Son of Little Joe II

BJ-1 may not have gotten a MA number because the Atlas at the time was
not considered operational yet.
The Air Force launched Big Joe so NASA was only interested in the
payload, which they called Big Joe.
BJ-1 was considered a success even though the Atlas 10-D it was riding
on failed ... the two outboard booster engines failed to separate as
shown in my last post.
However the Atlas was announced to be operational by a successful
launch of Atlas 12-D on that same day from Vandenberg.

Yea, I was only listing the Mercury missions, I didn'y know that Little
Joe was used for Apollo ... or I had forgotten.


Rusty wrote:
wrote:
Flight test of a Little Joe boosted full- scale spacecraft model and
escape system for Project Mercury - May 1, 1962

The first one that Rusty lists seems to be LJ-2 on my list, the mission
with Sam the chimp, launched Dec. 4, 1959.

I wasn't listing all of the Little Joe missions, only Little Joe PDF's
that NASA has
available online.

Wikipedia has a complete list of Project Mercury missions here, (that
includes all Little Joe missions):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury


Rusty

Yea, I was only listing the Mercury missions, I didn't know that Little

Joe was used for Apollo ... or I had forgotten.

One more thing ... the Little Joe rockets used solid fuel, I hadn't
known that either.


Rusty wrote:
wrote:
Flight test of a Little Joe boosted full- scale spacecraft model and
escape system for Project Mercury - May 1, 1962

The first one that Rusty lists seems to be LJ-2 on my list, the mission
with Sam the chimp, launched Dec. 4, 1959.

I wasn't listing all of the Little Joe missions, only Little Joe PDF's
that NASA has
available online.

Wikipedia has a complete list of Project Mercury missions here, (that
includes all Little Joe missions):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Mercury


Rusty

wrote:
BJ-1 may not have gotten a MA number because the Atlas at the time was
not considered operational yet.
The Air Force launched Big Joe so NASA was only interested in the
payload, which they called Big Joe.


Air Force crews launched all of the Mercury-Atlas and Gemini-Titan
launch vehicles.

https://www.patrick.af.mil/heritage/6555th/6555fram.htm


Rusty

Rusty wrote:
wrote:
BJ-1 may not have gotten a MA number because the Atlas at the time was
not considered operational yet.
The Air Force launched Big Joe so NASA was only interested in the
payload, which they called Big Joe.


Air Force crews launched all of the Mercury-Atlas and Gemini-Titan
launch vehicles.

https://www.patrick.af.mil/heritage/6555th/6555fram.htm



Correction. Air Force contractors launched all of NASA's Mercury-Atlas
launch vehicles and
Air Force crews launched all of the Gemini-Titan launch vehicles.

Rusty

On 24 Dec 2005 08:14:17 -0800, "Rusty"
wrote:

Air Force crews launched all of the Mercury-Atlas and Gemini-Titan
launch vehicles.

....Actually, it was Air Farce *contractors* - most of whom worked for
and/or through Convair - who launched the Atlas for NASA.

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

On 24 Dec 2005 07:20:23 -0800, wrote:

One more thing ... the Little Joe rockets used solid fuel, I hadn't
known that either.

....Might help to read a few of the histories, then. Or spend some time
over on Mark Waid's site. At least, before you stick your foot in your
mouth yet again.

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

In article om,
wrote:
LJ-1 Little Joe 1 Aug. 21, 1959 Wallops Island - failed
...adapter-clamp ring remained intact on the launcher. Near apogee, at
about 2000 ft, the clamping ring that held tower to capsule released
and the little pyro-rocket for jettisoning the tower fired...

Also, the drogue chute deployed... but there wasn't quite enough charge
left in the not-fully-charged batteries to deploy the main chute, which
rather spoiled the otherwise-correct functioning of the escape system.

BJ-1 Big Joe 1 Sept. 9, 1959 - success
...About 7 hours after launch, the destroyer Strong reported that she had
netted the boilerplate capsule intact.
Spacecraft test successful, Launch Vehicle Failure. The two outboard
engines had not separated... The impact point was 500 miles short.

Which was why the long delay before pickup.

...and the capsule separated from the booster 138 seconds too late.

Having first exhausted its attitude-control nitrogen trying to turn the
whole stack to reentry attitude! Max Faget's capsule aerodynamics got
more of a test than expected, but as reentry started, drag forces did
indeed orient the capsule properly; the paint on the upper body barely
got singed.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

In article ,
Dale wrote:
It's great that NASA already has a cutesie name for the test booster.
Every efficient agency should have its priorities...

NASA so rarely shows any sense of humor, that it should be encouraged
when it does show up.

(Now, the Italian Space Agency is another story, as witness the names
they gave the station's pressurized cargo modules...)
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

(Henry Spencer) writes:

Having first exhausted its attitude-control nitrogen trying to turn the
whole stack to reentry attitude!

Nitrogen and not hydrogen peroxide? It was not using the standard
Mercury attitude control system?