Apollo/Saturn V Center. The Saturn IB booster for AS 209 is currently located in the Visitor Complex’s Rocket Garden. It is displayed horizontally, mated to an Apollo FVV (Facilities Verification Vehicle) which was formerly displayed at the VAB’s Visitor Complex c. October 1968. In 2007, after sitting untouched for over 30 years, NASA engineers used the command module for studies on the spacecraft’s life support adapter assembly—the projecting aerodynamic fairing that allows oxygen, water, and electricity to flow from the Service Module to the Command Module. This was in support of the design and construction of a similar system on the new Orion spacecraft, which resembles the Skylab Rescue configuration.

Discovery SSTO V8.2 - Single Stage to Orbit Heavy Lift, Hypersonic Aircraft - 70 TON Payload - IO Aircraft

 

IO Aircraft: www.ioaircraft.com/hypersonic/discovery-218.php

 

Discovery SSTO V8.2 Specs

Length: 218FT/ Span: 102.58FT / Palyload Bay: 60' L X 16' 7" W X 16' 7" H / Span: 70 Ton (140,000 LBS)

 

Engines: U-TBCC (Unified Turbined Based Combined Cycle) Inc/Zero Atmosphere

 

Inlets: Adaptive REST, Originally Hapb/Larc NASA

 

Fuel: 140,000 Gallons 12,000+ PSI H2 / 90,000 Gallons 12,000+ PSI O2

 

Fuel Weight: Apx 72,000 LBS Total / *If liquid, would be 1.4 Million LBS

 

Weight: Apx 250,000 LBS EOW/Dry Weight / Apx 510,000 T/O Weight, Max Payload

 

Airframe: 75+% Proprietary Advanced Composites, 400,000 PSI Tensile Strength Airframe / *NO Ceramic Tiles

 

Thermals: 6,000F Thermal Resistance

 

Estimated Cost: $1.2 Billion Each (Fly Away Price) or $900 million in batches of 5

 

Estimated Launch Cost: Apx $30 Million at 140,000 LBS, Including Maintenance Costs / Under $250 per pound at Maximum Paylaod Wieght *Could Drop to Below $50 per LBS

 

-----------------------------

single stage to orbit, ssto, space plane, falcon heavy, delta iv, hypersonic commercial aircraft, hypersonic commercial plane, hypersonic aircraft, hypersonic plane, ICAO, International Civil Aviation Orginization, hypersonic airline, tbcc, glide breaker, fighter plane, hyperonic fighter, boeing phantom express, phantom works, boeing phantom works, lockheed skunk works, hypersonic weapon, hypersonic missile, scramjet engineering, scramjet physics, boost glide, tactical glide vehicle, scramjet, turbine based combined cycle, ramjet, dual mode ramjet, darpa, onr, navair, afrl, air force research lab, office of naval research, defense advanced research project agency, defense science, missile defense agency, aerospike, hydrogen fueled, hydrogen aircraft, virgin airlines, united airlines, sas, finnair ,emirates airlines, ANA, JAL, airlines, military, physics, airline, british airways, air france, aerion supersonic, aerion, spike aerospace, boom supersonic,

-----------------------------

 

Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle. Current technologies and what Lockheed is trying to force on the Dept of Defense, for that low speed Mach 5 plane DOD gave them $1 billion to build and would disintegrate above Mach 5, is TBCC. 2 separate propulsion systems in the same airframe, which requires TWICE the airframe space to use.

 

Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle is 1 propulsion system cutting that airframe deficit in half, and also able to operate above Mach 10 up to Mach 15 in atmosphere, and a simple nozzle modification allows for outside atmosphere rocket mode, ie orbital capable.

 

Additionally, Reaction Engines maximum air breather mode is Mach 4.5, above that it will explode in flight from internal pressures are too high to operate. Thus, must switch to non air breather rocket mode to operate in atmosphere in hypersonic velocities. Which as a result, makes it not feasible for anything practical. It also takes an immense amount of fuel to function.

International Space Station Payload Operation Center Nov 18 2013

VF-1W in the clouds, revealing its undersides and its full weapon (two ARMs and four AMM-1 self defense missiles) and ECM equipment payload.

  

Mutations, mutations... another (totally) fictional Valkyrie version, and an exotic one, too. This kit had two inspirational sources: after building some grey low-viz Valkyries, I considered a machine with a darker paint scheme like "Europe One" a.k.a. "Lizard" (even though I am not a big fan of this kind of murky look).

On the other hand, with the recent VF-1G AEW Valkyrie in the back of my mind, I speculated about a specialized SAM supression aircraft like the F-105G, F-4G or Tornado ECR (so-called "Wild Weasel" aircrafts), and how an innocent Valkyrie could be eqipped for such a task...?Well, with this murky and not really elegant VF-1W, both aspects came together.

 

Some further explanation might be useful: A "Wild Weasel" is an aircraft (the term originates from the United States Air Force) specially equipped with radar seeking missiles, and tasked with destroying the radars and SAM installations of enemy air defence systems. Wild Weasel tactics & techniques were first developed in the Vietnam and the Yom Kippur War, and were later integrated into the Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD). In brief, the task of a Wild Weasel aircraft is to bait enemy anti-aircraft defenses into targeting it with their radars, whereupon the radar waves are traced back to their source so that the Weasel or its teammates can precisely target it for destruction.

A simple analogy is playing the game of "flashlight tag" in the dark; a flashlight is usually the only reliable means of identifying someone in order to "tag" (destroy) them, but the light immediately renders the bearer able to be identified and attacked as well. The result is a hectic game of cat-and-mouse in which the radar "flashlights" are rapidly cycled on and off in an attempt to identify and kill the target before the target is able to home in on the emitted radar "light" and destroy the site.

 

The kit is a standard, vintage 1:100 scale VF-1D dual seater Valkyrie Fighter from ARII, which underwent various modifications. As usual, it received a crew. Since the machine would be rather dark, I went for olive drab pilot suits, but I could not resist and still use a bright red and white ("bone dome") helmet ;) Further cockpit details include a HUD, a console for the 2nd crewman, seat belts and election seat triggers. Some antennae on the outside were added, too..

 

Beyond that, the extra radar sensor equipment on board had to be placed somewhere - in the USAF's F-4G for example, the M61 gatling gun had to go. I found two plausible places on the Valkyrie: most obvious change is the different, more voluminous nose cone which comes from an 1:72 IAI Kfir. Less obvious is the elongated dorsal hump, which is supposed to hold extra equipment and a heat exchanger. Additionally, radar sensors were added on the fins as well as sensor arrays on the legs' sides, later enhanced witn dielectric panels. Overall, the VF-1W looks bulkier and somehow bigger now - much of it must be tributed to the nose. It is not longer than the original cone, but the proportions have become way different.

 

This "different" look is augmented by a bizarre looking ordnance mix under the VF-1W's belly and wings. Instead of the GU-11 gun pod, this SEAD version carries a slender ECM/sensor pod. It consists of two very poor (not to say ugly!) ALQ-119 pods from a vintage Revell F-16 prototype kit, combined and with some added elements. After years, these things could be used somewhere... This piece, painted in grey, also holds an adapter for the kit's display.

 

In order to accomplish its radar suppression task, a pair of 1:72 AGM-45 'Shrike' came under the outer pylons, including starter rails, conincidently resembling AGM-88 HARM anti radar missiles in 1:100 scale. Under its inner wing pylons the VF-1W carries a vintage ALQ-87 (in white) and an ALQ-101 (in grey) ECM pod, from a 1:72 Hasegawa aircraft weapons kit. Four AMM-1air-to-air missiles are also carried for self-defence purposes, even though such a Wild Weasel machine would hardly operate on its own. Being a special decoy machine with high target priority, it must be assumed that it is accompanied by true fighters for protection, and by some buddies which carry (more) weapons against ground targets.

 

For the paint scheme, inspiration came from Spangdahlem-based F-4Gs from the 80ies. These Germany-based machines used to carry the USAF "Lizard" scheme. Effectively, these Phantoms were painted in the South East Asia scheme with two greens (FS34102 and FS34079), but the tan simply replaced by charcoal grey (FS36081). Such a livery is even plausible in the Macross universe - in the "This Is Animation Special: Macross PLUS" source book, U.N.S.A.F.'s VF-11 and VF-5000 are shown in a similar livery.

 

Anyway, on the small 1:100 kit, "Lizard" with authentic colors would look VERY dark and dull. I searched for lighter alternatives and stumbled across A-4K Skyhawks from New Zealand. These machines used to carry a wrap-around paint scheme with the Lizard colors, but when I found a drawing of their paint scheme, I was intrigued by the "wrong" colors that were used in the graphic. The overall machine looked rather greyish and ...interesting. I found this different look so unique that I tried to emulate these "wrong" tones, and the VF-1W's three basic colors have finally become:

Humbrol 224 "Dark Slate Grey" (probably a British tone)

Humbrol 66 "Dark Olive Drab", which is VERY dark and has a rather greyish hue

Humbrol 79 "Dark Blue Gray", much lighter than FS36081

 

After basic painting the kit received a thin black ink wash, blending out the differences between the 3 colors even more. Additionally, engravings were blackened witha 0.1mm fine liner pen. No colorful markings were intentionally added, just the wings' leading edges received a contrats in Humbrol 83 (Ochre), some dielectric sensor covers were marked with black decals. Almost all markings and stencelling were kept in black or grey for low contrast. The Macross insignia were self-made from sliding decal paper, enamel paint and a black fine liner. The result is not perfect, but it was the only way to make these markings almost invisible and blend them into the camouflage. Finally, the kit received a matte varnish coating - except for the black radar nose, which is - just as on the A-4Ks - glossy black, a total contrast to the rest of the greyish-green machine.

 

Honestly,I am not totally happy with the overall result. The dark camouflage scheme takes the kit very far away from the Macross "color code"? I suppose it will remain the first and last attempt into this direction...

 

Payloaders from the MTA's New York City bus divisions assisted with snow clearance in Suffolk County. They plowed parking lots of the LIRR's Ronkonkoma station, and worked from exit 60 to exit 64 on the Long Island Expressway eastbound clearing snow from the guard rail, creating the third lane of traffic. They also scrapped the road bed packed with ice for plowing and salt application.

 

Photo: MTA New York City Transit.

Pay loaders from MTA New York City Transit Buses await transfer from the College Point Depot on lowboy trucks. Nine are being sent to Suffolk County to assist with snow clearing operations, each being escorted with supervision and operators.

 

Jessica Gaskin and Steven Christe are pictured here with Brian Ramsey the principal investigator for HERO, the original payload that HEROES is built upon.

 

Credit: NASA/Goddard

 

--

 

In Ft. Sumner, N.M., a team of scientists is readying a giant balloon -- and a 5,015-pound telescope – for launch in mid-September 2013. During its flight some 25 miles up in the sky, the balloon, called HEROES, for High Energy Replicated Optics to Explore the Sun, will carry a hard X-ray telescope with a two-part job. During the day, the telescope will observe the sun. It will record imagery of giant bursts of radiation and light on the sun called solar flares with 10 times better resolution than the best solar observations to date in these wavelengths. At night, the telescope will turn its focus toward other stars, collecting X-ray data from astrophysical sources such as the crab Nebula. The hard X-ray sky is relatively unexplored, especially at high resolution.

 

The HEROES mission is funded by NASA's Hands-On Project Experience, or HOPE, Training Opportunity award, an honor designed to promote achievement among America's newest ranks of space scientists and engineers. HEROES is led by Jessica Gaskin, an astrophysicist at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and Steven Christe, a solar scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center.

 

NASA image use policy.

 

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center enables NASA’s mission through four scientific endeavors: Earth Science, Heliophysics, Solar System Exploration, and Astrophysics. Goddard plays a leading role in NASA’s accomplishments by contributing compelling scientific knowledge to advance the Agency’s mission.

 

Follow us on Twitter

 

Like us on Facebook

 

Find us on Instagram

Inside a clean room in Building 1555 at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, technicians install the first half of the Northrop Grumman Pegasus XL payload fairing around NASA's Ionospheric Connection Explorer (ICON) on Aug. 22, 2018. ICON is being prepared for its launch on the Pegasus XL rocket, which is attached beneath the company's L-1011 Stargazer aircraft. Launch is scheduled for Oct. 26, from the Skid Strip at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. ICON will study the frontier of space - the dynamic zone high in Earth's atmosphere where terrestrial weather from below meets space weather above. The explorer will help determine the physics of Earth's space environment and pave the way for mitigating its effects on our technology, communications systems and society. Photo credit: NASA/Rodney Jones

NASA image use policy.

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The Messerschmitt Me 262 F was a series of multi-purpose jet planes designed by Messerschmitt for the Luftwaffe that entered service during the final phase of the Second World War in Europe. The aircraft’s design was begun in the summer of 1943 under the project handle P.1099, intended as an improvement to the successful Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighter and also as a replacement for the Arado Ar 234 bomber/reconnaissance aircraft. The primary focus was on more payload, being either usable for more fuel (since early jet engines had poor mileage and therefore range and endurance) or for weapons, including bombs in an internal bomb bay that would enable the aircraft to fulfil a similar tactical role as the British de Havilland Mosquito. Beyond this high-speed bomber (Schnellbomber) variant, the P.1099 would also be a suitable basis for a fast reconnaissance plane, interceptors and night fighters, and trainer versions were also planned.

 

The Messerschmitt P.1099 was a 12 m long, conventional-looking aircraft with a wingspan of 12.6 m. It had a much wider fuselage than the Messerschmitt Me 262. It had a circular shape with a diameter of 1.7m (5 ft 6¾ in) and the cockpit was now moved closer to the aircraft’s nose, above the front landing gear well. The baseline aircraft featured a side-by-side cockpit for a crew of two, even though different layouts were envisioned for the specialized variants, including single-seaters. To save development time and to use existing jigs and tools as much as possible, the P.1099 retained the wings and the tail section of the Me 262A-2a. Despite a higher total weight (the P.1099’ MTOW was about 3 tons higher), the planned powerplants were initially two uprated Junkers Jumo 004 turbojet engines, later to be replaced by more powerful Heinkel HeS 011 turbojets.

 

In January 1944 the P.1099 was accepted by the RLM and received, despite the aircraft’s different structure, the designation “Me 262 F”. The first variant, the Me 262 F-1 (internally designated P.1099A), was the baseline aircraft under the handle “Jäger I”, a jet-powered single seat daytime fighter. There were three planned versions, differing mainly in armament: Version F-1a was armed with four MK 108 30 mm cannon in the lower fuselage, comparable with the earlier Me 262 A fighter, just with more fuel and ammunition. Version F-1b carried two MK 103 30 mm cannon with longer range, firepower and ammunition supply, and Version F-1c was a heavy daytime fighter with two MK 108 and two MK 103 cannon in the nose.

In parallel the Me 262 F-2 was developed as a more heavily armed and armored variant, as a dedicated heavy bomber interceptor (“Pulkjäger” or “Zerstörer”) under the handle “Jäger II”. Again, three versions were foreseen: Version F-2a would be armed with a single MK 108 cannon and a heavy MK 112 55 mm cannon in the nose. Version F-2b was the same, but it was armed with a MK 114 50 mm cannon instead of the Mk 112. Both were single seaters with a heavily armored cockpit and canopy.

The F-2c was a more thoroughly modified two-seater version; it was armed with a single MG151/20 in a small nose turret, a pair of Mk 103 in the rear of the cockpit firing up- and backwards and two defensive MG 131 in remote-controlled FDL 151 barbettes in the tail. Due to the significant changes this model had the internal project designation P.1099B.

Another two-seater, the F-2d, remained very close to the original baseline aircraft with a crew of two in a side-by-side cockpit. This aircraft was armed with the standard four MK 108 in the nose, plus one launch rail under each wing for Ruhrstahl X-4 guided missiles, which were launched and steered by the second crewman via a wire connection with the mothership. This variant did not come to fruition, however, after the X-4 missile project had been cancelled in early 1945.

 

All P.1099 fighters also had hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles each, a detail taken over from the Me 262 A, even though the fuel load had to be reduced to carry them. The radio equipment of all these versions would be a FuG 16, Peil G6, FuG 101 radio altimeter, FuBl 2 blind landing equipment, as well as the FuG 25a Erstling identification friend or foe transceiver.

 

Beyond these initial day fighter variants, further types based on the P.1099 airframe were envisioned, too. The F-3 was a dedicated night fighter version, developed in parallel to the Me 262 G. It was based on the F-2a heavy day fighter, but it carried a crew of two (the pilot and a rearward-facing radar operator) and was equipped with a FuG 240 “Berlin” radar set and a rotating dish antenna under a streamlined plywood cover in the nose. The armament consisted of four MK 108 under the nose, similar to the F-1a day fighter, plus two additional, upward-firing MK 108 cannon (“Schräge Musik”) in the rear fuselage.

Other proposed variants (with less priority, though) were the F-4 and the F-5, which were to become the basis for fast bombers and reconnaissance aircraft with only light defensive armament, typically only a pair of MG 131 in remote-controlled tail barbettes was to be carried. The F-4 resembled the baseline P.1099A, with two bomb bays in front of and behind the main landing gear wells and a crew of two seated side-by-side in a pressurized cockpit. Two MK 108 were carried in the nose, plus the MG 131 tail barbettes. The F-5 was similar but featured a glazed bomb aimer/navigator station in the nose instead of the MK 108’s and the glazing above the pilot’s station was reduced and asymmetrical. In both bomber variants the fuselage tanks were re-arranged to make room for a single SC 1.200 in the front bomb bay, but combinations of smaller bombs could be carried, too. Alternatively, mounts for up to three cameras or a 1.350 l auxiliary tank for extended range could be carried in the bays, too.

 

Initial flight tests of the Me 262 F in late 1944 showed severe directional instability: especially after fuel and ammunition had been depleted and the center of gravity shifted the aircraft tended to become nose-heavy and ditch down if it was not carefully monitored and trimmed by the pilot. To cope with this problem, the engine mounts were modified, so that the CoG was shifted back. Compared with the original Me 262 the engines were placed roughly 900 mm (35.5 in) further back under the wings. The emptying sequence of the fuselage tanks was also changed, and this mostly mended the problems. Another measure to mend the directional instability issues was the enlargement of the tail surfaces, even though later production aircraft frequently had smaller Me 262 A stabilizers fitted due to material shortages and simple lack of parts.- However, due to the higher weight the Me 262 F’s handling and agility were very limited – but most of its intended roles rather relied on speed, anyway, so that dogfights could be avoided.

 

From 1944 on the war situation worsened considerably, and production of the new Me 262 F superseded the A variant only on selected production lines. A disused mine complex under the Walpersberg mountain was adapted for the production of complete aircraft. These were hauled to the flat top of the hill where a runway had been cleared and flown out. Between 20 and 30 Me 262 Fs were built here until early 1946, primarily fighters, the underground factory being overrun by Allied troops before it could reach a meaningful output. Wings were produced in Germany's oldest motorway tunnel at Engelberg, to the west of Stuttgart. At B8 Bergkristall-Esche II, a vast network of tunnels was excavated beneath St. Georgen/Gusen, Austria, where fully equipped fuselages for the Me 262 at a planned monthly rate of 450 units on large assembly lines were to be produced from early 1945.

 

After the type’s introduction to frontline units in early 1945 further handling problems arose through the aircraft’ weight, resulting from its high wing load. Both starting and landing run were excessive, so that the number of airfields from which it could be operated was relatively small. No real short-term solution could be found without fully re-designing the wings, so that RATO bottles were frequently used to get a fully loaded Me 262 F up into the air from standard airfields. These were typically fitted to racks which were mounted under the fuselage, flanking the rear bomb bay.

The Me 262 F’s landing speed was dangerously high, too. A retrofittable brake parachute, housed in a simple tubular fairing under the tail, was developed to reduce the landing distance and save brakes, which frequently overheated and could set the landed aircraft aflame.

 

From the Me 262 F-2a “Pulkzerstörer I”, only a small number were built and eventually entered service. Its main armament, the MK 112, was a heavy German machine cannon produced by Rheinmetall-Borsig from 1945 on – in fact, the MK 112 was basically a scaled-up MK 108, a very compact weapon with relatively low weight. The MK 112 had a caliber of 55 mm and thus fired much larger shells than the 30 mm MK 108, but the rate of fire was significantly lower (300 rounds / min compared to about 600-660 rounds / min of the MK 108). This large-caliber gun was designed primarily to combat heavy bombers, its rate of fire would have been too slow for effective aerial battles with escort fighters – but the Me 262 F would not have been a dogfighter, anyway, so that the “hit-and-run” mission profile suited the aircraft well. Fire tests showed that a single MK 112 hit with mine grenades could destroy a bomber, and with a rate of fire of five shells per second this weapon could inflict considerably higher losses on the incoming streams of Allied bombers compared to other on-board weapons used on the German side. Only the unguided R4M missiles were as effective, but the MK 112 offered considerably higher accuracy and the opportunity to execute more than just a single attack run on an incoming bomber formation.

The MK 112 was mounted in the lower starboard section of the Me 262 F-2a’s nose, its barrel protruded more than 2 m (7 ft) from its nose. The gun’s drum magazine with sixty rounds partly took up the rear space of the cockpit behind the pilot and the gun mount even used up space of the weapon bay on port side, so that only a single MK 108 with 100 rounds as an additional weapon was mounted in the lower port side weapon bay.

Its sister, the Me 262 F-2b, remained on the drawing board, because its main weapon, the 50 mm MK 114 autocannon that had been derived from the 5 cm Pak 38 anti-tank gun, had turned out to be over-complicated, overweight and unreliable. A refined version was developed as the MK 214A, though, but after flight test from February 1945, but the weapon was not deployed operationally.

 

Only a handful Me 262 F-2a Pulkzerstörer were eventually fielded and operated before the end of hostilities – beyond the low production numbers the lack of fuel and loss of suitable airfields highly limited the aircraft’s potential. Probably less than ten were used by operational units, including JG 53 “Pik As”, in which they served alongside other interceptors, including other Me 262 variants. Typically, bomber formations were approached from the side of a bomber formation, where their silhouettes were widest, and while still out of range of the bombers' machine guns. This broadside-attack tactic was very effective, and the aircraft’s high speed allowed the interceptors to turn around 180° and make at least a second attack run from the opposite side, before the machines dashed off and returned to their bases.

  

General characteristics

Crew: One

Length: 14,32 m (46 ft 11 in) overall

12,00 m (39 ft 3¾ in) fuselage only, w/o brake parachute housing

Wingspan: 12,61 m (41 ft 3¾ in)

Height: 4,43 m (14 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 24,2 m² (236 sq ft)

Empty weight: 5.061 kg (11,148 lb)

Loaded weight: 8.762 kg (19,300 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 10.062 kg (22,163 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Junkers Jumo 004 C turbojets with 12 kN (2,697 lb st) each

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 930 km/h (577 mph, 505 kn)

Cruising speed: 805 km/h (500 mph, 438 kn) at 6.500 m (21,290 ft)

Range: 1.340 km (830 ml, 728 nm) at 6000 m with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 11,450 m (37,570 ft)

Rate of climb: 18 m/s (3,540 ft/min) at max. weight

 

Armament:

1× 55 mm (1.96 in) MK 112 machine cannon with 60 rounds

1× 30 mm (1.18 in) MK 108 machine cannon with 100 rounds

Hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles

  

The kit and its assembly:

This became a submission to the late 2021 “Gunships” group build at whatifmodellers.com – what would such a competition be without at least one gun-toting German Luft ’46 interceptor? The Messerschmitt P.1099 lent itself for such a build. Since 1996 Revell offers a 1:72 IP model kit of this paper aircraft, depicting more or less the two planned versions: a basic single-seat day fighter and a heavy two-seater Zerstörer, both based on the same basis.

 

This what-if model was based on Revell’s interpretation of the P.1099A, and the kit goes together well. Fit is very good, even though some designs are IMHO a bit dubious. The kit’s weakest point: Revell unfortunately missed the important detail of the modified engine nacelles: the kit comes with standard Me 262 wings and engines, but due to CoG reasons the P.1099 would have had its engines moved back by about 900 mm, as mentioned in the background. I corrected this on this build with some PSR – sounds simple, but since the nacelles are not expected to be stuck to the wings in their new position roughly 1 cm further back, some serious bodywork had to be done.

 

Otherwise the kit was basically built OOB. I just left away the inner wheels from the main landing gear because I found the twin wheels to be “too much” for this upgraded Me 262. The P.1099 might have been heavier than the Me 262, but…? And the wheels’ tractor-like tread design looks IMHO out of place, too, so that I replaced them with a pair of MiG-21 wheels, left over from a KP kit.

 

The cockpit was taken OOB, even though I have doubts concerning the canopy. And when you look at mockup pictures of the P.1099 you realize that cockpit access had been facilitated through a side door at starboard, similar to the D. H. Mosquito. The cockpit tub does not consider this hatch at all, and the engraved door on the fuselage (it’s actually there!) is so tiny that only a Halfling might use it?

Well, I stuck with it “as is” and just added a pilot figure (specifically from a Matchbox Hawker tempest, because it is one of the rare cases that you get a WWII pilot wearing an oxygen mask) and a “barrel” behind the bulbous pilot seat because there’s a lot of free space in this single seat variant that is otherwise occupied by a rear gunner in Revell’s P.1099B kit. I also have doubts concerning the kit’s canopy, since the original P.1099 had a cockpit for two seated side-by-side, with a canopy that resembled the D.H. Mosquito’s a lot. I am also not certain about the stabilizers – the kit comes with standard Me 262 parts, but trustworthy sources I consulted suggest that not only the fin had been enlarged (depicted well in Revell’s kit), but also the stabilizers? To improve this, I implanted a pair of modified stabilizers that came from a Heller PZL P.23 light bomber. Sounds odd, but they were a very good match in size, shape and thickness!

 

The only major modification concerns the armament, even though it became just a “graft-on” solution. On the lower left side, the upper gun port was PSRed away. On the right side I added a bulged fairing for the MK 112. It was sculpted from a Matchbox Saab J29 drop tank and blended into the hull with PSR. Protruding spent cases fairings were added for both guns. The MK 112 gun barrel is a resin piece, left over from a ModelTrans tank conversion set and actually depicts a German 55 mm gun, so that this became a perfect donor piece.

 

Since the airframe still looked rather clean and boring I finally added a pair of JATO bottle racks to the rear fuselage (scratched from styrene profile but left empty) and a brake parachute fairing under the fin, carved from a piece of sprue.

 

Furthermore, a display adapter was installed into the fuselage for in-flight pictures.

  

Painting and markings:

This became a challenge, because I wanted a rather unusual livery, neither a standard RLM 81/82/76 late-war combo nor an improvised-cammo-over-bare-metal finish. After some research I settled upon something that was actually carried by some He 177 bombers around 1944: a uniform RLM 74 (Graugrün, Humbrol 245) upper surface with “cloudy” mottles in RLM 76 (Humbrol 247). This appears like a winter camouflage, but it’s actually quite effective at medium altitude, esp. over a cloudy landscape. The original bombers had light blue (RLM 65) undersides, but for the P.1099 from a later period and as a fighter I rather used a darker shade of RLM76 in the form of Tamiya XF-23 (Light Blue). The model received a black ink washing and some post-panel-shading.

 

The cockpit interior became RLM 66 (Schwarzgrau, Humbrol 67) while the landing gear and the well were painted in uniform RLM 02 (I used Revell 45, a slightly more greenish tone), with wheel discs in RLM 66, too.

 

Unit markings became minimal and quite sober. I gave the aircraft a typical late-war “Reichsverteidigung” fuselage band, and in JG 53’s case it is plain black. The black band was deliberately chosen because it is a good, much darker contrast to the murky RLM 74, so that the latter appears lighter than it actually is, lowering the contrast to the RLM 76 spots.

 

The decals were puzzled together from various sources. As an aircraft of the 3rd group the unit’s ID color would be yellow, reflected in the tactical code and the fin tip. For some contrast and to emphasize the long gun barrel I gave it white and black stripes – as a security measure for ground handling. For some more variety I painted one air intake in very dark grey (Revell 06, Anthracite) and the other one in steel Metallizer, simulating replacement parts. The Balkenkreuze come from various sheets – I used simplified “low viz” versions all around. The undulating yellow bar for the 3rd group comes from a TL Modellbau sheet, while the yellow “4” came from a Fw 190 A sheet from Sky Models. A small “4” on the nose was added as a wacky detail, too, the “Pik As” unit markings came IIRC from a Hobby Boss Bf 109 sheet. Since they turned out to have poor contrast/opacity I only used a few stencils from the P.1099A sheet, but due to the disruptive paint scheme this is not apparent.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and a wire antenna, scratched from heated black sprue material, was added between cockpit and fin.

  

Well, this modified Messerschmitt P.1099A looks simple, but the modified engine nacelles as well as the gun fairing under the nose called for serious PSR. The result looks quite natural, though, and AFAIK this weapon configuration was actually on German drawing boards. However, I am not certain about the cockpit canopy and other details on Revell’s kit, reference information is contradictive.

The paint scheme looks good, even though it was lent from a heavy bomber, and the poor Humbrol enamels did not yield a finish that I had hoped for – the paintwork could certainly have been better, but the overall impression of a late-war Pulkzerstörer is O.K., and this eventually counts.

Jason August, International Space Station Mission Evaluation Room manager, talks to NASA Social participants about the International Docking Adapter-3 payload during a What’s On Board science briefing at the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida on July 23, 2019.

The briefing was held for SpaceX’s 18th Commercial Resupply Services (CRS-18) mission to the station. The SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket and uncrewed Dragon spacecraft are scheduled to launch July 24, 2019, from Space Launch Complex 40 at Florida’s Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.

Photo credit: NASA/Kim Shiflett

NASA image use policy.

 

Inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, illumination testing is underway on the power-producing solar arrays for the agency’s Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security-Regolith Explorer, or OSIRIS-REx spacecraft. Targeted for liftoff Sept. 8, 2016, OSIRIS-Rex will be the first U.S. mission to sample an asteroid, retrieve at least two ounces of surface material and return it to Earth for study. The asteroid, Bennu, may hold clues to the origin of the solar system and the source of water and organic molecules found on Earth.

Photo credit: NASA/Cory Huston

NASA image use policy.

 

Inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, a solar array is checked before it is integrated with the Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security--Regolith Explorer, or OSIRIS-REx spacecraft. Targeted for liftoff Sept. 8, 2016, aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket, OSIRIS-Rex will be the first U.S. mission to sample an asteroid, retrieve at least two ounces of surface material and return it to Earth for study. The asteroid, Bennu, may hold clues to the origin of the solar system and the source of water and organic molecules found on Earth.

Photo credit: NASA/Ben Smegelsky

NASA image use policy.

 

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The Messerschmitt Me 262 F was a series of multi-purpose jet planes designed by Messerschmitt for the Luftwaffe that entered service during the final phase of the Second World War in Europe. The aircraft’s design was begun in the summer of 1943 under the project handle P.1099, intended as an improvement to the successful Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighter and also as a replacement for the Arado Ar 234 bomber/reconnaissance aircraft. The primary focus was on more payload, being either usable for more fuel (since early jet engines had poor mileage and therefore range and endurance) or for weapons, including bombs in an internal bomb bay that would enable the aircraft to fulfil a similar tactical role as the British de Havilland Mosquito. Beyond this high-speed bomber (Schnellbomber) variant, the P.1099 would also be a suitable basis for a fast reconnaissance plane, interceptors and night fighters, and trainer versions were also planned.

 

The Messerschmitt P.1099 was a 12 m long, conventional-looking aircraft with a wingspan of 12.6 m. It had a much wider fuselage than the Messerschmitt Me 262. It had a circular shape with a diameter of 1.7m (5 ft 6¾ in) and the cockpit was now moved closer to the aircraft’s nose, above the front landing gear well. The baseline aircraft featured a side-by-side cockpit for a crew of two, even though different layouts were envisioned for the specialized variants, including single-seaters. To save development time and to use existing jigs and tools as much as possible, the P.1099 retained the wings and the tail section of the Me 262A-2a. Despite a higher total weight (the P.1099’ MTOW was about 3 tons higher), the planned powerplants were initially two uprated Junkers Jumo 004 turbojet engines, later to be replaced by more powerful Heinkel HeS 011 turbojets.

 

In January 1944 the P.1099 was accepted by the RLM and received, despite the aircraft’s different structure, the designation “Me 262 F”. The first variant, the Me 262 F-1 (internally designated P.1099A), was the baseline aircraft under the handle “Jäger I”, a jet-powered single seat daytime fighter. There were three planned versions, differing mainly in armament: Version F-1a was armed with four MK 108 30 mm cannon in the lower fuselage, comparable with the earlier Me 262 A fighter, just with more fuel and ammunition. Version F-1b carried two MK 103 30 mm cannon with longer range, firepower and ammunition supply, and Version F-1c was a heavy daytime fighter with two MK 108 and two MK 103 cannon in the nose.

In parallel the Me 262 F-2 was developed as a more heavily armed and armored variant, as a dedicated heavy bomber interceptor (“Pulkjäger” or “Zerstörer”) under the handle “Jäger II”. Again, three versions were foreseen: Version F-2a would be armed with a single MK 108 cannon and a heavy MK 112 55 mm cannon in the nose. Version F-2b was the same, but it was armed with a MK 114 50 mm cannon instead of the Mk 112. Both were single seaters with a heavily armored cockpit and canopy.

The F-2c was a more thoroughly modified two-seater version; it was armed with a single MG151/20 in a small nose turret, a pair of Mk 103 in the rear of the cockpit firing up- and backwards and two defensive MG 131 in remote-controlled FDL 151 barbettes in the tail. Due to the significant changes this model had the internal project designation P.1099B.

Another two-seater, the F-2d, remained very close to the original baseline aircraft with a crew of two in a side-by-side cockpit. This aircraft was armed with the standard four MK 108 in the nose, plus one launch rail under each wing for Ruhrstahl X-4 guided missiles, which were launched and steered by the second crewman via a wire connection with the mothership. This variant did not come to fruition, however, after the X-4 missile project had been cancelled in early 1945.

 

All P.1099 fighters also had hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles each, a detail taken over from the Me 262 A, even though the fuel load had to be reduced to carry them. The radio equipment of all these versions would be a FuG 16, Peil G6, FuG 101 radio altimeter, FuBl 2 blind landing equipment, as well as the FuG 25a Erstling identification friend or foe transceiver.

 

Beyond these initial day fighter variants, further types based on the P.1099 airframe were envisioned, too. The F-3 was a dedicated night fighter version, developed in parallel to the Me 262 G. It was based on the F-2a heavy day fighter, but it carried a crew of two (the pilot and a rearward-facing radar operator) and was equipped with a FuG 240 “Berlin” radar set and a rotating dish antenna under a streamlined plywood cover in the nose. The armament consisted of four MK 108 under the nose, similar to the F-1a day fighter, plus two additional, upward-firing MK 108 cannon (“Schräge Musik”) in the rear fuselage.

Other proposed variants (with less priority, though) were the F-4 and the F-5, which were to become the basis for fast bombers and reconnaissance aircraft with only light defensive armament, typically only a pair of MG 131 in remote-controlled tail barbettes was to be carried. The F-4 resembled the baseline P.1099A, with two bomb bays in front of and behind the main landing gear wells and a crew of two seated side-by-side in a pressurized cockpit. Two MK 108 were carried in the nose, plus the MG 131 tail barbettes. The F-5 was similar but featured a glazed bomb aimer/navigator station in the nose instead of the MK 108’s and the glazing above the pilot’s station was reduced and asymmetrical. In both bomber variants the fuselage tanks were re-arranged to make room for a single SC 1.200 in the front bomb bay, but combinations of smaller bombs could be carried, too. Alternatively, mounts for up to three cameras or a 1.350 l auxiliary tank for extended range could be carried in the bays, too.

 

Initial flight tests of the Me 262 F in late 1944 showed severe directional instability: especially after fuel and ammunition had been depleted and the center of gravity shifted the aircraft tended to become nose-heavy and ditch down if it was not carefully monitored and trimmed by the pilot. To cope with this problem, the engine mounts were modified, so that the CoG was shifted back. Compared with the original Me 262 the engines were placed roughly 900 mm (35.5 in) further back under the wings. The emptying sequence of the fuselage tanks was also changed, and this mostly mended the problems. Another measure to mend the directional instability issues was the enlargement of the tail surfaces, even though later production aircraft frequently had smaller Me 262 A stabilizers fitted due to material shortages and simple lack of parts.- However, due to the higher weight the Me 262 F’s handling and agility were very limited – but most of its intended roles rather relied on speed, anyway, so that dogfights could be avoided.

 

From 1944 on the war situation worsened considerably, and production of the new Me 262 F superseded the A variant only on selected production lines. A disused mine complex under the Walpersberg mountain was adapted for the production of complete aircraft. These were hauled to the flat top of the hill where a runway had been cleared and flown out. Between 20 and 30 Me 262 Fs were built here until early 1946, primarily fighters, the underground factory being overrun by Allied troops before it could reach a meaningful output. Wings were produced in Germany's oldest motorway tunnel at Engelberg, to the west of Stuttgart. At B8 Bergkristall-Esche II, a vast network of tunnels was excavated beneath St. Georgen/Gusen, Austria, where fully equipped fuselages for the Me 262 at a planned monthly rate of 450 units on large assembly lines were to be produced from early 1945.

 

After the type’s introduction to frontline units in early 1945 further handling problems arose through the aircraft’ weight, resulting from its high wing load. Both starting and landing run were excessive, so that the number of airfields from which it could be operated was relatively small. No real short-term solution could be found without fully re-designing the wings, so that RATO bottles were frequently used to get a fully loaded Me 262 F up into the air from standard airfields. These were typically fitted to racks which were mounted under the fuselage, flanking the rear bomb bay.

The Me 262 F’s landing speed was dangerously high, too. A retrofittable brake parachute, housed in a simple tubular fairing under the tail, was developed to reduce the landing distance and save brakes, which frequently overheated and could set the landed aircraft aflame.

 

From the Me 262 F-2a “Pulkzerstörer I”, only a small number were built and eventually entered service. Its main armament, the MK 112, was a heavy German machine cannon produced by Rheinmetall-Borsig from 1945 on – in fact, the MK 112 was basically a scaled-up MK 108, a very compact weapon with relatively low weight. The MK 112 had a caliber of 55 mm and thus fired much larger shells than the 30 mm MK 108, but the rate of fire was significantly lower (300 rounds / min compared to about 600-660 rounds / min of the MK 108). This large-caliber gun was designed primarily to combat heavy bombers, its rate of fire would have been too slow for effective aerial battles with escort fighters – but the Me 262 F would not have been a dogfighter, anyway, so that the “hit-and-run” mission profile suited the aircraft well. Fire tests showed that a single MK 112 hit with mine grenades could destroy a bomber, and with a rate of fire of five shells per second this weapon could inflict considerably higher losses on the incoming streams of Allied bombers compared to other on-board weapons used on the German side. Only the unguided R4M missiles were as effective, but the MK 112 offered considerably higher accuracy and the opportunity to execute more than just a single attack run on an incoming bomber formation.

The MK 112 was mounted in the lower starboard section of the Me 262 F-2a’s nose, its barrel protruded more than 2 m (7 ft) from its nose. The gun’s drum magazine with sixty rounds partly took up the rear space of the cockpit behind the pilot and the gun mount even used up space of the weapon bay on port side, so that only a single MK 108 with 100 rounds as an additional weapon was mounted in the lower port side weapon bay.

Its sister, the Me 262 F-2b, remained on the drawing board, because its main weapon, the 50 mm MK 114 autocannon that had been derived from the 5 cm Pak 38 anti-tank gun, had turned out to be over-complicated, overweight and unreliable. A refined version was developed as the MK 214A, though, but after flight test from February 1945, but the weapon was not deployed operationally.

 

Only a handful Me 262 F-2a Pulkzerstörer were eventually fielded and operated before the end of hostilities – beyond the low production numbers the lack of fuel and loss of suitable airfields highly limited the aircraft’s potential. Probably less than ten were used by operational units, including JG 53 “Pik As”, in which they served alongside other interceptors, including other Me 262 variants. Typically, bomber formations were approached from the side of a bomber formation, where their silhouettes were widest, and while still out of range of the bombers' machine guns. This broadside-attack tactic was very effective, and the aircraft’s high speed allowed the interceptors to turn around 180° and make at least a second attack run from the opposite side, before the machines dashed off and returned to their bases.

  

General characteristics

Crew: One

Length: 14,32 m (46 ft 11 in) overall

12,00 m (39 ft 3¾ in) fuselage only, w/o brake parachute housing

Wingspan: 12,61 m (41 ft 3¾ in)

Height: 4,43 m (14 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 24,2 m² (236 sq ft)

Empty weight: 5.061 kg (11,148 lb)

Loaded weight: 8.762 kg (19,300 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 10.062 kg (22,163 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Junkers Jumo 004 C turbojets with 12 kN (2,697 lb st) each

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 930 km/h (577 mph, 505 kn)

Cruising speed: 805 km/h (500 mph, 438 kn) at 6.500 m (21,290 ft)

Range: 1.340 km (830 ml, 728 nm) at 6000 m with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 11,450 m (37,570 ft)

Rate of climb: 18 m/s (3,540 ft/min) at max. weight

 

Armament:

1× 55 mm (1.96 in) MK 112 machine cannon with 60 rounds

1× 30 mm (1.18 in) MK 108 machine cannon with 100 rounds

Hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles

  

The kit and its assembly:

This became a submission to the late 2021 “Gunships” group build at whatifmodellers.com – what would such a competition be without at least one gun-toting German Luft ’46 interceptor? The Messerschmitt P.1099 lent itself for such a build. Since 1996 Revell offers a 1:72 IP model kit of this paper aircraft, depicting more or less the two planned versions: a basic single-seat day fighter and a heavy two-seater Zerstörer, both based on the same basis.

 

This what-if model was based on Revell’s interpretation of the P.1099A, and the kit goes together well. Fit is very good, even though some designs are IMHO a bit dubious. The kit’s weakest point: Revell unfortunately missed the important detail of the modified engine nacelles: the kit comes with standard Me 262 wings and engines, but due to CoG reasons the P.1099 would have had its engines moved back by about 900 mm, as mentioned in the background. I corrected this on this build with some PSR – sounds simple, but since the nacelles are not expected to be stuck to the wings in their new position roughly 1 cm further back, some serious bodywork had to be done.

 

Otherwise the kit was basically built OOB. I just left away the inner wheels from the main landing gear because I found the twin wheels to be “too much” for this upgraded Me 262. The P.1099 might have been heavier than the Me 262, but…? And the wheels’ tractor-like tread design looks IMHO out of place, too, so that I replaced them with a pair of MiG-21 wheels, left over from a KP kit.

 

The cockpit was taken OOB, even though I have doubts concerning the canopy. And when you look at mockup pictures of the P.1099 you realize that cockpit access had been facilitated through a side door at starboard, similar to the D. H. Mosquito. The cockpit tub does not consider this hatch at all, and the engraved door on the fuselage (it’s actually there!) is so tiny that only a Halfling might use it?

Well, I stuck with it “as is” and just added a pilot figure (specifically from a Matchbox Hawker tempest, because it is one of the rare cases that you get a WWII pilot wearing an oxygen mask) and a “barrel” behind the bulbous pilot seat because there’s a lot of free space in this single seat variant that is otherwise occupied by a rear gunner in Revell’s P.1099B kit. I also have doubts concerning the kit’s canopy, since the original P.1099 had a cockpit for two seated side-by-side, with a canopy that resembled the D.H. Mosquito’s a lot. I am also not certain about the stabilizers – the kit comes with standard Me 262 parts, but trustworthy sources I consulted suggest that not only the fin had been enlarged (depicted well in Revell’s kit), but also the stabilizers? To improve this, I implanted a pair of modified stabilizers that came from a Heller PZL P.23 light bomber. Sounds odd, but they were a very good match in size, shape and thickness!

 

The only major modification concerns the armament, even though it became just a “graft-on” solution. On the lower left side, the upper gun port was PSRed away. On the right side I added a bulged fairing for the MK 112. It was sculpted from a Matchbox Saab J29 drop tank and blended into the hull with PSR. Protruding spent cases fairings were added for both guns. The MK 112 gun barrel is a resin piece, left over from a ModelTrans tank conversion set and actually depicts a German 55 mm gun, so that this became a perfect donor piece.

 

Since the airframe still looked rather clean and boring I finally added a pair of JATO bottle racks to the rear fuselage (scratched from styrene profile but left empty) and a brake parachute fairing under the fin, carved from a piece of sprue.

 

Furthermore, a display adapter was installed into the fuselage for in-flight pictures.

  

Painting and markings:

This became a challenge, because I wanted a rather unusual livery, neither a standard RLM 81/82/76 late-war combo nor an improvised-cammo-over-bare-metal finish. After some research I settled upon something that was actually carried by some He 177 bombers around 1944: a uniform RLM 74 (Graugrün, Humbrol 245) upper surface with “cloudy” mottles in RLM 76 (Humbrol 247). This appears like a winter camouflage, but it’s actually quite effective at medium altitude, esp. over a cloudy landscape. The original bombers had light blue (RLM 65) undersides, but for the P.1099 from a later period and as a fighter I rather used a darker shade of RLM76 in the form of Tamiya XF-23 (Light Blue). The model received a black ink washing and some post-panel-shading.

 

The cockpit interior became RLM 66 (Schwarzgrau, Humbrol 67) while the landing gear and the well were painted in uniform RLM 02 (I used Revell 45, a slightly more greenish tone), with wheel discs in RLM 66, too.

 

Unit markings became minimal and quite sober. I gave the aircraft a typical late-war “Reichsverteidigung” fuselage band, and in JG 53’s case it is plain black. The black band was deliberately chosen because it is a good, much darker contrast to the murky RLM 74, so that the latter appears lighter than it actually is, lowering the contrast to the RLM 76 spots.

 

The decals were puzzled together from various sources. As an aircraft of the 3rd group the unit’s ID color would be yellow, reflected in the tactical code and the fin tip. For some contrast and to emphasize the long gun barrel I gave it white and black stripes – as a security measure for ground handling. For some more variety I painted one air intake in very dark grey (Revell 06, Anthracite) and the other one in steel Metallizer, simulating replacement parts. The Balkenkreuze come from various sheets – I used simplified “low viz” versions all around. The undulating yellow bar for the 3rd group comes from a TL Modellbau sheet, while the yellow “4” came from a Fw 190 A sheet from Sky Models. A small “4” on the nose was added as a wacky detail, too, the “Pik As” unit markings came IIRC from a Hobby Boss Bf 109 sheet. Since they turned out to have poor contrast/opacity I only used a few stencils from the P.1099A sheet, but due to the disruptive paint scheme this is not apparent.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and a wire antenna, scratched from heated black sprue material, was added between cockpit and fin.

  

Well, this modified Messerschmitt P.1099A looks simple, but the modified engine nacelles as well as the gun fairing under the nose called for serious PSR. The result looks quite natural, though, and AFAIK this weapon configuration was actually on German drawing boards. However, I am not certain about the cockpit canopy and other details on Revell’s kit, reference information is contradictive.

The paint scheme looks good, even though it was lent from a heavy bomber, and the poor Humbrol enamels did not yield a finish that I had hoped for – the paintwork could certainly have been better, but the overall impression of a late-war Pulkzerstörer is O.K., and this eventually counts.

First of two Galileo navigation satellites SATs 9-10 being attached to the payload dispenser system, which will first secure the satellites during their flight to medium-altitude orbit and then release them into space. The satellites were hoisted into position and secured during 27–28 August 2015.

 

SATs 9-10 are scheduled to lift off at 02:08 GMT on 11 September (04:08 CEST; 23:08 local time, 10 September) from Europe’s Spaceport in French Guiana on top of a Soyuz rocket. They are expected to become operational, after initial in-orbit testing, later in the autumn.

 

Credit: ESA–M. Pedoussaut, 2015

Discovery STO - 70 Ton, Single Stage to Orbit Fixed Wing Aircraft - Space Plane - Hypersonic Plane, U-TBCC / Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle & Aerospike

 

Iteration 1, Mach 8-10 in amtmosphere, 195ft long, Heavy Lift Single Stage To Orbit Fixed Wing Aircraft. 70 TONS, ie 140,000 LBS, 60 ft X 15ft X 15ft payload bay. Up in the Falcon Heavy and Delta IV class, except not $400 million to launch giant payloads into orbit, but below $250 per lbs, or about $28 million to launch giant payloads, and normalized orbital flight, as normal as a 737 commercial flight. Load up, refuel, take off in an afternoon. I estimate this aircraft would cost about $750 million each for space capable. In atmosphere commercial, roughly $300 million each for a 200 passenger M8-10 (not designed yet)

 

--------------

 

www.ioaircraft.com/hypersonic/ranger.php

 

Drew Blair

www.linkedin.com/in/drew-b-25485312/

 

--------------

 

Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle. Current technologies and what Lockheed is trying to force on the Dept of Defense, for that low speed Mach 5 plane DOD gave them $1 billion to build and would disintegrate above Mach 5, is TBCC. 2 separate propulsion systems in the same airframe, which requires TWICE the airframe space to use.

 

Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle is 1 propulsion system cutting that airframe deficit in half, and also able to operate above Mach 10 up to Mach 15 in atmosphere, and a simple nozzle modification allows for outside atmosphere rocket mode, ie orbital capable.

 

Additionally, Reaction Engines maximum air breather mode is Mach 4.5, above that it will explode in flight from internal pressures are too high to operate. Thus, must switch to non air breather rocket mode to operate in atmosphere in hypersonic velocities. Which as a result, makes it not feasible for anything practical. It also takes an immense amount of fuel to function.

  

-------------

 

tbcc, glide breaker, fighter plane, hyperonic fighter, stealth fighter, boeing phantom express, phantom works, boeing phantom works, lockheed skunk works, hypersonic weapon, hypersonic missile, scramjet missile, scramjet engineering, scramjet physics, boost glide, tactical glide vehicle, Boeing XS-1, htv, Air Launched Rapid Response Weapon, (ARRW), hypersonic tactical vehicle, hypersonic plane, hypersonic aircraft, space plane, scramjet, turbine based combined cycle, ramjet, dual mode ramjet, darpa, onr, navair, afrl, air force research lab, office of naval research, defense advanced research project agency, defense science, missile defense agency, aerospike, vtol, vertical take off, air taxi, personal air vehicle, boeing go fly prize, go fly prize,

 

Advanced Additive Manufacturing for Hypersonic Aircraft

 

Utilizing new methods of fabrication and construction, make it possible to use additive manufacturing, dramatically reducing the time and costs of producing hypersonic platforms from missiles, aircraft, and space capable craft. Instead of aircraft being produced in piece, then bolted together; small platforms can be produced as a single unit and large platforms can be produces in large section and mated without bolting. These techniques include using exotic materials and advanced assembly processes, with an end result of streamlining the production costs and time for hypersonic aircraft; reducing months of assembly to weeks. Overall, this process greatly reduced the cost for producing hypersonic platforms. Even to such an extent that a Hellfire missile costs apx $100,000 but by utilizing our technologies, replacing it with a Mach 8-10 hypersonic missile of our physics/engineering and that missile would cost roughly $75,000 each delivered.

  

Materials used for these manufacturing processes are not disclosed, but overall, provides a foundation for extremely high stresses and thermodynamics, ideal for hypersonic platforms. This specific methodology and materials applications is many decades ahead of all known programs. Even to the extend of normalized space flight and re-entry, without concern of thermodynamic failure.

 

*Note, most entities that are experimenting with additive manufacturing for hypersonic aircraft, this makes it mainstream and standardized processes, which also applies for mass production.

 

What would normally be measured in years and perhaps a decade to go from drawing board to test flights, is reduced to singular months and ready for production within a year maximum.

 

Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle (U-TBCC)

 

To date, the closest that NASA and industry have achieved for turbine based aircraft to fly at hypersonic velocities is by mounting a turbine into an aircraft and sharing the inlet with a scramjet or rocket based motor. Reaction Engines Sabre is not able to achieve hypersonic velocities and can only transition into a non air breathing rocket for beyond Mach 4.5

 

However, utilizing Unified Turbine Based Combine Cycle also known as U-TBCC, the two separate platforms are able to share a common inlet and the dual mode ramjet/scramjet is contained within the engine itself, which allows for a much smaller airframe footprint, thus engingeers are able to then design much higher performance aerial platforms for hypersonic flight, including the ability for constructing true single stage to orbit aircraft by utilizing a modification/version that allows for transition to outside atmosphere propulsion without any other propulsion platforms within the aircraft. By transitioning and developing aircraft to use Unified Turbine Based Combined Cycle, this propulsion system opens up new options to replace that airframe deficit for increased fuel capacity and/or payload.

 

Enhanced Dynamic Cavitation

 

Dramatically Increasing the efficiency of fuel air mixture for combustion processes at hypersonic velocities within scramjet propulsion platforms. The aspects of these processes are non disclosable.

 

Dynamic Scramjet Ignition Processes

 

For optimal scramjet ignition, a process known as Self Start is sought after, but in many cases if the platform becomes out of attitude, the scramjet will ignite. We have already solved this problem which as a result, a scramjet propulsion system can ignite at lower velocities, high velocities, at optimal attitude or not optimal attitude. It doesn't matter, it will ignite anyways at the proper point for maximum thrust capabilities at hypersonic velocities.

 

Hydrogen vs Kerosene Fuel Sources

 

Kerosene is an easy fuel to work with, and most western nations developing scramjet platforms use Kerosene for that fact. However, while kerosene has better thermal properties then Hydrogen, Hydrogen is a far superior fuel source in scramjet propulsion flight, do it having a much higher efficiency capability. Because of this aspect, in conjunction with our developments, it allows for a MUCH increased fuel to air mixture, combustion, thrust; and ability for higher speeds; instead of very low hypersonic velocities in the Mach 5-6 range. Instead, Mach 8-10 range, while we have begun developing hypersonic capabilities to exceed 15 in atmosphere within less then 5 years.

 

Conforming High Pressure Tank Technology for CNG and H2.

 

As most know in hypersonics, Hydrogen is a superior fuel source, but due to the storage abilities, can only be stored in cylinders thus much less fuel supply. Not anymore, we developed conforming high pressure storage technology for use in aerospace, automotive sectors, maritime, etc; which means any overall shape required for 8,000+ PSI CNG or Hydrogen. For hypersonic platforms, this means the ability to store a much larger volume of hydrogen vs cylinders.

 

As an example, X-43 flown by Nasa which flew at Mach 9.97. The fuel source was Hydrogen, which is extremely more volatile and combustible then kerosene (JP-7), via a cylinder in the main body. If it had used our technology, that entire section of the airframe would had been an 8,000 PSI H2 tank, which would had yielded 5-6 times the capacity. While the X-43 flew 11 seconds under power at Mach 9.97, at 6 times the fuel capacity would had yielded apx 66 seconds of fuel under power at Mach 9.97. If it had flew slower, around Mach 6, same principles applied would had yielded apx 500 seconds of fuel supply under power (slower speeds required less energy to maintain).

 

Enhanced Fuel Mixture During Shock Train Interaction

 

Normally, fuel injection is conducted at the correct insertion point within the shock train for maximum burn/combustion. Our methodologies differ, since almost half the fuel injection is conducted PRE shock train within the isolator, so at the point of isolator injection the fuel enhances the combustion process, which then requires less fuel injection to reach the same level of thrust capabilities.

 

Improved Bow Shock Interaction

 

Smoother interaction at hypersonic velocities and mitigating heat/stresses for beyond Mach 6 thermodynamics, which extraordinarily improves Type 3, 4, and 5 shock interaction.

 

6,000+ Fahrenheit Thermal Resistance

 

To date, the maximum thermal resistance was tested at AFRL in the spring of 2018, which resulted in a 3,200F thermal resistance for a short duration. This technology, allows for normalized hypersonic thermal resistance of 3,000-3,500F sustained, and up to 6,500F resistance for short endurance, ie 90 seconds or less. 10-20 minute resistance estimate approximately 4,500F +/- 200F.

  

*** This technology advancement also applies to Aerospike rocket engines, in which it is common for Aerospike's to exceed 4,500-5,000F temperatures, which results in the melting of the reversed bell housing. That melting no longer ocurrs, providing for stable combustion to ocurr for the entire flight envelope

 

Scramjet Propulsion Side Wall Cooling

 

With old technologies, side wall cooling is required for hypersonic flight and scramjet propulsion systems, otherwise the isolator and combustion regions of a scramjet would melt, even using advanced ablatives and ceramics, due to their inability to cope with very high temperatures. Using technology we have developed for very high thermodynamics and high stresses, side wall cooling is no longer required, thus removing that variable from the design process and focusing on improved ignition processes and increasing net thrust values.

 

Lower Threshold for Hypersonic Ignition

 

Active and adaptive flight dynamics, resulting in the ability for scramjet ignition at a much lower velocity, ie within ramjet envelope, between Mach 2-4, and seamless transition from supersonic to hypersonic flight, ie supersonic ramjet (scramjet). This active and dynamic aspect, has a wide variety of parameters for many flight dynamics, velocities, and altitudes; which means platforms no longer need to be engineered for specific altitude ranges or preset velocities, but those parameters can then be selected during launch configuration and are able to adapt actively in flight.

 

Dramatically Improved Maneuvering Capabilities at Hypersonic Velocities

 

Hypersonic vehicles, like their less technologically advanced brethren, use large actuator and the developers hope those controls surfaces do not disintegrate in flight. In reality, it is like rolling the dice, they may or may not survive, hence another reason why the attempt to keep velocities to Mach 6 or below. We have shrunken down control actuators while almost doubling torque and response capabilities specifically for hypersonic dynamics and extreme stresses involved, which makes it possible for maximum input authority for Mach 10 and beyond.

 

Paradigm Shift in Control Surface Methodologies, Increasing Control Authority (Internal Mechanical Applications)

 

To date, most control surfaces for hypersonic missile platforms still use fins, similar to lower speed conventional missiles, and some using ducted fins. This is mostly due to lack of comprehension of hypersonic velocities in their own favor. Instead, the body itself incorporates those control surfaces, greatly enhancing the airframe strength, opening up more space for hardware and fuel capacity; while simultaneously enhancing the platforms maneuvering capabilities.

 

A scramjet missile can then fly like conventional missile platforms, and not straight and level at high altitudes, losing velocity on it's decent trajectory to target. Another added benefit to this aspect, is the ability to extend range greatly, so if anyone elses hypersonic missile platform were developed for 400 mile range, falling out of the sky due to lack of glide capabilities; our platforms can easily reach 600+ miles, with minimal glide deceleration.

Saturn IB SA-209

 

Dominating the Rocket Garden is a Saturn IB, SA-209. This booster, designated as the booster for a Skylab rescue mission should it prove necessary and later as a backup booster for the ASTP mission, it was never used for its intended purpose and today is one of two remaining Saturn IBs.

 

•General Specifications

oFunction: Apollo spacecraft development; S-IVB stage development in support of Saturn V; Skylab crew launcher

oManufacturer: Chrysler (S-IB); Douglas (S-IVB)

oCountry of Origin: United States

•Size

oHeight141.6 ft (43.2 m) without payload

oDiameter: 21.67 ft (6.61 m)

oMass: 1,300,220 lb (589,770 kg) without payload

oStages: 2

•Capacity

oPayload to LEO: 46,000 lb (21,000 kg)

•Launch History

oStatus: Retired

oLaunch Sites: LC-37 & LC-34, Cape Canaveral; LC-39B, Kennedy Space Center

oTotal Launches: 9

oSuccesses: 9

oFailures: 0

oFirst Flight: February 26, 1966

oLast Flight: July 15, 1975

oNotable Payloads: Unmanned Apollo CSM; Unmanned Apollo LM; Manned Apollo CSM

•First Stage – S-IB

oLength: 80.17 feet (24.44 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 92,500 pounds (42,000 kg)

oGross mass: 973,000 pounds (441,000 kg)

oPropellant mass: 880,500 pounds (399,400 kg)

oEngines: 8 × Rocketdyne H-1

oThrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

oSpecific impulse: 272 seconds (2.67 km/s)

oBurn time: 150 seconds

oFuel: RP-1/LOX

•Second Stage – S-IVB-200

oLength: 58.42 feet (17.81 m)

oDiameter: 21.42 feet (6.53 m)

oEmpty mass: 23,400 pounds (10,600 kg)

oGross mass: 251,900 pounds (114,300 kg)

oPropellant mass: 228,500 pounds (103,600 kg)

oEngines: Rocketdyne J-2

oThrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

oSpecific Impulse: 420 seconds (4.1 km/s)

oBurn Time: 480 seconds

oFuel: LH2 / LOX

 

The Saturn IB (pronounced “one B”, also known as the Uprated Saturn I) was an American launch vehicle commissioned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for the Apollo program. It replaced the S-IV second stage of the Saturn I with the much more powerful S-IVB, able to launch a partially fueled Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) or a fully fueled Lunar Module (LM) into low Earth orbit for early flight tests before the larger Saturn V needed for lunar flight was ready.

 

By sharing the S-IVB upper stage, the Saturn IB and Saturn V provided a common interface to the Apollo spacecraft. The only major difference was that the S-IVB on the Saturn V burned only part of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit, so it could be restarted for trans-lunar injection. The S-IVB on the Saturn IB needed all of its propellant to achieve Earth orbit.

 

The Saturn IB launched two unmanned CSM suborbital flights, one unmanned LM orbital flight, and the first manned CSM orbital mission (first planned as Apollo 1, later flown as Apollo 7). It also launched one orbital mission, AS-203, without a payload so the S-IVB would have residual liquid hydrogen fuel. This mission supported the design of the restartable version of the S-IVB used in the Saturn V, by observing the behavior of the liquid hydrogen in weightlessness.

 

In 1973, the year after the Apollo lunar program ended, three Apollo CSM/Saturn IBs ferried crews to the Skylab space station. In 1975, one last Apollo/Saturn IB launched the Apollo portion of the joint US-USSR Apollo–Soyuz Test Project (ASTP). A backup Apollo CSM/Saturn IB was assembled and made ready for a Skylab rescue mission, but never flown.

 

The remaining Saturn IBs in NASA’s inventory were scrapped after the ASTP mission, as no use could be found for them and all heavy lift needs of the US space program could be serviced by the cheaper and more versatile Titan III family.

 

History

 

In 1959, NASA’s Silverstein Committee issued recommendations to develop the Saturn class launch vehicles, growing from the C-1. When the Apollo program was started in 1961 with the goal of landing men on the Moon, NASA chose the Saturn I for Earth orbital test missions. However, the Saturn I’s payload limit of 20,000 pounds (9,100 kg) would allow testing of only the Command Module with a smaller propulsion module attached, as the Apollo Command/Service Module would have a dry weight of at least 26,300 pounds (11,900 kg), in addition to service propulsion and reaction control fuel. In July 1962, NASA announced selection of the C-5 for the lunar landing mission, and decided to develop another launch vehicle by upgrading the Saturn I, replacing its S-IV second stage with the S-IVB, which would also be modified for use as the Saturn V third stage. The S-I first stage would also be upgraded to the S-IB by improving the thrust of its engines and removing some weight. The new Saturn IB, with a payload capability of at least 35,000 pounds (16,000 kg), would replace the Saturn I for Earth orbit testing, allowing the Command/Service Module to be flown with a partial fuel load. It would also allow launching the 32,000-pound (15,000 kg) Lunar Excursion Module separately for unmanned and manned Earth orbital testing, before the Saturn V was ready to be flown. It would also give early development to the third stage.

 

On May 12, 1966, NASA announced the vehicle’s name would be changed to the “Uprated Saturn I”, at the same time the “Lunar Excursion Module” was renamed the Lunar Module. However, the “Uprated Saturn I” name was reverted to Saturn IB on December 2, 1967.

 

By the time it was developed, the Saturn IB payload capability had increased to 41,000 pounds (19,000 kg). By 1973, when it was used to launch three Skylab missions, the first-stage engine had been upgraded further, raising the payload capability to 46,000 pounds (21,000 kg).

 

Specifications

 

Launch vehicle

 

ParameterS-IB 1st StageS-IVB-200 2nd StageInstrument Unit

Height80.17 ft (24.44 m)58.42 ft (17.81 m)3.00 ft (0.91 m)

Diameter21.42 ft (6.53 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)21.67 ft (6.61 m)

Structural mass92,500 lb (42,000 kg)23,400 lb (10,600 kg)4,400 lb (2,000 kg)

PropellantRP-1 / LOXLH2 / LOXN/A

Propellant mass880,500 lb (399,400 kg)228,500 lb (103,600 kg)N/A

EnginesEight - H-1One - J-2N/A

Thrust1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN) sea level200,000 lbf (890 kN) vacuumN/A

Burn duration150 s480 sN/A

Specific impulse272 s (2.66 kN·s/kg) sea level420 s (4.12 kN·s/kg) vacuumN/A

ContractorChryslerDouglasIBM

 

Payload Configurations

 

ParameterCommand/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Launch Escape System mass9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

Payload Configurations

 

Command/Service ModuleApollo 5AS-203

Parameter: Launch Escape System mass

Command/Service Module 9,200 lb (4,200 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Command/Service Module mass36,400 lb (16,500 kg) to

46,000 lb (21,000 kg)N/AN/A

Parameter: Apollo Lunar Module massN/A31,650 lb (14,360 kg)N/A

Parameter: Spacecraft LM Adapter mass4,050 lb (1,840 kg)4,050 lb (1,840 kg)N/A

Parameter: Nose cone heightN/A8.3 ft (2.5 m)27.7 ft (8.4 m)

Payload height81.8 ft (24.9 m)36.3 ft (11.1 m)N/A

Total space vehicle height223.4 ft (68.1 m)177.9 ft (54.2 m)169.4 ft (51.6 m)

 

S-IB Stage

 

The S-IB stage was built by the Chrysler corporation at the Michoud Assembly Facility, New Orleans. It was powered by eight Rocketdyne H-1 rocket engines burning RP-1 fuel with liquid oxygen (LOX). Eight Redstone tanks (four holding fuel and four holding LOX) were clustered around a Jupiter rocket LOX tank. The four outboard engines were mounted on gimbals, allowing them to be steered to control the rocket. Eight fins surrounding the base thrust structure provided aerodynamic stability and control.

 

•Height: 80.17 ft. (24.44 m)

•Diameter: 21.42 ft. (6.53 m)

•Number of fins: 8

•Finspan: 39.42 ft. (12.02 m)

•Engines: 8 Rocketdyne H-1

•Thrust: 1,600,000 lbf (7,100 kN)

•Fuel: RP-1 (Refined kerosene) 41,000 US gal (155 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 66,277 US gal (251 m3) nominal capacity including 1.5% ullage volume (43,284 US gal/163 m3 in four outer tanks plus 22,993 US gal/87 m3 in center tank)

•Burn time: 2.5 min

•Burnout altitude: 37 nmi (69 km)

 

S-IVB-200 Stage

 

The S-IVB was built by the Douglas Aircraft Company at Huntington Beach, California. The S-IVB-200 model was similar to the S-IVB-500 third stage used on the Saturn V, with the exception of the interstage adapter, smaller auxiliary propulsion control modules, and lack of on-orbit engine restart capability. It was powered by a single Rocketdyne J-2 engine. The fuel and oxidizer tanks shared a common bulkhead, which saved about ten tons of weight and reduced vehicle length over ten feet.

 

•Height: 58.42 ft. (17.81 m)

•Diameter: 21.67 ft. (6.61 m)

•Engine: single J-2

•Thrust: 200,000 lbf (890 kN)

•Fuel: Liquid hydrogen (LH2) 64,000 US gal (242 m3)

•Oxidizer: Liquid oxygen (LOX) 20,000 US gal (76 m3)

•Burn time: approx. 7 min

•Burnout altitude (for Saturn IB): orbit

 

Instrument Unit

 

Main article: Saturn V Instrument Unit

 

IBM built the Instrument Unit at the Space Systems Center in Huntsville, Alabama. Located at the top of the S-IVB stage, it consisted of a Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC), an inertial platform, accelerometers, a tracking, telemetry and command system and associated environmental controls. It controlled the entire rocket from just before liftoff until battery depletion. Like other rocket guidance systems, it maintained its state vector (position and velocity estimates) by integrating accelerometer measurements, sent firing and steering commands to the main engines and auxiliary thrusters, and fired the appropriate ordnance and solid rocket motors during staging and payload separation events.

 

As with other rockets, a completely independent and redundant range safety system could be invoked by ground radio command to terminate thrust and to destroy the vehicle should it malfunction and threaten people or property on the ground. In the Saturn IB and V, the range safety system was permanently disabled by ground command after safely reaching orbit. This was done to ensure that the S-IVB stage would not inadvertently rupture and create a cloud of debris in orbit that could endanger the crew of the Apollo CSM.

 

Launch Sequence Events

 

•Launch Event: Ignition Command

oTime (s): -3.02

•Launch Event: First Motion

oTime (s): -0.19

•Launch Event: Liftoff

oTime (s): 0.00

•Launch Event: Initiate Pitch Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: Initiate Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 10.0

•Launch Event: End Roll Maneuver

oTime (s): 38.0

•Launch Event: Mach One

oTime (s): 62.18

oAltitude (km): 7.63

•Launch Event: Max Q

oTime (s): 75.5

oAltitude (km): 12.16.

•Launch Event: Freeze Tilt

oTime: 134.40..

•Launch Event: Inboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 140.65..

•Launch Event: Outboard Engine Cutoff

oTime (s): 144.32

•Launch Event: Ullage Rockets Ignition

oTime (s): 145.37

•Launch Event: S-IB / S-IVB Separation

oTime (s): 145.59

•Launch Event: S-IVB Ignition

oTime (s): 146.97

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Burnout

oTime (s): 148.33

•Launch Event: Ullage Rocket Jettison

oTime (s): 156.58

•Launch Event: Jettison LES

oTime (s): 163.28

•Launch Event: Start Pitch Over

oTime (s): 613.95

•Launch Event: S-IVB Cutoff

oTime (s): 616.76

•Launch Event: Orbit Insertion

oTime (s): 626.76

•Launch Event: Start S/C Sep Sequence

oTime (s): 663.11

•Launch Event: Spacecraft Separation

oTime (s): 728.31

 

Saturn IB Vehicles and Launches

 

The first five Saturn IB launches for the Apollo program were made from LC-34 and LC-37, Cape Kennedy Air Force Station.

 

The Saturn IB was used between 1973 and 1975 for three manned Skylab flights, and one Apollo-Soyuz Test Project flight. This final production run did not have alternating black and white S-IB stage tanks, or vertical stripes on the S-IVB aft tank skirt, which were present on the earlier vehicles. Since LC-34 and 37 were inactive by then, these launches utilized Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39B. Mobile Launcher Platform No. 1 was modified, adding an elevated platform known as the “milkstool” to accommodate the height differential between the Saturn IB and the much larger Saturn V. This enabled alignment of the Launch Umbilical Tower’s access arms to accommodate crew access, fueling, and ground electrical connections for the Apollo spacecraft and S-IVB upper stage. The tower’s second stage access arms were modified to service the S-IB first stage.

 

SA-201

 

•Mission: AS-201

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,820

oLaunch Date: February 26, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM (Command/Service Module).

 

SA-203

 

•Mission: AS-203

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): None

oLaunch Date: July 5, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned test of unburned LH2 behavior in orbit to support S-IVB-500 restart design

 

SA-202

 

•Mission: AS-202

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 25,810

oLaunch Date: August 25, 1966

oNotes: Unmanned suborbital test of Block I CSM

 

SA-204

 

•Mission: Apollo 1

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,412

oNotes: Was to be first manned orbital test of Block I CSM. Cabin fire killed astronauts and damaged CM during dress rehearsal for planned February 21, 1967 launch.

•Mission: Apollo 5

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 14,360

oLaunch Date: January 22, 1968

oNotes: Unmanned orbital test of Lunar Module, used Apollo 1 launch vehicle.

 

SA-205

 

•Mission: Apollo 7

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,520

oLaunch Date: October 11, 1968

oNotes: Manned orbital test of Block II CSM.

 

SA-206

 

•Mission: Skylab 2

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 19,979

oLaunch Date: May 25, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried first crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-207

 

•Mission: Skylab 3

•Spacecraft Mass (kg): 20,121

•Launch Date: July 28, 1973

•Notes: Block II CSM ferried second crew to Skylab orbital workshop

 

SA-208

 

•Mission: AS-208

oNotes: Standby Skylab 3 rescue CSM-119; not needed.

•Mission: Skylab 4

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 20,847

oLaunch Date: November 16, 1973

oNotes: Block II CSM ferried third crew to Skylab orbital workshop.

 

SA-209

 

•Mission: AS-209

oNotes: Standby Skylab 4 and later Apollo-Soyuz rescue CSM-119. Not needed, currently on display in the KSC rocket garden.

•Mission: Skylab 5

oNotes: Planned CSM mission to lift Skylab workshop’s orbit to endure until Space Shuttle ready to fly; cancelled.

 

SA-210

 

•Mission: ASTP

oSpacecraft Mass (kg): 16,780

oLaunch Date: July 15, 1975

oNotes: Apollo CSM with special docking adapter module, rendezvoused with Soyuz 19. Last Saturn IB flight.

 

SA-211

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage at the Alabama Welcome Center on I-65 in Ardmore, Alabama. S-IVB stage rests with Skylab underwater training simulator hardware and is on display outdoors at the U.S. Space and Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

SA-212

 

•Notes: Unused. First stage scrapped. S-IVB stage converted to Skylab space station.

 

SA-213:

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

SA-214

 

•Notes: Only first stage built. Unused and scrapped.

 

For earlier launches of vehicles in the Saturn I series, see the list in the Saturn I article.

 

Saturn IB Rockets on Display

 

Currently there are three locations where Saturn IB vehicles (or parts thereof) are on display:

 

•SA-209 is on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, with the Apollo Facilities Verification Vehicle. Due to severe corrosion, the first stage engines and Service Module were replaced with fabricated duplicates in 1993–1994.

•The SA-211 first stage is on display with the S-IVB-S “Battleship” static test stage stacked in a launch-ready condition at the Alabama Welcome Center on Interstate 65 in Ardmore, Alabama. 34.954548°N 86.89193°W

•The SA-211 S-IVB stage was mated with the Skylab underwater training docking adapter and Apollo Telescope Mount and is on display in the Rocket Garden of the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

 

Cost

 

In 1972, the cost of a Saturn IB including launch was US$55,000,000 (equivalent to $315,000,000 in 2016).

 

AS 209

 

Black-and-white picture from inside a tall building with a space capsule being lifted from the top of a rocket

 

The Skylab Rescue CSM is removed from its Saturn IB Launch vehicle following the successful recovery of Skylab 4.

 

After the Skylab 4 launch, another rescue flight was assembled as a backup contingency. The Saturn IB rocket AS 209 was assembled in the Vehicle Assembly Building at Launch Complex 39 for possible use. It also used the CSM 119 Command Module that was to be launched with Brand and Lind.

 

There were also plans for a short 20-day Skylab 5 flight that would use this backup CSM. The crew, likely consisting of Brand, Lind, and Skylab backup Science Pilot William B. Lenoir, would have performed some scientific research and closed out the station until the Space Shuttle was operational. However, the extension of Skylab 4 from fifty-six to eighty-four days obviated the need for the additional mission.

 

AS 209 and CSM 119 were later used as a backup to the ASTP mission. Both are now on display at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex. CSM 119 is located in the Apollo/Saturn V Center. The Saturn IB booster for AS 209 is currently located in the Visitor Complex’s Rocket Garden. It is displayed horizontally, mated to an Apollo FVV (Facilities Verification Vehicle) which was formerly displayed at the VAB’s Visitor Complex c. October 1968. In 2007, after sitting untouched for over 30 years, NASA engineers used the command module for studies on the spacecraft’s life support adapter assembly—the projecting aerodynamic fairing that allows oxygen, water, and electricity to flow from the Service Module to the Command Module. This was in support of the design and construction of a similar system on the new Orion spacecraft, which resembles the Skylab Rescue configuration.

Illustration to show SpaceShipTwo with Science Research Payload Racks.

Enclosed in its payload fairing, NOAA's Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES-R) is being transported to the Vertical Integration Facility at Space Launch Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. The satellite will launch aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket in November. GOES-R is the first satellite in a series of next-generation NOAA GOES Satellites. Photo credit: NASA/Ben Smegelsky

NASA image use policy.

 

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – Inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, engineers and technicians begin encapsulation of the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution, or MAVEN, spacecraft inside its payload fairing. MAVEN is being prepared for its scheduled launch on Nov 18, 2013 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla. atop a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket. Positioned in an orbit above the Red Planet, MAVEN will study the upper atmosphere of Mars in unprecedented detail. For more information, visit: www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/maven/main/index.html Photo credit: NASA/Kim Shiflett

Inside the Payload Hazardous Servicing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, a solar array is being inspected, tested and cleaned before being integrated with the Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security--Regolith Explorer, or OSIRIS-REx spacecraft. Targeted for liftoff Sept. 8, 2016, aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket, OSIRIS-Rex will be the first U.S. mission to sample an asteroid, retrieve at least two ounces of surface material and return it to Earth for study. The asteroid, Bennu, may hold clues to the origin of the solar system and the source of water and organic molecules found on Earth.

Photo credit: NASA/Ben Smegelsky

NASA image use policy.

 

Encapsulated in its payload fairing, NASA's Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport, or InSight, Mars lander is transported to Space Launch Complex 3 at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. InSight will be the first mission to look deep beneath the Martian surface. It will study the planet's interior by measuring its heat output and listen for marsquakes. The spacecraft will use the seismic waves generated by marsquakes to develop a map of the planet’s deep interior. The resulting insight into Mars’ formation will provide a better understanding of how other rocky planets, including Earth, were created. InSight is scheduled for liftoff May 5, 2018.

Photo credit: USAF 30th Space Wing/Daniel Herrera

NASA image use policy.

+++ DISCLAIMER +++

Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!

  

Some background:

The Messerschmitt Me 262 F was a series of multi-purpose jet planes designed by Messerschmitt for the Luftwaffe that entered service during the final phase of the Second World War in Europe. The aircraft’s design was begun in the summer of 1943 under the project handle P.1099, intended as an improvement to the successful Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighter and also as a replacement for the Arado Ar 234 bomber/reconnaissance aircraft. The primary focus was on more payload, being either usable for more fuel (since early jet engines had poor mileage and therefore range and endurance) or for weapons, including bombs in an internal bomb bay that would enable the aircraft to fulfil a similar tactical role as the British de Havilland Mosquito. Beyond this high-speed bomber (Schnellbomber) variant, the P.1099 would also be a suitable basis for a fast reconnaissance plane, interceptors and night fighters, and trainer versions were also planned.

 

The Messerschmitt P.1099 was a 12 m long, conventional-looking aircraft with a wingspan of 12.6 m. It had a much wider fuselage than the Messerschmitt Me 262. It had a circular shape with a diameter of 1.7m (5 ft 6¾ in) and the cockpit was now moved closer to the aircraft’s nose, above the front landing gear well. The baseline aircraft featured a side-by-side cockpit for a crew of two, even though different layouts were envisioned for the specialized variants, including single-seaters. To save development time and to use existing jigs and tools as much as possible, the P.1099 retained the wings and the tail section of the Me 262A-2a. Despite a higher total weight (the P.1099’ MTOW was about 3 tons higher), the planned powerplants were initially two uprated Junkers Jumo 004 turbojet engines, later to be replaced by more powerful Heinkel HeS 011 turbojets.

 

In January 1944 the P.1099 was accepted by the RLM and received, despite the aircraft’s different structure, the designation “Me 262 F”. The first variant, the Me 262 F-1 (internally designated P.1099A), was the baseline aircraft under the handle “Jäger I”, a jet-powered single seat daytime fighter. There were three planned versions, differing mainly in armament: Version F-1a was armed with four MK 108 30 mm cannon in the lower fuselage, comparable with the earlier Me 262 A fighter, just with more fuel and ammunition. Version F-1b carried two MK 103 30 mm cannon with longer range, firepower and ammunition supply, and Version F-1c was a heavy daytime fighter with two MK 108 and two MK 103 cannon in the nose.

In parallel the Me 262 F-2 was developed as a more heavily armed and armored variant, as a dedicated heavy bomber interceptor (“Pulkjäger” or “Zerstörer”) under the handle “Jäger II”. Again, three versions were foreseen: Version F-2a would be armed with a single MK 108 cannon and a heavy MK 112 55 mm cannon in the nose. Version F-2b was the same, but it was armed with a MK 114 50 mm cannon instead of the Mk 112. Both were single seaters with a heavily armored cockpit and canopy.

The F-2c was a more thoroughly modified two-seater version; it was armed with a single MG151/20 in a small nose turret, a pair of Mk 103 in the rear of the cockpit firing up- and backwards and two defensive MG 131 in remote-controlled FDL 151 barbettes in the tail. Due to the significant changes this model had the internal project designation P.1099B.

Another two-seater, the F-2d, remained very close to the original baseline aircraft with a crew of two in a side-by-side cockpit. This aircraft was armed with the standard four MK 108 in the nose, plus one launch rail under each wing for Ruhrstahl X-4 guided missiles, which were launched and steered by the second crewman via a wire connection with the mothership. This variant did not come to fruition, however, after the X-4 missile project had been cancelled in early 1945.

 

All P.1099 fighters also had hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles each, a detail taken over from the Me 262 A, even though the fuel load had to be reduced to carry them. The radio equipment of all these versions would be a FuG 16, Peil G6, FuG 101 radio altimeter, FuBl 2 blind landing equipment, as well as the FuG 25a Erstling identification friend or foe transceiver.

 

Beyond these initial day fighter variants, further types based on the P.1099 airframe were envisioned, too. The F-3 was a dedicated night fighter version, developed in parallel to the Me 262 G. It was based on the F-2a heavy day fighter, but it carried a crew of two (the pilot and a rearward-facing radar operator) and was equipped with a FuG 240 “Berlin” radar set and a rotating dish antenna under a streamlined plywood cover in the nose. The armament consisted of four MK 108 under the nose, similar to the F-1a day fighter, plus two additional, upward-firing MK 108 cannon (“Schräge Musik”) in the rear fuselage.

Other proposed variants (with less priority, though) were the F-4 and the F-5, which were to become the basis for fast bombers and reconnaissance aircraft with only light defensive armament, typically only a pair of MG 131 in remote-controlled tail barbettes was to be carried. The F-4 resembled the baseline P.1099A, with two bomb bays in front of and behind the main landing gear wells and a crew of two seated side-by-side in a pressurized cockpit. Two MK 108 were carried in the nose, plus the MG 131 tail barbettes. The F-5 was similar but featured a glazed bomb aimer/navigator station in the nose instead of the MK 108’s and the glazing above the pilot’s station was reduced and asymmetrical. In both bomber variants the fuselage tanks were re-arranged to make room for a single SC 1.200 in the front bomb bay, but combinations of smaller bombs could be carried, too. Alternatively, mounts for up to three cameras or a 1.350 l auxiliary tank for extended range could be carried in the bays, too.

 

Initial flight tests of the Me 262 F in late 1944 showed severe directional instability: especially after fuel and ammunition had been depleted and the center of gravity shifted the aircraft tended to become nose-heavy and ditch down if it was not carefully monitored and trimmed by the pilot. To cope with this problem, the engine mounts were modified, so that the CoG was shifted back. Compared with the original Me 262 the engines were placed roughly 900 mm (35.5 in) further back under the wings. The emptying sequence of the fuselage tanks was also changed, and this mostly mended the problems. Another measure to mend the directional instability issues was the enlargement of the tail surfaces, even though later production aircraft frequently had smaller Me 262 A stabilizers fitted due to material shortages and simple lack of parts.- However, due to the higher weight the Me 262 F’s handling and agility were very limited – but most of its intended roles rather relied on speed, anyway, so that dogfights could be avoided.

 

From 1944 on the war situation worsened considerably, and production of the new Me 262 F superseded the A variant only on selected production lines. A disused mine complex under the Walpersberg mountain was adapted for the production of complete aircraft. These were hauled to the flat top of the hill where a runway had been cleared and flown out. Between 20 and 30 Me 262 Fs were built here until early 1946, primarily fighters, the underground factory being overrun by Allied troops before it could reach a meaningful output. Wings were produced in Germany's oldest motorway tunnel at Engelberg, to the west of Stuttgart. At B8 Bergkristall-Esche II, a vast network of tunnels was excavated beneath St. Georgen/Gusen, Austria, where fully equipped fuselages for the Me 262 at a planned monthly rate of 450 units on large assembly lines were to be produced from early 1945.

 

After the type’s introduction to frontline units in early 1945 further handling problems arose through the aircraft’ weight, resulting from its high wing load. Both starting and landing run were excessive, so that the number of airfields from which it could be operated was relatively small. No real short-term solution could be found without fully re-designing the wings, so that RATO bottles were frequently used to get a fully loaded Me 262 F up into the air from standard airfields. These were typically fitted to racks which were mounted under the fuselage, flanking the rear bomb bay.

The Me 262 F’s landing speed was dangerously high, too. A retrofittable brake parachute, housed in a simple tubular fairing under the tail, was developed to reduce the landing distance and save brakes, which frequently overheated and could set the landed aircraft aflame.

 

From the Me 262 F-2a “Pulkzerstörer I”, only a small number were built and eventually entered service. Its main armament, the MK 112, was a heavy German machine cannon produced by Rheinmetall-Borsig from 1945 on – in fact, the MK 112 was basically a scaled-up MK 108, a very compact weapon with relatively low weight. The MK 112 had a caliber of 55 mm and thus fired much larger shells than the 30 mm MK 108, but the rate of fire was significantly lower (300 rounds / min compared to about 600-660 rounds / min of the MK 108). This large-caliber gun was designed primarily to combat heavy bombers, its rate of fire would have been too slow for effective aerial battles with escort fighters – but the Me 262 F would not have been a dogfighter, anyway, so that the “hit-and-run” mission profile suited the aircraft well. Fire tests showed that a single MK 112 hit with mine grenades could destroy a bomber, and with a rate of fire of five shells per second this weapon could inflict considerably higher losses on the incoming streams of Allied bombers compared to other on-board weapons used on the German side. Only the unguided R4M missiles were as effective, but the MK 112 offered considerably higher accuracy and the opportunity to execute more than just a single attack run on an incoming bomber formation.

The MK 112 was mounted in the lower starboard section of the Me 262 F-2a’s nose, its barrel protruded more than 2 m (7 ft) from its nose. The gun’s drum magazine with sixty rounds partly took up the rear space of the cockpit behind the pilot and the gun mount even used up space of the weapon bay on port side, so that only a single MK 108 with 100 rounds as an additional weapon was mounted in the lower port side weapon bay.

Its sister, the Me 262 F-2b, remained on the drawing board, because its main weapon, the 50 mm MK 114 autocannon that had been derived from the 5 cm Pak 38 anti-tank gun, had turned out to be over-complicated, overweight and unreliable. A refined version was developed as the MK 214A, though, but after flight test from February 1945, but the weapon was not deployed operationally.

 

Only a handful Me 262 F-2a Pulkzerstörer were eventually fielded and operated before the end of hostilities – beyond the low production numbers the lack of fuel and loss of suitable airfields highly limited the aircraft’s potential. Probably less than ten were used by operational units, including JG 53 “Pik As”, in which they served alongside other interceptors, including other Me 262 variants. Typically, bomber formations were approached from the side of a bomber formation, where their silhouettes were widest, and while still out of range of the bombers' machine guns. This broadside-attack tactic was very effective, and the aircraft’s high speed allowed the interceptors to turn around 180° and make at least a second attack run from the opposite side, before the machines dashed off and returned to their bases.

  

General characteristics

Crew: One

Length: 14,32 m (46 ft 11 in) overall

12,00 m (39 ft 3¾ in) fuselage only, w/o brake parachute housing

Wingspan: 12,61 m (41 ft 3¾ in)

Height: 4,43 m (14 ft 6 in)

Wing area: 24,2 m² (236 sq ft)

Empty weight: 5.061 kg (11,148 lb)

Loaded weight: 8.762 kg (19,300 lb)

Max. take-off weight: 10.062 kg (22,163 lb)

 

Powerplant:

2× Junkers Jumo 004 C turbojets with 12 kN (2,697 lb st) each

 

Performance

Maximum speed: 930 km/h (577 mph, 505 kn)

Cruising speed: 805 km/h (500 mph, 438 kn) at 6.500 m (21,290 ft)

Range: 1.340 km (830 ml, 728 nm) at 6000 m with internal fuel only

Service ceiling: 11,450 m (37,570 ft)

Rate of climb: 18 m/s (3,540 ft/min) at max. weight

 

Armament:

1× 55 mm (1.96 in) MK 112 machine cannon with 60 rounds

1× 30 mm (1.18 in) MK 108 machine cannon with 100 rounds

Hardpoints under the outer wings for racks with twelve 55mm R4M unguided air-to-air missiles

  

The kit and its assembly:

This became a submission to the late 2021 “Gunships” group build at whatifmodellers.com – what would such a competition be without at least one gun-toting German Luft ’46 interceptor? The Messerschmitt P.1099 lent itself for such a build. Since 1996 Revell offers a 1:72 IP model kit of this paper aircraft, depicting more or less the two planned versions: a basic single-seat day fighter and a heavy two-seater Zerstörer, both based on the same basis.

 

This what-if model was based on Revell’s interpretation of the P.1099A, and the kit goes together well. Fit is very good, even though some designs are IMHO a bit dubious. The kit’s weakest point: Revell unfortunately missed the important detail of the modified engine nacelles: the kit comes with standard Me 262 wings and engines, but due to CoG reasons the P.1099 would have had its engines moved back by about 900 mm, as mentioned in the background. I corrected this on this build with some PSR – sounds simple, but since the nacelles are not expected to be stuck to the wings in their new position roughly 1 cm further back, some serious bodywork had to be done.

 

Otherwise the kit was basically built OOB. I just left away the inner wheels from the main landing gear because I found the twin wheels to be “too much” for this upgraded Me 262. The P.1099 might have been heavier than the Me 262, but…? And the wheels’ tractor-like tread design looks IMHO out of place, too, so that I replaced them with a pair of MiG-21 wheels, left over from a KP kit.

 

The cockpit was taken OOB, even though I have doubts concerning the canopy. And when you look at mockup pictures of the P.1099 you realize that cockpit access had been facilitated through a side door at starboard, similar to the D. H. Mosquito. The cockpit tub does not consider this hatch at all, and the engraved door on the fuselage (it’s actually there!) is so tiny that only a Halfling might use it?

Well, I stuck with it “as is” and just added a pilot figure (specifically from a Matchbox Hawker tempest, because it is one of the rare cases that you get a WWII pilot wearing an oxygen mask) and a “barrel” behind the bulbous pilot seat because there’s a lot of free space in this single seat variant that is otherwise occupied by a rear gunner in Revell’s P.1099B kit. I also have doubts concerning the kit’s canopy, since the original P.1099 had a cockpit for two seated side-by-side, with a canopy that resembled the D.H. Mosquito’s a lot. I am also not certain about the stabilizers – the kit comes with standard Me 262 parts, but trustworthy sources I consulted suggest that not only the fin had been enlarged (depicted well in Revell’s kit), but also the stabilizers? To improve this, I implanted a pair of modified stabilizers that came from a Heller PZL P.23 light bomber. Sounds odd, but they were a very good match in size, shape and thickness!

 

The only major modification concerns the armament, even though it became just a “graft-on” solution. On the lower left side, the upper gun port was PSRed away. On the right side I added a bulged fairing for the MK 112. It was sculpted from a Matchbox Saab J29 drop tank and blended into the hull with PSR. Protruding spent cases fairings were added for both guns. The MK 112 gun barrel is a resin piece, left over from a ModelTrans tank conversion set and actually depicts a German 55 mm gun, so that this became a perfect donor piece.

 

Since the airframe still looked rather clean and boring I finally added a pair of JATO bottle racks to the rear fuselage (scratched from styrene profile but left empty) and a brake parachute fairing under the fin, carved from a piece of sprue.

 

Furthermore, a display adapter was installed into the fuselage for in-flight pictures.

  

Painting and markings:

This became a challenge, because I wanted a rather unusual livery, neither a standard RLM 81/82/76 late-war combo nor an improvised-cammo-over-bare-metal finish. After some research I settled upon something that was actually carried by some He 177 bombers around 1944: a uniform RLM 74 (Graugrün, Humbrol 245) upper surface with “cloudy” mottles in RLM 76 (Humbrol 247). This appears like a winter camouflage, but it’s actually quite effective at medium altitude, esp. over a cloudy landscape. The original bombers had light blue (RLM 65) undersides, but for the P.1099 from a later period and as a fighter I rather used a darker shade of RLM76 in the form of Tamiya XF-23 (Light Blue). The model received a black ink washing and some post-panel-shading.

 

The cockpit interior became RLM 66 (Schwarzgrau, Humbrol 67) while the landing gear and the well were painted in uniform RLM 02 (I used Revell 45, a slightly more greenish tone), with wheel discs in RLM 66, too.

 

Unit markings became minimal and quite sober. I gave the aircraft a typical late-war “Reichsverteidigung” fuselage band, and in JG 53’s case it is plain black. The black band was deliberately chosen because it is a good, much darker contrast to the murky RLM 74, so that the latter appears lighter than it actually is, lowering the contrast to the RLM 76 spots.

 

The decals were puzzled together from various sources. As an aircraft of the 3rd group the unit’s ID color would be yellow, reflected in the tactical code and the fin tip. For some contrast and to emphasize the long gun barrel I gave it white and black stripes – as a security measure for ground handling. For some more variety I painted one air intake in very dark grey (Revell 06, Anthracite) and the other one in steel Metallizer, simulating replacement parts. The Balkenkreuze come from various sheets – I used simplified “low viz” versions all around. The undulating yellow bar for the 3rd group comes from a TL Modellbau sheet, while the yellow “4” came from a Fw 190 A sheet from Sky Models. A small “4” on the nose was added as a wacky detail, too, the “Pik As” unit markings came IIRC from a Hobby Boss Bf 109 sheet. Since they turned out to have poor contrast/opacity I only used a few stencils from the P.1099A sheet, but due to the disruptive paint scheme this is not apparent.

 

Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri) and a wire antenna, scratched from heated black sprue material, was added between cockpit and fin.

  

Well, this modified Messerschmitt P.1099A looks simple, but the modified engine nacelles as well as the gun fairing under the nose called for serious PSR. The result looks quite natural, though, and AFAIK this weapon configuration was actually on German drawing boards. However, I am not certain about the cockpit canopy and other details on Revell’s kit, reference information is contradictive.

The paint scheme looks good, even though it was lent from a heavy bomber, and the poor Humbrol enamels did not yield a finish that I had hoped for – the paintwork could certainly have been better, but the overall impression of a late-war Pulkzerstörer is O.K., and this eventually counts.

NASA Associate Administrator, Science Mission Directorate, Thomas Zurbuchen, left, speaks to, Chairman of the Board of Intuitive Machines, Kam Ghaffarian, right, and VP of Research and Development of Intuitive Machines, Tim Crain, second from right, about their lunar lander, Friday, May 31, 2019, at Goddard Space Flight Center in Md. Astrobotic, Intuitive Machines, and Orbit Beyond have been selected to provide the first lunar landers for the Artemis program's lunar surface exploration. Photo credit: (NASA/Aubrey Gemignani)

This custom is for auction on eBay right now. To bid, visit ---> www.ebay.com/itm/161123370730?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&a...

 

To see more of this custom, visit ---> www.mintconditioncustom.com/custom-aliens-sgt-apone-kenne...

  

Remember the awesome Kenner Aliens toy line from the early 90's? It’s always been one of my favorites. Recently I was hit with inspiration to recreate several of the old Kenner figures, but in a modern, more realistic, NECA style. After looking at Sgt. Apone, all the parts immediately came to me and I knew I had to do it. Sgt. Apone here is “frankensteining” at its best. He’s made from the body of a NECA Jungle Patrol Dutch, the head and arms of an Expendables 2 Hale Caesar, and the lower legs of a NECA Half Life 2 Gordon Freeman. His web gear was taken from a NECA Hicks figure, and made to fit in a similar style as the original Sgt. Apone figure. The bio-mechanical arm is pieced together from terminator bits and random pieces of fodder.

 

The rifle came from an Alien Resurrection Ripley figure. I remade the original figure’s grenades using various bits of fodder, and some polystyrene. I gave mine a chain in the middle and I made each one a bit different, as if they’re carrying different kinds of payloads. I know, I’ve thought far too much about this. The facehugger comes from the old Kenner toy line, just repainted to look like the movie. I painted Sgt. Apone using the original Kenner figure as my guide, making sure I got the exact same color scheme, making him look as totally 90's as possible. So now Sgt. Apone is ready for some bug stomping action! I plan to do an entire line of Kenner Aliens updates, both the Colonial Marines and the Xenomorphs, so be sure to check Mint Condition Customs for more updates!

Please visit www.dailydieseldose.com for more!