LC-37A never used

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 17:36:35 -0500, Brian Thorn
wrote:

it was to be a more modern launch complex and would replace LC-34 for
Saturn C-1 and C-2 operations. Rising costs in 1961 forced NASA to
instead build one pad at LC-37 (Pad B) and keep LC-34.

This
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LC-37
says that NASA accepted 37A in 1963 to support Saturn IB.

The LOR decision meant the intermediate Saturns (C-2, C-3...) would
not be built and would not need a launch pad, so LC-37A was never
needed. The mission that became Apollo 9 was originally expected to
use two Saturn IB flights in rapid succession, one from LC-34 and one
from LC-37B.

Wasn't 34 redone to accommodate the Saturn IB when 37A was already
built?
--
Replace you know what by j to email

Brian Thorn wrote:


Why was LC-39A never used?


(LC-37A)

Pat is correct. Launch Complex 37 was built as a hedge against LC-34
being destroyed in an explosion.

The young 'uns around here don't remember that seemed downright amazing
that none of the Saturn series of boosters ever blew up, because every
other major rocket we built before them did it repeatedly. :-D

Pat

Jud McCranie wrote:
See this map, D and E were for Advanced Saturn or Nova
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CCAFS.jpg


You can tell they were trying to get Nova way out in the boonies in case
it blew.
NASA did buy the land for the Nova pads, is it still NASA owned, or has
it been used for other purposes?

Pat

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 20:08:47 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

You can tell they were trying to get Nova way out in the boonies in case
it blew.

Yes, they are spread out on the northern part. I think if a Sat V
blew it would have a blast radius like a small atomic bomb.
--
Replace you know what by j to email

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:11:17 -0400, Jud McCranie
wrote:

it was to be a more modern launch complex and would replace LC-34 for
Saturn C-1 and C-2 operations. Rising costs in 1961 forced NASA to
instead build one pad at LC-37 (Pad B) and keep LC-34.

This
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LC-37
says that NASA accepted 37A in 1963 to support Saturn IB.

Okay, re-reading "Moonport"...

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi.../contents.html

....I agree, 37A was built. (My goof, sorry.) But only for Saturn I,
and it never actually hosted a launch probably because it was only a
backup pad to the seaside 37B. It was never upgraded for Saturn IB.
(1963 is much too early to be accepted for Saturn IB, which didn't fly
until 1966.)

Launch Complex 34: SA-1 through SA-4
Launch Complex 37, Pad B: SA-5 through SA-10
Launch Complex 34: SA-201 (first Saturn IB)

"Moonport" is somewhat vague on the decisions about the pads (and
"Stages to Saturn" is no help at all.) Reading between the lines, my
guess is that Launch Complex 34 was not originally equipped to support
Liquid Hydrogen operations with the S-IV stage, that was to be the job
of the bigger and more modern Launch Complex 37. LC-37 also was
originally conceived as having only a single pad, but a second pad was
added to serve as backup to the first. LC-37 was expected to be the
primary Saturn I launch facility after SA-4.

But then came the LOR decision, and with it the need to accelerate the
launch timetable to get the improved S-IVB stage flight-tested for
Saturn V, as well as launch Apollo (which had outgrown Saturn I) into
orbit sooner than would be possible with Saturn V. Saturn IB was born.

So the first four Saturn I's, which had only dummy upper stages, all
flew from LC-34. Then NASA's attention moved up the coast to LC-37 for
SA-5, the first "all-up" Saturn I flight. SA-5 finally launched in
January, 1964. During this time, NASA was planning Saturn IB flights
to begin in 1965-66, using the stretched S-IB first stage and the
improved S-IVB upper stage. So while still flying Saturn I's (SA-6
through 10) to gain experience with the vehicle and launch the Pegasus
satellites, NASA needed to modify a launch complex for the bigger
Saturn IB.

They couldn't do this with LC-37, which had a common Mobile Service
Tower for the two pads (A and B) without interfering with Saturn I
test flights, but they could expand old LC-34 for Saturn IB. So LC-37
finished off the Saturn I program (all flights were from LC-37B
because the low flight rate didn't require the use of the inland
backup pad) while LC-34 was upgraded for Saturn IB. SA-10, the last
Saturn I, flew from LC-37B in July, 1965. The first Saturn IB (SA-201)
flew from LC-34 in February 1966.

Now NASA had to build a second Saturn IB launch pad, because it was
planning to launch two Saturn IBs in close order (SA-205 and SA-206)
to test the Command Module and Lunar Module in Earth orbit sometime in
1967, since Saturn V was not expected to be ready until 1968 (after
the Fire, this mission became Apollo 9) 37B was the logical choice,
since 37A was only a backup pad. LC-34 would launch the crew and
LC-37B would launch the LM. So LC-37B was upgraded for Saturn IB, and
actually did launch the lunar module on Apollo 6 in 1968.

Brian

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 20:08:47 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:


You can tell they were trying to get Nova way out in the boonies in case
it blew.
NASA did buy the land for the Nova pads, is it still NASA owned, or has
it been used for other purposes?

It is today's Canaveral National Seashore.

Brian

On Wed, 05 Aug 2009 20:57:27 -0500, Brian Thorn
wrote:

...I agree, 37A was built. (My goof, sorry.) But only for Saturn I, ...

Thanks for all of that information. Now it makes sense about what
they did. Wikipedia says that 37A was for Sat IB, but that must be
wrong. The map of pads shows 37A for Sat I (not IB).

--
Replace you know what by j to email

Jud McCranie wrote:
Yes, they are spread out on the northern part. I think if a Sat V
blew it would have a blast radius like a small atomic bomb.


I used to know that... was it something like 1/2 mile?
The acoustic footprint of a normal Nova launch was going be pretty
appalling also.

Pat

Pat Flannery writes:


The young 'uns around here don't remember that seemed downright amazing
that none of the Saturn series of boosters ever blew up, because every
other major rocket we built before them did it repeatedly. :-D

Chicago Bridge and Iron...


--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433