Apollo Mission designators

I'm reading "Apollo: The Lost and Forgotten Missions" by Shayler. After the
Apollo 1 fire the mission designators were changed. Apollo 2
never flew. Apollo 4 was the first Saturn V test. Apollo 5 was the first
test flight for the LM. Apollo 6 was the second Saturn V test. Of course
Apollo 7 was the first manned test of the CSM.

2 Questions and a lot of speculating on my part....

1. What happened to Apollo 3? Shayler doesn't say much about this mission.
2. Is there any possibility the Original 7 astronauts kept Apollo 3 around
so the first manned mission would be Apollo 7? Sort of a throw back to
Mercury i.e. Freedom 7, Liberty Bell 7, Faith 7, etc. Schirra was due to
retire after Apollo 7 and who knew at the time that Shepard, Slayton, or
Glenn would fly again, and Cooper was pretty well done. Maybe the Original
7 wanted to fly their last flight with a seven in the name. Yes I know
Grissom, Cooper, and Schirra got away from the "7" concept during Gemini.

Scott

"Scott J" wrote in message
t...
I'm reading "Apollo: The Lost and Forgotten Missions" by Shayler. After
the
Apollo 1 fire the mission designators were changed. Apollo 2
never flew. Apollo 4 was the first Saturn V test. Apollo 5 was the first
test flight for the LM. Apollo 6 was the second Saturn V test. Of course
Apollo 7 was the first manned test of the CSM.

2 Questions and a lot of speculating on my part....

1. What happened to Apollo 3? Shayler doesn't say much about this
mission.
2. Is there any possibility the Original 7 astronauts kept Apollo 3 around
so the first manned mission would be Apollo 7? Sort of a throw back to
Mercury i.e. Freedom 7, Liberty Bell 7, Faith 7, etc. Schirra was due to
retire after Apollo 7 and who knew at the time that Shepard, Slayton, or
Glenn would fly again, and Cooper was pretty well done. Maybe the
Original
7 wanted to fly their last flight with a seven in the name. Yes I know
Grissom, Cooper, and Schirra got away from the "7" concept during Gemini.

Scott

Scott -

There were a number of orbital and suborbital Saturn launches (I, IB and V)
designated by (SA-x) and (AS-xxx) between 1961 and 1968. The numbering
system, as you can see below, shuffled a few times - with "SA" designations
used through the 1965 Pegasus program (SA-10/Pegasus 3), AS-xxx was used for
the 1966 flights and the designation changed to Apollo # in 1967.

The Apollo 1 mission, originally designated Apollo 204 (1966 AS-xxx
numbering system), was officially assigned the name "Apollo 1" in honor of
Grissom, White, and Chaffee following the January 27, 1967 launchpad
accident(fire).
The first Saturn V launch (uncrewed) in November 9, 1967 was designated
Apollo 4 (no missions were ever officially designated Apollo 2 or 3).
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary...ollo1info.html

Sub-orbital - unmanned
1961 - SA-1 - First launch of Saturn 1 (October 27)
1962 - SA-2 - Project HighWater (April 25)
SA-3 - Project HighWater II (November 16)
1963 - SA-4 - Engine out capability test (March 1963)
1966 - AS-201 - First flight of Saturn 1B (February 26)
AS-202 - Apollo development flight (August 25)

Orbital - unmanned
1965 - Pegasus program - 3 launches using Saturn 1 (SA-9, SA-8, SA-10)
1966 - AS-203 - Saturn 1B with first S-IVB stage orbital mission (July 5)
1967 - Apollo 4 - first all up launch of Saturn V (November 9)
1968 - Apollo 5 - first test of LM in space (January 22)
Apollo 6 - final test launch of Saturn V (April 4)

G. Beat

"G.Beat" wrote in message
news:d3G2d.451007$%_6.126481@attbi_s01...
"Scott J" wrote in message
t...

Apollo 4 (no missions were ever officially designated Apollo 2 or 3).

Well something was going to fly on Apollo 2. Schirra & co were in training
to fly something and it doesn't seem
likely NASA would have flown CSM 014 unmanned had Apollo 1 been successful.
So we've got a crew and spacecraft for Apollo 2 even if your reference says
"there was no officially designated Apollo 2". Since they went straight to
Apollo 4 NASA must have had something in mind for Apollo 3.

So back to my questions:

What happened to Apollo 3? Was Apollo 3 contrived to allow Schirra to fly
the manned mission named Apollo 7 in keeping with the Mercury naming
tradition?

Scott

In article ,
"Scott J" wrote:

"G.Beat" wrote in message
news:d3G2d.451007$%_6.126481@attbi_s01...
"Scott J" wrote in message
t...

Apollo 4 (no missions were ever officially designated Apollo 2 or 3).

Well something was going to fly on Apollo 2. Schirra & co were in training
to fly something and it doesn't seem
likely NASA would have flown CSM 014 unmanned had Apollo 1 been successful.
So we've got a crew and spacecraft for Apollo 2 even if your reference says
"there was no officially designated Apollo 2". Since they went straight to
Apollo 4 NASA must have had something in mind for Apollo 3.

So back to my questions:

What happened to Apollo 3? Was Apollo 3 contrived to allow Schirra to fly
the manned mission named Apollo 7 in keeping with the Mercury naming
tradition?

Scott

No, what he's saying is that there were no "Apollo 1", "Apollo 2" or
"Apollo 3" at the time. "Apollo 1" was an informal designation at best
and was only formally applied (if at all) posthumously. At the time,
the formal mission designator was AS-204, to be flown with the Apollo
Block I vehicle CM-012. CM-014 was to be used to fly AS-205 with
Schirra, Eisele and Cunningham (e.g., what you refer to as "Apollo 2").
The CM-014 vehicle was disassembled in parallel with the CM-012 vehicle
during the post-fire investigation. That mission was to be AS-205.

After the A-204 fire, the entire program was revamped and rescheduled.
NASA shuffled mission designations around to end up with Apollo 7 as the
first manned mission, this time with a Block II spacecraft (CM-101).
The internal mission designator was still AS-205, by the way.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
~ Robert A. Heinlein
http://www.angryherb.net

Before the fire, there were no single digit mission designators.
Grissom, White and Chaffee were going to fly the "Apollo-Saturn 204"
(AS-204) mission, boosted to orbit by the fourth Saturn IB launcher.
Schirra and company were going to fly AS-205, etc. The Saturn V
missions were going to use AS-5xx designators. It made sense, but the
media guys didn't like it for their headlines. After the fire, the
news guys started calling the first planned Apollo flight "Apollo One".
NASA adopted the idea when it launched SA-501, the first Saturn V,
which it called "Apollo 4" simply because it was the fourth Saturn
vehicle launched for the Apollo program. It had been preceded by the
SA-201, SA-202, and SA-203 Saturn-IB Apollo missions.

- Ed Kyle

"Scott J" wrote:
Well something was going to fly on Apollo 2. Schirra & co were in training
to fly something and it doesn't seem likely NASA would have flown CSM 014
unmanned had Apollo 1 been successful.

Schirra & co were variously backups to Grissom & Co, or slated to fly
a follow on mission to AS-204 extending the flight time of the CSM to
two weeks.

So we've got a crew and spacecraft for Apollo 2 even if your reference says
"there was no officially designated Apollo 2". Since they went straight to
Apollo 4 NASA must have had something in mind for Apollo 3.

There is no consistency to the scheme. None. Zip. Nada. There never
was an Apollo 1 planned (the name was given unofficially and
retroactively) . There never was a mission designated Apollo 2 or
Apollo 3. Nobody knows why the numbers were skipped.

So back to my questions:
What happened to Apollo 3? Was Apollo 3 contrived to allow Schirra to fly
the manned mission named Apollo 7 in keeping with the Mercury naming
tradition?

Your question was answered.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

"Scott J" wrote in message
...

"G.Beat" wrote in message
news:d3G2d.451007$%_6.126481@attbi_s01...
"Scott J" wrote in message
t...

Apollo 4 (no missions were ever officially designated Apollo 2 or 3).

Well something was going to fly on Apollo 2. Schirra & co were in training
to fly something and it doesn't seem
likely NASA would have flown CSM 014 unmanned had Apollo 1 been
successful.
So we've got a crew and spacecraft for Apollo 2 even if your reference
says
"there was no officially designated Apollo 2". Since they went straight
to
Apollo 4 NASA must have had something in mind for Apollo 3.

So back to my questions:

What happened to Apollo 3? Was Apollo 3 contrived to allow Schirra to fly
the manned mission named Apollo 7 in keeping with the Mercury naming
tradition?

Scott

NO,
it was circumstance that the final numbering actually worked out that way
.....
any failure in late 1967/early 1968 - that would have required additional
unmanned test launches - and a change in the numbering for the first crewed
(manned) launch may have occurred.

That said, with the pogo problems experienced on Apollo 6 - an additional
launch was not made -- since they believed they understood the
problems/solutions.

1966 - AS-201 - First flight of Saturn 1B - suborbital (February 26)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...log?sc=APST201
AS-203 - Saturn 1B with first use of S-IVB stage - orbital (July
5)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1966-059A
AS-202 - Apollo development flight - suborbital (August 25)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...log?sc=APST202

1967 - AS-204 - Pad 34 fire (accident) - not flown (January 27)

Apollo 4 - First all up launch of Saturn V (November 9)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1967-113A

1968 - Apollo 5 - First test of LM in space - Saturn 1B (January 22)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1968-007A
Apollo 6 - Final test launch of Saturn V - unmanned (April 4)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1968-025A
Apollo 7 (AS-205) - first manned Apollo launch - Saturn 1B
(October 11)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1968-089A

One nit-pick/addition...

"G.Beat" ) writes:
"Scott J" wrote in message
...

"G.Beat" wrote in message
news:d3G2d.451007$%_6.126481@attbi_s01...
"Scott J" wrote in message
t...

Apollo 4 (no missions were ever officially designated Apollo 2 or 3).

Well something was going to fly on Apollo 2. Schirra & co were in training
to fly something and it doesn't seem
likely NASA would have flown CSM 014 unmanned had Apollo 1 been
successful.
So we've got a crew and spacecraft for Apollo 2 even if your reference
says "there was no officially designated Apollo 2". Since they went
straight to Apollo 4 NASA must have had something in mind for Apollo 3.

So back to my questions:

What happened to Apollo 3? Was Apollo 3 contrived to allow Schirra to
fly the manned mission named Apollo 7 in keeping with the Mercury naming
tradition?

Scott

NO,
it was circumstance that the final numbering actually worked out that way
....
any failure in late 1967/early 1968 - that would have required additional
unmanned test launches - and a change in the numbering for the first
crewed (manned) launch may have occurred.

That said, with the pogo problems experienced on Apollo 6 - an additional
launch was not made -- since they believed they understood the
problems/solutions.

1966 - AS-201 - First flight of Saturn 1B - suborbital (February 26)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...log?sc=APST201
AS-203 - Saturn 1B with first use of S-IVB stage - orbital
(July 5)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1966-059A
AS-202 - Apollo development flight - suborbital (August 25)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...log?sc=APST202

1967 - AS-204 - Pad 34 fire (accident) - not flown (January 27)

Well, spacecraft 012 not flown: Rocket AS-204 flown as the below
mentioned Apollo 5, unmanned, first unmanned test flight of LM.

Apollo 4 - First all up launch of Saturn V (November 9)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1967-113A

1968 - Apollo 5 - First test of LM in space - Saturn 1B (January 22)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1968-007A
Apollo 6 - Final test launch of Saturn V - unmanned (April 4)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1968-025A
Apollo 7 (AS-205) - first manned Apollo launch - Saturn 1B
(October 11)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...g?sc=1968-089A

Andre


--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Scott J" wrote:
Well something was going to fly on Apollo 2. Schirra & co were in
training
to fly something and it doesn't seem likely NASA would have flown CSM 014
unmanned had Apollo 1 been successful.

Schirra & co were variously backups to Grissom & Co, or slated to fly
a follow on mission to AS-204 extending the flight time of the CSM to
two weeks.

No sweat. Schirra would have flown the next mission, probably designated
Apollo 2. I already said that.....


There is no consistency to the scheme. None. Zip. Nada. There never
was an Apollo 1 planned (the name was given unofficially and
retroactively) . There never was a mission designated Apollo 2 or
Apollo 3. Nobody knows why the numbers were skipped.

Well that's why I'm asking the question, because nobody seems to know......
They must have had some reason to say "Ok this one's Apollo 4". Just
because you
and I don't know what it is doesn't mean there isn't a reason.

What I'm suggesting here, somewhat speculatively and without substantiation
to be sure, is that there
was no spacecraft or mission for the Apollo 3 designator and that "Apollo
3" was contrived to allow
the last remaining flight qualified astronaut of the Original 7 to fly his
last mission designated as "Apollo 7"

I'm not interested at all in the NASA official designators i.e. "AS-205".
Just the designators that came out of the Astronaut office. Maybe I'd have
been clearer had I called them "call signs" vs. designators. Sorry.

What happened to Apollo 3? Was Apollo 3 contrived to allow Schirra to fly
the manned mission named Apollo 7 in keeping with the Mercury naming
tradition?

Your question was answered.

Sorry mate, not even close to answered.
..

wrote in message
...
Before the fire, there were no single digit mission designators.
Grissom, White and Chaffee were going to fly the "Apollo-Saturn 204"
(AS-204) mission, boosted to orbit by the fourth Saturn IB launcher.
Schirra and company were going to fly AS-205, etc. The Saturn V
missions were going to use AS-5xx designators. It made sense, but the
media guys didn't like it for their headlines. After the fire, the
news guys started calling the first planned Apollo flight "Apollo One".
NASA adopted the idea when it launched SA-501, the first Saturn V,
which it called "Apollo 4" simply because it was the fourth Saturn
vehicle launched for the Apollo program. It had been preceded by the
SA-201, SA-202, and SA-203 Saturn-IB Apollo missions.

- Ed Kyle


Ed -- This makes sense and fits with what I already know. I'll go chew on
it. Thanks. Scott