Versions, opinions. Chapter 25
A Brief History of Skylab
The version about the “lunar” rocket is strongly contradicted by NASA’s message about the launch of the huge Skylab orbital station with a mass of 75 tons on May 14, 1973 (Fig. 1).
Ill.1.The structure of the Skylab station
(NASA artist's drawing).
1 - working compartment;
2 -an airlock for astronauts to go into outer space;
3 – docking module c two docking points;
4 - solar observatory;
5 - Apollo ship
So let's take a look at this counterargument.. Let's start with brief history"Skylab"("Heavenly Laboratory").
1. « Skylab was created and launched in a hurry. As S. Alexandrov writes: , “When it became clear that the lunar program would be limited to a few flights, the Skylab station was hastily created.” It would seem, what is the connection between two programs of such different purposes? Why is it necessary to quickly create a near-Earth station if the end of flights to the Moon is in sight?And yet, just five months after the flight of the last Apollo (A-17), Skylab was launched into low-Earth orbit.
2. Having started the Skylab program, NASA did not seem to intend to continue it. This is evidenced by the fact thatjust 3 months after the launch of Skylab and six months before the return of the last third crew from space, NASA decided to mothball all remaining Saturn 5s. And only they could launch subsequent Skylabs. This looks a little strange because, starting new project, developers, as a rule, see the prospects for its continuation in the most rosy tones. And, conversely, they don’t start a new project if they don’t see prospects for its development. In this light, NASA's decision to close the Skylab mission as soon as it began appears unusual.
Skylab was inhabited for only a tenth of the total time of its existence.All 3 visiting crews stayed at the station for a total of 171 days. After the return of the third crew (February 8, 1974), the station flew empty for 5 years. In July 1979, it entered the dense layers of the atmosphere and collapsed .
3. Bmore three people never been at the station.
According to NASA, three Apollos with crews of three people visited Skylab in orbit. The corresponding flights were named “Skylab-2”, “Skylab-3” and “Skylab-4”. (“Skylab-1” or simply “Skylab” is the launch of the station itself, which was carried out in unmanned mode). Skylab, according to the description, had two docking nodes (Fig. 1), and two Apollos could dock to it at once. But this has never happened. First, the previous crew departed, and only then the next one arrived. N and not once did the number of astronauts on Skylab increase due to the second arriving crew, as was practiced at the Soviet Salyut and Mir stations, and is now happening at the ISS. As a result, despite the reported very large size working compartment of the station, there were never more than three people on it.
4. Despite the “Skylab experience,” NASA was unable to create a full-fledged orbital station and in this was decisively behind the USSR (Russia).Having amazed contemporaries with its enormous size, Skylab disappeared without repeating itself in the history of astronautics. Even the modern ISS, “born” 30 years after Skylab and incorporating all the achievements of the world space technology over these 30 years, cannot compete with Skylab in terms of weight and dimensions. It is made up of blocks whose mass does not exceed 20 tons, that is, more than three times less than the mass of Skylab.
After Skylab, NASA tried to create a new orbital station, Freedom, but failedand after ten years of fruitless efforts, she stopped this work, setting a course for the ISS and relying on Russian (Soviet) experience. Skylab "worked well in orbit, but had no prospects for development".
5. All 9 astronauts who visited the station were US citizens. Not a single cosmonaut (astronaut) who is not a US citizen worked at the station, and cannot confirm its real structure. So, like the “flights to the moon,” this American space record is confirmed only by American witnesses.
All these facts encourage us to continue our acquaintancewith this station. Let's look at pictures of how the astronauts lived and worked in Skylab.
Such pictures can be taken on Earth
As NASA explains ,
spacious work compartment 1
was equipped in the rocket stage fuel tank (Fig. 1). Figure 2 shows the inside of this compartment. Here the author's attention was drawn to space suits marked with red marks.
Ill.2.Spacesuit exhibition?
Typically, designers try to place objects that are similar in type and purpose in one place: it is easier to use and takes up less space. And here it looks like some kind of exhibition of spacesuits, built in haste. One gets the impression that we were invited to look into the inside of a real fuel tank, temporarily decorated as a space habitat. Even if this is the author’s subjective impression, one thing can be said with confidence: the photograph in Fig. 2 does not bear any signs that it was taken in space.
Figure 3 shows a happy astronaut Conrad. He climbed into a special bag - a container where he will take a shower. NASA's commentary on this image says that this is happening in Skylab, that is, in space.
Fig.3
. The cloth sagged under the influence of gravity.
(Shower at Skylab)
But this scene would look exactly the same on Earth. The doubt is reinforced by the red-marked rag visible in the upper right corner of the photo. She sagged strictly vertically, as if the force of weight was acting on her. How did this force “make its way” to the orbital station, where weightlessness should reign?
In the photographs, Fig. 4a, b, c, the astronauts are trying to convince us how easy it is for them to move in zero gravity.
Fig.4. Skylab astronauts need support. NASA captions:
A) Gibson floats through the airlock hatch; b) The car floats in the bow; V) Lusma as an acrobat
« Gibson floats through the airlock hatch." - this is NASA's caption for the photo Fig.4a. However, to get such a picture, Gibson only needs to stand in the hatch opening here on Earth and raise his hands. The photo was taken from above.
"The car is floating in the bow" under the domed “ceiling” of the working compartment (4b). But notice that Kar is glued to this ceiling. And imagine that the "ceiling" is actually the floor on which the astronaut lies. Then the picture will become completely “earthly”. The astronaut has an object under his back. It peeks over his right shoulder. Used as a support, this item provides a small gap between the astronaut's body and the floor so that the astronaut appears to be suspended in the air. At the same time, the astronaut, in order to keep his unusualpose, touches visible front with hands and feet meth.
"Lusma as an acrobat" also depicts “free floating” (ill. 4c). But, again, his legs are very suspiciously close to the treasured support (the edge of the hatch), on which he seems to be leaning with one of his knees.
Special attention deserves a witty photograph, ill. 5a. Here as described by NASAAstronaut Kahr holds Astronaut Pogue on the tip of his finger. This picture, it would seem, convincingly demonstrates weightlessness - one person on Earth cannot hold another on the tip of his finger, while the other remains in an upside-down position.
But take a closer look at this photo. Being in zero gravity, peoplecan be in space in arbitrary positions relative to each other (Fig. 6). And in photo 5a, the astronauts positioned themselves in relation to each other as if they were being “built” in one line by some force.
Turning over picture 5a, you can seehow it could have been made on Earth (5b).It is enough for Pogu to stand “tiptoe” on the pipe, and for Karoo to hang on a hidden support (say, on a crossbar). And so that this support is not visible to us, the figure of Kara is shown only from the waist up. The hanging Kar touches the crown of the standing Pog with his finger.And the force that lines up the astronauts may well be gravity.
Ill.5.And gravity seems to be at work here too.
A) NASA caption: " "Kar demonstrates 'weight lifting' in zero gravity by holding astronaut Pogue on the tip of his finger."
b)here's how you can take such a picture on Earth, in the absence of weightlessness
In general, the impression from the photographs, illustrations 2, 3, 4, 5, is that there is no weightlessness in them, but there is a desire to show it. Although, it would seem, if you have a huge space station at your disposal, then why waste effort on such tricks?
These clips about weightlessness can be filmed on an airplane.
On NASA websites and in films, you can find up to two dozen individual clips or episodes embedded in films in which Skylab astronauts actually demonstrate weightlessness. Figure 6a shows a frame from one such clip.
Ill.6.Astronauts and cosmonauts demonstrate weightlessness:
A)astronauts demonstrate weightlessness supposedly in Skylab; b) Soviet cosmonaut in a simulator plane in the same years; V) scheme for achieving weightlessness in a simulator aircraft
Watching clips on the topic of weightlessness in Skylab shows all the episodes about weightlessness, supposedly filmed in Skylab, are very short-lived. Their average duration is 10 seconds. And when there are longer clips, they consist of a set of separate short scenes. Why were the astronaut-cinema operators in such a hurry, if in real life space station weightlessness is a constant “thing”, and there is no rush when filming it. The assumption arises that all these short clips were filmed not in space, but in an airplane known to all astronauts - a simulator (ill. 6c). To achieve a short-term state of weightlessness in the cabin, such an aircraft accelerates upward and, continuing to move by inertia, makes a “slide” and then begins to fall down. In the short seconds of passing the “slide,” a state close to weightlessness sets in in the airplane cabin. It would be ideal if the outside air did not slow down the plane’s fall. The pilot of the plane tries to compensate for this braking as accurately as possible with the help of the engines. After passing the hill, the plane cannot fall for a long time, otherwise it will not have time to recover from the dive. The typical duration of weightlessness on an airplane is about 30 seconds.(at a certain risk it may be slightly increased).
Airplane simulators have been used since the very first years of manned space exploration. In Fig. 6c we see cosmonaut A. Nikolaev floating in zero gravity in an airplane during the very years discussed in this book. Therefore, NASA could well have filmed a tumble in zero gravity inside such an aircraft for a dozen or two seconds, and then presented it as acrobatic exercises supposedly inside a space station (ill. 6a). There are no technical difficulties in reproducing the interior of the station in the cabin of an aircraft simulator. The size of its interior is quite sufficient for this. Suffice it to say that entire mock-ups of Soyuz spacecraft were loaded onto our planes, and the cosmonauts hovered around them, practicing spacewalks.
The situation was more difficult for NASA with filming some subtle physical experiments in zero gravity. Let's talk about one of them. It is known that in zero gravity, water collects into balls that float freely in the surrounding air. Figure 7 shows several frames from a clip in which an ISS cosmonaut demonstrates this experience. . First, the astronaut squeezed the water balloon out of the drinking syringe, and it hung near his chin (ill. 7a). After 6 seconds, the astronaut blew on it, and the ball split into two (ill. 7b). Finally, the astronaut got tired of the balls, and he swallowed first one, and then the other (ill. 7c, d). The entire episode took 13-14 seconds, and all this time the balls hung calmly in the air in front of the astronaut’s nose, and the astronaut slowly played with them. This immobility was a consequence of the ideal weightlessness on the space station.
Ill.7.This is real weightlessness.
In the International Space Station, water balloons hang in the air for as long as desired until the astronaut gets tired of it.
It's a different matter in an airplane simulator. No matter how much he regulates the operation of the engines, the plane will fall either a little slower or a little faster than it would be in free fall. Tumbling astronauts will not pay attention to these small deviations from the state of weightlessness. But a water balloon under such circumstances will not be able to hang motionless. It will shift in one direction or another depending on who is outmaneuvering whom. at the moment: whether the thrust of the engines slightly exceeds the braking from the air or vice versa. And only in rare moments of transition from one state to another, the ball will freeze in the air of the cabin. From this it is clear that in a simulator aircraft the experiment with a freely hanging water balloon, if possible, will be for a very short time. This is exactly what is observed in the video with a free water balloon, allegedly filmed in Skylab. One of them shows a water ball floating freely in the air (Fig. 8). This episode lasts only 1.4s. Say the word “Skylab” once - that’s the entire duration of this soaring.
Ill.8.A short moment of joy:
The Skylab astronaut was able to demonstrate a suspended water balloon for only 1.4 seconds.
As a result, it becomes clear that all those short-term clips about weightlessness in Skylab, which NASA shows, could well have been filmed in a simulator aircraft, inside of which the visibility of the station premises is equipped.
Why did only three people work in the spacious station?
According to The habitable volume of the Skylab working compartment was 270 cubic meters (Fig. 9a). A NASA artist painted the inside of Skylab (Fig. 9a). To help the reader notice the human figure in such space, the author put an arrow in the drawing.“Such a large volume made it possible to create in Skylab conditions for the crew’s life and work that were close to those on earth. At the rear of the block there is a wardroom, cabins for sleeping and resting." . The astronauts of the modern ISS can envy such conditions: look how cramped they live in (ill. 9b).But why was the crew of the spacious Skylab so small - only three people?? Is there really no work for more astronauts? Look, in the 5 times more cramped room of the ISS module (50 cubic meters), 7 people settled down to rest (Fig. 9b). Of course, there is not always such a crowd on the ISS: it happens when crews change. Usually 3-4 people work there. The change of crews according to the scheme “passed the watch - accepted the watch” makes it possible to transfer the station in working condition, so to speak, from hand to hand, without its conservation. But two Apollos never docked at Skylab at the same time, although for this purpose, according to NASA’s description, there was the necessary docking module (Fig. 1). In the end More than three people have never lived in the supposedly spacious Skylab, even for a short time. This can be explained by the fact that In fact there was no operating compartment on Skylab. And the astronauts who flew to Skylab remained to live in what they arrived in - in the cramped cabin of the Apollo spacecraft.
Shot 9. A) 1973 - how spacious it is in Skylab (drawing by a NASA artist);
b) 2003 - 30 years later, 7 people are huddled in a cramped modern ISS
According to NASA, the three visiting expeditions to Skylab lasted 28, 59 and 84 days, respectively. It’s hard to say how long they were actually there, given NASA’s extensive experience in simulations. It cannot be ruled out that the astronauts of the Skylab-2,3,4 missions would actually return earlier from orbit, followed by a spectacular splashdown within the time announced by NASA; fortunately, the technique of show splashdowns was apparently worked out quite well (Chapter 24).
Possible scheme for simulating an orbital station
According to the official version NASA's manned block of the Skylab station was a converted, empty stage body III (S - IVB ) "Saturn 5". The launch of the station into orbit was carried out only by the first two stages of Saturn 5. But everything that we have learned about Skylab indicates that it was not an orbital station, but an imitation of it.How was it accomplished?
First of all, we note that according to our version, Fig. 10a shows not the Saturn-5, which did not take place, but another “lunar” rocket, that is, a dressed-up Saturn-1B, in which one working stage is located at the very bottom , and the second working stage (the same S-IVB ) crowns the rocket. On the “lunar” rocket stage S-IVB fully fueled, which rules out any options with the Skylab working compartment. It is simply not on the launching rocket. According to our version, the “lunar” rocket is so overloaded with a “masquerade” that even entering low-Earth orbit is simply a spent empty stage S-IVB seems doubtful. Therefore, most likely, the “lunar” rocket that NASA launched on May 14, 1973, codenamed Skylab 1, did not put anything into orbit at all, and its last stage fell into the Atlantic Ocean. But the launch itself was not in vain: it depicted the launch of Skylab, without which the rest would have been unthinkable.
But if the next “lunar” rocket fell into the ocean, then how did the structure that we see in Fig. 10b end up in orbit? According to the author, it could well have been launched in secret and at an appropriate time in a separate launch of the “normal” Saturn-1B. Let us remember that every second space launch, produced at that time in the USA, was secret (chap. 18). The second stage of the standard Saturn 1B(S - IVB ) easily enters low-Earth orbit and can represent Skylab. As a payload, this stage carries what is called a “solar telescope module” and a docking unit (Fig. 1).After entering orbit, the telescope module reclines on consoles, giving the entire complex a rather picturesque appearance.
Ill. 10.Version of the Skylab “orbital station” hoax:
a) another “lunar” rocket launches;
b) Skylab in orbit
The completeness of this view, however, was hampered by the appearance of a “naked” rocket stage with a nozzle sticking out from behind. It was entrusted to correct this deficiencyto the astronauts who soon arrived at Skylab on the Apollo spacecraft with the Skylab 2 mission. They had to disguise the spent rocket stage so that it would turn into something unlike itself. To justify the need for astronauts to go into outer space, NASA announced that during the launch of Skylab, the sun protection cover was torn off, one solar panel came off and another was damaged. , so the arriving astronauts are tasked with the appropriate repairs. In fact, according to the author, none of these incidents occurred, because from the bare step S-IVB there is nothing to pick. The arriving astronauts, having gone into space, attached a dummy solar battery panel “P” to the body of the rocket stage, installed a supposedly sunscreen, but in fact a camouflage screen “E” over it, and covered the rocket stage nozzle with a cover “H”, which NASA called it a cooling radiator. After this, Skylab took on the appearance that adorned the NASA archives (ill. 9b).
A slightly simpler version of the simulation is also possible, in which there is no need for an additional launch of Saturn-1B. It should be taken into account that in the launch of Skylab, the “lunar” rocket was launched for the thirteenth time. And, most likely, NASA specialists improved their brainchild over and over again. It cannot be ruled out that by the time of the Skylab launch, the “lunar” rocket could already have launched its last, empty stage.(S - IVB ) into orbit plus a few more tons of load (models of the named modules). In this case, an additional launch is not needed.
Imitating scientific achievements does not benefit progress
As S. Alexandrov writes, Skylab “worked well in orbit, but had no prospects for development...In the early 80s, p.Spurred by the successes of the Salyuts, the Americans began designing the Freedom station. There was no end in sight to the research work, and its leadership had absolutely no idea how to report to Congress for the money spent.” . And then the United States decided to create an orbital station, based on many years Russian experience .
But the dummy station could not have development prospects . And the Soviet orbital stations were real milestones in the development of astronautics, therefore it was the Soviet (Russian) experience that was useful in the creation of the ISS. For the same reason, “Skylab”, as an imitation of the station, was “visited” only at the very beginning of its “career”, and then, as soon as the need for the performance disappeared, it was abandoned .
You can't invite someone to a house that doesn't exist.
In 1975, during the Soyuz-Apollo flight, Soviet cosmonauts saw Apollo in action, and American cosmonauts saw our Soyuz. Since 1976, foreign cosmonauts began working on Soviet space stations. Later, the Americans actively invited foreign astronauts (cosmonauts) to fly on their shuttles. But only Americans saw Skylab in space. This fact is consistent with the version of the station imitation, becauseyou can't invite someone to a house that doesn't exist.
NASA apparently understood that the United States was expected to invite foreign astronauts to Skylab. And in 1975, when Skylab was already flying empty, NASA said the following words: : “After the completion of the Apollo, Skylab and Soyuz-Apollo programs, there will be two Saturn 5 rockets, one Skylab station, three Apollo command modules. NASA considered using this equipment to launch a second Skylab station, similar to the one launched in May 1973. Saturn V will launch Skylab. It will serve as a space station for the Soyuz and Apollo spacecraft. Using existing equipment, these options would cost between $220 million and $650 million. But the funds were not allocated. In August 1973, it was decided to mothball the equipment. In December 1976, the rockets and spacecraft were transferred to museums."
So, it all ended with talking. It's hard to believe that this happened due to lack of funds. Firstly, the amount mentioned is small by the standards of major projects(no more3% of the cost of the Apollo program). Secondly, the share participation of the USSR, and possibly other countries, would reduce NASA expenses.Therefore, it is more likely that the international Skylab was discussed only as a diversion.
"Skylab" - a brilliant epilogue to "Apollo"
Why was there a rush to launch and everything that followed? Is it really just because, as S. Aleksandrov writes, the lunar program is ending, and we need to do something, hurry somewhere?
The authors see the reason for this rush in another way. They write thatand after the completion of the Apollo flights, some Soviet specialists still had doubts about the reality of American landings on the Moon. Such doubts encouraged the continuation of the lunar race on the part of the USSR, and this threatened to expose the hoax. Just a manned flyby of the Moon (without landing) could show that there are no platforms from American lunar modules on the Moon. Even sending an automatic satellite to survey the lunar surface would be dangerous for the same reason. Therefore, it was necessary to push the USSR to curtail its lunar program in all directions. The urgent launch of the supposedly heavy Skylab served this purpose.. He “finished off” the last doubts regarding the existence of a real lunar rocket in the United States. H Three months after the success of Skylab, the USSR closed work on the program of manned flights to and to the Moon, and a little later stopped sending automatic vehicles there.
***
Skylab was essentially an epilogue to the Apollo program, a brilliant epilogue both in terms of the boldness of its design and the art of execution. And perhaps it is no coincidence that one of the directors of the Skylab program was Colonel Frank Borman, commander of Apollo 8, who did so much for the success of the entire lunar hoax (ill. 11).He was actor No. 1 in act No. 1 (“Apollo 8”) of this play, he carried out excellent political reconnaissance before the flight of Apollo 11 (chapter 20), and he prepared a brilliant epilogue for the entire Apollo program.
Ill. 11.Old acquaintance.
1 . NASA http://www. astronautix. com/craft/skylab. htm - detailed information on Skylab, about the delivery of rockets to the museum, see
2 Enz. "Cosmonautics". Under scientific ed. acad. B.E. Chertoka. M.: Avanta+, 2004, p. 126, 193. 336-337, 341-344
3. see[iv27], [iv28], [iv29], [iv30], [iv31], [iv32] section 28 Total in the series “American Space Odyssey” in the films “ Skylab: The First 40 days", "Skylab: The 2nd manned misson", "Four rooms e a rth view "There are up to two dozen such episodes.
The American orbital station Skylab was launched into orbit on May 14, 1973. According to the plans of NASA specialists, it was supposed to be in operation for almost a hundred years. However, the Americans flooded this station already in 1979. And the reason for its liquidation still remains an unsolved mystery.
Skylab turned out to be one of the most expensive United States programs in the history of space exploration. The cost of the project was about three billion dollars at the prices of that time. A truly astronomical amount.The station was designed and created by the famous designer Wernher von Braun. Its orbital block was created on the basis of the S-4B rocket, which is the third stage of the Saturn 5 launch vehicle. The rocket's hydrogen tank was converted into a two-story room for a crew of three. On the lower floor there were utility rooms, and on the upper floor there was a research laboratory. Together with the main block of the Apollo spacecraft docked to it, the volume of the station was 330 cubic meters. At the station, supplies of water, food and clothing were created in advance for the astronauts of the three planned expeditions. The payload weight of the station was 103 tons.
Troubles began immediately after the station was launched into low-Earth orbit at an altitude of about 435 kilometers. In the first 63 seconds of the flight, the high-speed pressure tore off part of the anti-meteor screen, as well as one of the two panels solar panels. The second battery was jammed with a piece of a torn meteorite shield. So, in any case, NASA engineers announced. A set of astronomical instruments moved away from the station and opened their solar panels, but their power was not enough. Due to the breakdown of the anti-meteor screen, which also served as a thermal protection shield, the temperature inside the station began to rise.
The first expedition that set off to the station on May 25, 1973, most of had to devote time repair work. The crew members went into outer space three times. Having worked at the station until June 22, the astronauts undocked from the station, flew around it, and returned to Earth, having spent 28 days in space. The second expedition departed for Skylab on July 28 and spent 59 days in orbit.
The third expedition launched on November 16, 1973 and was the longest, spending 84 days in space. And she was the last one on board the expensive station. And then something strange began to happen. Raised into a high orbit, the station began to quickly approach the Earth. And in 1979, Skylab was sunk. NASA made every effort to ensure that its debris ended up in the Indian Ocean. Despite this, about a thousand small fragments fell like metallic rain onto a densely populated area of Western Australia. Fortunately, there were no casualties.
The reason why the Americans flooded the station has not yet been clarified. Over time, specialists and journalists began to conduct independent investigations. The most sensational investigative journalism material was published in the newspaper “Prophecies and Sensations”, No. 336, August 1998. The article claimed that the Skylab station had been captured by aliens. Therefore, it was deliberately sunk along with the two aliens on board, who were unable to leave the station that had left orbit.
Experts, having looked at the published Skylab photographs, also noticed that in the front part of the station there is a power truss weighing about 11.4 tons, thanks to the existence of which the station’s fairing seemed to be an extra element. The question arose: why put into orbit an extra load of almost 12 tons, if every kilogram of the launched weight turns out to be literally golden in terms of costs?
Having thoroughly studied the design of the station, many experts came to the conclusion that it was specially created for docking with devices of extraterrestrial structures, or, more simply, with unidentified flying objects.
It was thanks to the fairing that an alien device could be attached to the airlock chamber, the dimensions of which could be 35-40 times greater than the dimensions of the station itself. And it had a length of 24.6 meters and a diameter of 6.6 meters. The task of the fairing truss was to withstand the load when docking an 80-ton station with a ship weighing more than 2 thousand tons. Whether this is true or not remains a mystery. But the side docking point was originally included in the station design. And NASA experts could not explain its purpose. But most likely they didn’t want to.
Some scientists have expressed the opinion that there was no damage when Skylab was launched into orbit. And the astronauts of the first expedition, who went into outer space three times, prepared the station for docking with a gigantic UFO.
Most likely, Skylab was not captured by aggressive aliens, and the main purpose of launching the station into space into a high orbit was to establish long-term contact with representatives of an alien civilization. But something went wrong. Perhaps this is why the station was deliberately flooded. But, as always, we don’t know whether this is really so.
Skylab orbital station
Skylab (Skylab, from the English sky laboratory (lit. celestial laboratory)) - the first and only national US, designed for technological, astrophysical, biomedical research, as well as for observation. Launched on May 14, 1973, hosted three expeditions on ships from May 1973 to February 1974, disembarked and collapsed on July 11, 1979.
Length - 24.6 m, maximum diameter - 6.6 m, weight - 77 tons, internal volume - 352.4 m³. Orbit altitude - 434-437 km (perigee-apogee), inclination - 50°.
The weight and size parameters (including useful volume) of the Skylab station were several times greater than those of the Soviet orbital stations of the DOS-Salyut and OPS-Almaz series. The American station was also the first where crews worked multiple times, and the first to be equipped with two docking ports (although the second was not used).
History of creation
The first projects of orbital stations began to appear in the USSR and the USA since the late 1950s. One of the most common options was to convert the upper stage of the launch vehicle into a full-fledged orbital station. In particular, in 1963, the US Air Force proposed a military reconnaissance station, Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL), based on the Agena upper stage, which had been developed for some time, but never implemented. Around the same time, von Braun introduced the concept of " Practical Application Apollo program, where, among other things, it was planned to use the upper stage of the Saturn 1B rocket as the living space of the orbital station. In fact, the station acted in two guises - first it launched itself into orbit as a rocket stage, then the vacated liquid hydrogen tank was retrofitted, and the stage turned into an orbital station. A docking station and other equipment were provided. The project, under the working title “Orbital Workshop,” found support from NASA management and began to be implemented.
Severe space budget cuts in the early 1970s forced NASA to reconsider its programs. The program of orbital stations also underwent a significant quantitative reduction. On the other hand, after the cancellation of the Apollo 18, -19, -20 lunar expeditions, NASA had at its disposal a supply of super-heavy rockets, which could easily launch a fully equipped orbital station, which means that the half-hearted option with the addition of a hydrogen tank became unnecessary. The final version was named “Skylab” - “Heavenly Laboratory”.
Structures involved
The general management of the project was carried out by the Space Center. Marshall, Huntsville, Alabama . The following commercial structures were involved in the manufacture of components and assemblies of the station:
- Universal Docking, Payload Integration - Martin-Marietta Corp., Denver, CO;
- Airlock Bay - McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Co., Eastern Division, St. Louis, MO;
- Command and Servicing Module - Rockwell International Corp., Space Division, Downey, California;
- Attitude Orientation System - Perkin-Elmer Corp. , Norwalk, CT;
- Control gyro - Bendix Corp., Teterboro, NJ;
- Electronic computing devices, unit measuring instruments- IBM Corp., Huntsville, Alabama;
- Scientific and technical equipment for atmospheric experiments - American Science & Engineering, Inc., Boston, MA; Ball Brothers Research Corp., Boulder, CO;
- Propulsion system - Rockwell International Corp., Rocketdyne Division, Canoga Park, California;
- S-IB stage - Chrysler Corp., Michoud Assembly Facility, Mishu, Louisiana;
- S-IC Stage - Boeing Co., Michoud Assembly Facility, Michoud, Louisiana;
- Stage S-II - Rockwell International Corp., Satellite Systems Division, Seal Beach, California;
- S-IVB stage (orbital station) - McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Co., Huntington Beach, California;
- Ground equipment - General Electric Co., Huntsville, Alabama.
In total, up to 23 thousand workers of all specialties were involved in the maintenance work of the station after the launch during periods of peak load, which occurred in mid-1973 (as the volume of work decreased, the number of attracted labor was systematically reduced to 3 thousand people at the end of 1974 .) .
Design
Schematic cross-sectional view of Skylab, giving an idea of the size of the station. On the left is the docked Apollo transport ship.
Skylab was built on the upper stage of the Saturn 1B rocket. The body was covered with thermal insulation, the interior of the tanks was adapted for life and scientific research.
At the top of the hull, an equipment compartment was installed, an airlock chamber with the main axial and backup side docking units with a length of 5.28 m and a diameter of 3.0 m, to which a massive compartment of astrophysical scientific instruments ATM (Apollo Telescope Mount) was attached. Once in orbit, the ATM rotated 90°, allowing access to the axial docking port.
Sectional diagram of the internal volume
The empty hydrogen tank of the stage forms an orbital block of the station with an internal diameter of 6.6 m, partitioned by lattice partitions into laboratory (LO) and household (DC) compartments and a height of 6 m and 2 m. The oxygen tank is used to collect waste. LO is used for conducting scientific experiments, BO is for rest, cooking and eating, sleeping and personal hygiene. Everything necessary for the activities of the three crews is on Skylab during its launch: 907 kg of food and 2,722 kg of drinking water.
The station's power supply system consists of six solar panels (SB): the main ones, deployed on the body in the form of two large wings, and four unfolding crosswise on the ATM block.
The external length of the Skylab complex with the Apollo spacecraft docked to it is 36 m, weight - 91.1 tons. In the living compartments with a total volume of 352.4 m³, an artificial oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere (26% nitrogen and 74% oxygen) is maintained at a pressure of 0. 35 atm and temperature +21…+32 °C.
Skylab had a huge internal volume, providing almost unlimited freedom of movement, for example, you could easily jump from wall to wall during gymnastics. The astronauts found the living conditions at the station very comfortable: in particular, there was a shower installed there. There was also a specialized toilet - a cabinet the size of a soda fountain with three urinals, which made automatic analysis urine; for the convenience of fixing the body in front of him, slippers were attached to the floor. The water was not regenerated. Each astronaut had a small separate compartment-cabin - a niche with a closing curtain, where there was a sleeping place and a drawer for personal belongings.
In-flight front view of the airlock chamber with the main docking station and the ATM bay
Launch of Skylab
The American Skylab OS was launched at 17:30 UTC on May 14, 1973 by the Saturn 5 rocket, and a day later the first expedition was to depart to the station on the Saturn 1B rocket, consisting of commander Charles Conrad, CM pilot Paul Weitz and physician Joseph Kerwin.
Skylab entered an almost circular orbit at an altitude of 435 km, the solar panels on the ATM opened, but one solar panel on the station body did not open, and the other came off. As the investigation showed, during removal from the station, the heat-insulating screen (which also served as a protection against meteorites) was torn off, which tore out one SB and jammed another. Soon the temperature at the station began to rise catastrophically, reaching +38 °C inside and +80 °C outside. Skylab was left without power supply and without thermal control, and its operation was almost impossible. To resolve the situation, it was decided to deliver a replacement screen to the station - a kind of “umbrella”, a panel stretched over 4 extending spokes. "Umbrella" was in as soon as possible manufactured and already on May 25 went to the station along with the first expedition.
Expeditions to Skylab
In total, three expeditions visited the station. The main task of the expeditions was to study human adaptation to conditions of weightlessness and conduct scientific experiments. Since the launch of the station itself was designated SL-1 (“Skylab-1”), the three manned flights were numbers 2, 3 and 4.
The first expedition SL-2 (“Skylab-2”) (Charles Conrad, Paul Waitz and Joseph Kerwin) lasted 28 days (05/25/1973 - 06/22/1973) and was not so much of a scientific nature as a repair one. During several spacewalks, the astronauts opened a jammed solar panel and restored the station's thermoregulation using an installed heat-protective “umbrella.”
The second expedition SL-3 (“Skylab-3”) (Alan Bean, Jack Lausma and Owen Garriott) lasted 59 days (07/28/1973 - 09/25/1973). During the spacewalk, a second heat-insulating screen was installed, and operations related to replacing gyroscopes were also carried out.
The third and final expedition SL-4 (“Skylab 4”) (Gerald Carr, Edward Gibson and William Pogue) lasted 84 days (11/16/1973 - 02/08/1974). Carr, Gibson and Pogue became the first astronauts to meet New Year in space. During the mission, the station experienced a one-day mutiny when the crew voluntarily cut off communications with mission control and rested for the day. During the spacewalk, the radar was corrected to study the earth's natural resources.
Despite numerous difficulties, expeditions to Skylab carried out huge amount biological, technical and astrophysical experiments. The most important were telescopic observations in the X-ray and ultraviolet ranges; many flares were photographed and coronal holes were discovered. Spacewalks during the expeditions involved regularly changing the film of astronomical instruments mounted on the outside of the station.
Each expedition set a record for the duration of a person's stay in space. The first expedition, lasting 28 days, broke the record - 23 days of Soyuz-11 at the Salyut-1 orbital station. The record of the last expedition - 84 days - was broken in 1978 by Salyut-6 - 96 days.
The total cost of the Skylab program was about 3 billion US dollars in prices of that time.
Further operation of the station
There were no more expeditions to the station. Since the Saturn-5 rocket was discontinued, there was nothing to launch such a heavy and voluminous station into space in the coming years. Therefore, scientists wanted to preserve Skylab for future use. A 20-day flight of SL-5 Skylab-5 was proposed for scientific experiments and some raising of the station's orbit. Ways to save Skylab before flights began were discussed reusable ships, after which it must be used for at least 5 years. The Skylab-Shuttle program provided for one flight to significantly raise the orbit using the propulsion module delivered by the shuttle, two flights of recovery expeditions with the delivery of a new docking port in the first, and then regular multi-month expeditions with bringing the crew at the station to six to eight people, docking a new a large airlock module, other modules (including the non-free-flying Spacelab laboratories) and trusses, as well as, possibly, retrofitting a larger spent external tank of the Shuttle system. After the ASTP (Soyuz-Apollo) flight, there was even a proposal to create the Skylab-Salyut complex. However, no final decision on funding was made.
Meanwhile, increased solar activity led to a slight increase in atmospheric density at the height of Skylab's orbit, and the station's decline accelerated. Raising the station to a higher orbit was impossible, since it did not have its own engine (the orbit was raised only by the engines of the docked Apollo spacecraft, in which the crews arrived at the station). Mission control oriented the station for atmospheric reentry at 16:37 GMT on July 11, 1979. The station's flooding area was assumed to be a point 1,300 km south of Cape Town, South Africa. However, an error in the calculations within 4% and the fact that the station was destroyed more slowly than expected led to a shift in the point of impact of unburned debris: some of them fell into Western Australia south of Perth. Some of the wreckage was discovered between the towns of Esperance and Rawlinna and is now on display in museums.
Dear friends! Do you want to always be aware of the latest events in the Universe? Subscribe to receive notifications about new articles by clicking on the bell button in the lower right corner of the screen ➤ ➤ ➤
Why did the first American orbital station need an “umbrella”, why the first space strike occurred and how the Skylab station almost became the prototype of the International Space Station during cold war, says the section “History of Science”.
The idea of creating a long-term station in orbit, where ships launched from Earth could dock, arose long before space flights. As a matter of fact, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky’s story “Outside the Earth” describes such a station. But the first station projects in both the USSR and the USA appeared before Gagarin.
However, some specifics appeared in 1963-1964, when first the American military aviation proposed the Manned Orbiting Laboratory project - a military reconnaissance orbital station based on the upper stage of the Agena rocket, and then Wernher von Braun proposed his Orbital Workshop project based on the upper stage of the Saturn-1B rocket. However, it came to actual design and construction at the very beginning of the 1970s.
The fact is that at that time the lunar program had already succeeded and, thanks to this, Congress... cut funds for space. Well, there is a political result, but how many missions fly to the Moon - what difference does it make? Therefore, the Apollo 18-19-20 flights to the Moon were cancelled. But as a result, a certain number of unused Saturn V rockets remained in NASA’s warehouses. Why not use the most powerful rocket to implement a long-standing idea? And there are also Apollo aircraft to fly to the station.
Launch of Skylab station on Saturn V launch vehicle
Wikimedia Commons
Like the previous project, the Skylab orbital station - “Sky Laboratory” - was built on the basis of the body of the first stage of the Saturn IB rocket. The station turned out to be massive, much larger than the Salyut that had already flown in 1971. Length - 24.6 meters, maximum diameter - 6.6 meters. The power supply, just like on the Salyut, was provided by solar panels, but these were not only two “wings”, as in all the first Soviet stations and on the Soyuz spacecraft, but also a kind of “sunflower” placed above the axis of the station together with the astrophysical instruments compartment.
The launch of the first American orbital station took place on May 14, 1973. And immediately what is commonly called the phrase “Houston, we have problems” began. In fact, according to the schedule, the first ship with a crew was supposed to launch the next day. However, the launch had to be postponed and we began to think about what to do. The fact is that after entering orbit, one of the “wings” of the solar panels did not open, and the other came off. Then it turned out that this was the “work” of the heat-insulating screen, which also came off, simultaneously demolishing one battery and jamming another.
Damaged Skylab
Wikimedia Commons
As a result, the station became unbearably hot (inside - 38 degrees, on the surface - 80). We had to hastily construct an “umbrella” - an ordinary cloth that was stretched over the station on four knitting needles.
On May 25, the first crew flew (mission SL-2, SL-1 was called the launch of the station itself). This expedition turned from scientific to repair. It lasted 28 days. In July, a new crew flew (SL-3), working for 59 days in orbit (July 28 – September 25). The third and final crew worked at Skylab for a record 84 days for the United States (this record for astronauts lasted right up to the joint expeditions to the Mir station). However, at that time it was also a world record, which was broken in 1978 by Soviet cosmonauts at the Salyut-6 station.
Skylab device
Wikimedia Commons
An interesting episode was associated with the last crew of Gerald Carr, Edward Gibson and William Pogue: the first and only space strike to date. The fact is that both Expedition SL-2 and Expedition SL-3 were staffed by experienced astronauts who were hungry for work. The crew of SL-3 especially tried. The guys worked 16 hours a day, trying to fulfill the flight program as much as possible. And in SL-4 there were newcomers, whose program was calculated based on the zeal of the “third”. Gerald Carr said: "We would never work 16 hours a day for 84 days straight on earth, and we shouldn't be expected to do that here in space." The crew completely interrupted contact with Earth for a day and began to rest. Now this case is included in all textbooks on space psychology and medicine.
But then the program ended. The rocket was discontinued, there was nothing to launch new stations with. They tried to preserve the station until the start of Space Shuttle flights, there was even an idea to create a “Cold War-era ISS” - the Skylab-Salyut complex, but alas. On July 11, 1979, the station left orbit and burned up in the atmosphere. The debris fell in Australia and is still on display in museums. The United States had to wait many years for its long-term flights.
Skylab 4 (also SL-4 and SLM-4) is the third manned flight to the first American space station, Skylab. Also, the name "Skylab-4" refers to the Apollo series spacecraft that made this flight.
The expedition set an absolute record for the duration of a person's stay in space - 84 days, which was broken only in 1977 at the Soviet Salyute-6 station - 96 days. Carr, Gibson and Pogue became the first astronauts to celebrate the New Year in space, because... launched on November 16, 1973, and returned to Earth the following year - February 8, 1974.
The work program was very intense, and the crew, consisting of novices, complained that the schedule was too tight. Ground services refused to reschedule the work, and in the end they pointedly declared an unscheduled day off and turned off the radio. This incident is the first recorded strike in space. However, by the end of the flight the planned program was completed."
We look at the photo materials, this time there are much fewer of them, unlike the lunar show. A copy of Skylab on Earth was also a film set for the show, it was divided into two zones, the first part of the “station” was included in the zero-gravity plane, the second part of the “station” was not included in the aircraft cabin, due to its large diameter of 6.6 meters, At first it was exactly like that. And therefore, the clowns’ demonstration of weightlessness was different: in the first part, it was weightlessness achieved on an airplane, and the second demonstration was achieved using a system of tricks and illusions. The training photos therefore mainly focused on the first small zone:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/skylab/skylab4/ndxpage1.html
http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html
Post-Apollo Images Index. Skylab (three manned missions to orbiting laboratory/workshop - 1973)
Poor eyesight is not a problem for American astronachts, because real astronauts need 100% vision; for actors, such health and visual acuity are not required and this will do:
I wonder if the Americans knew that it would be impossible to write with ballpoint or ink pens in zero gravity? Looks like they didn't know:
S73-32839 (10 Sept. 1973) - Scientist-astronaut Edward G. Gibson, science pilot for the third manned Skylab mission (Skylab 4), enters a notation in a manual while seated at the control and display panel for the Apollo Telescope Mount (ATM) during simulations inside the one-G trainer for the Multiple Docking Adapter (MDA) at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). Dr. Gibson will be joined by astronauts Gerald P. Carr, commander, and William R. Pogue, pilot, when the Skylab 4 mission begins in November 1973.
An attempt to depict scientific activity at the “station”:
S73-32840 (10 Sept. 1973) --- Scientist-astronaut Edward G. Gibson, Skylab 4 science pilot, turns on a switch on the control box of the S190B camera, one of the components of the Earth Resources Experiments Package (EREP ). The single lens Earth Terrain Camera takes five-inch photographs. Behind Gibson is the stowed suit of astronaut Gerald P. Carr, commander for the third manned mission.
The EREP program began in December 1970, according to NASA, which supposedly made it possible to determine where and what resources of the Earth were located. Stands for "Earth Resources Experiment Package":
EREP - Earth Resources Experiment Package
The EREP Program began in December 1970 with the announcement by NASA that data collected by the EREP would be made available to qualified investigators for Earth resource investigations.
This is an attempt to copy the experiments of Soviet cosmonauts, about whose activities the American Intelligence informed the United States.
Demonstration of a new US technology, a “treadmill” based on sliding the foot on a Teflon coating, how this sliding will occur is unknown:
S73-33858 (November 1973) --- A close-up view of the feet of scientist-astronaut William E. Thornton as he demonstrates the use of a treadmill-like exercise device which was developed for maintaining the leg and back muscles of the Skylab 4 crewman. Thornton is in the Skylab Orbital Workshop simulator in Building 5 at the Johnson Space Center. The Skylab 2 and Skylab 3 astronauts had no exercise device onboard capable of adequately maintaining their leg and back muscles. The treadmill device consists of a Teflon-coated aluminum plate or sheet bolted to the floor of the Skylab Orbital Workshop. The crewmen will wear the bicycle ergometer harness while exercising. Bungee cords attached to the floor and to the harness will supply the downward pressure or force for the back and leg muscles. The astronaut's feet will slide over the Teflon-coated plate as he marches
S73-33858 (November 1973) --- large shot of astronaut scientist William E. Thornton's legs as he demonstrates the use of a treadmill-like exercise machine that was designed to maintain the tone and performance of a crew member's legs and back muscles on Skylab 4. Thornton at Skylab orbital workshop simulator in bldg. 5) at the Johnson Space Center. Skylab 2 and 3 astronauts did not have a training device on board that could adequately support their legs and back muscles. The treadmill device consists of a Teflon-coated aluminum plate or sheet screwed to the floor of the Skylab orbital workshop. Crew members will wear a cable ergometer during training. Bungee cords are attached to the floor and to the wiring, which will reduce pressure or force on the back and leg muscles. The astronaut's feet will slide on the Teflon-coated plate as he marches.
A crazy, ridiculous design, there can be no other words. The Teflon coating prevents the foot from slipping when walking on such a coating. Sliding generally has other physical justifications; a lubricant is needed that reduces the friction force, such as water, or oil, or another liquid.
The following are photographs and diagrams demonstrating an attempt to cure American astronachts from a serious illness - “star blindness”:
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/skylab/skylab4/lores/s73-36910.jpg
S73-36910 (November 1973) --- An engineer's drawing of the Skylab 4 Far Ultraviolet Electronographic camera (Experiment S201). Arrows point to various features and components of the camera. As the Comet Kohoutek streams through space at speeds of 100,000 miles per hour, the Skylab 4 crewmen will use the S201 UV camera to photograph features of the comet not visible from the Earth's surface. While the comet is some distance from the sun, the camera will be pointed through the scientific airlock in the wall of the Skylab space station Orbital Workshop (OWS). By using a movable mirror system built for the Ultraviolet Stellar Astronomy (S019) Experiment and rotating the space station, the S201 camera will be able to photograph the comet around the side of the space station.
S73-36910 (November 1973) --- engineering drawing of an ultraviolet camera (experiment S201) Skylab 4. Arrows indicate the various functions and components of the camera. As Comet Kohoutek hurtles through space at 100,000 mph, Skylab 4 crew members will use the S201 UV camera to photograph features of the comet not visible from Earth's surface. While the comet is some distance from the sun, the cameras will be pointed through a science gateway in the Skylab wall of the orbital workshop space station. Using a moving mirror system built for the Ultraviolet Stellar Astronomy (S019) experiment and a rotating space station, the S201 camera will be able to photograph comets around the side of the space station.
With the help of a conventional telescope, the astronachts could not see the stars in their “space”.
S73-37264 (November 1973) --- Graphical representation of Skylab instrumentation relationship of Comet Kohoutek to Spectral emissions.
S73-37264 (November 1973) --- graphic presentation of the use of Skylab equipment to observe spectral emissions from Comet Kohoutek.
S74-20010 (November-December 1973) ---Six frames of Skylab 4 Far Ultraviolet Electronographic (S201 experiment) photograph showing halo of Comet Kohoutek.
S74-20010 (November-December 1973) --- six images from Skylab 4 in the far ultraviolet region (S201 experiment), photograph showing the halo of Comet Kohoutek.
S73-38731 (December 1973) --- Photograph taken of the Comet Kohoutek from the Skylab space station in Earth orbit by a Skylab 4 crew member.
S73-38731 (December 1973) --- photo Comet Kohoutek from the Skylab space station in Earth orbit, taken by a Skylab 4 crew member.
S73-33283 (28 April 1973) --- Videographs of Comet Kohoutek taken by the 36-inch telescope at the Kitt Peak National Observatory on April 28, 1973 for the Skylab program.
S73-33283 (April 28, 1973) --- Video footage of Comet Kohoutek taken with the 36-inch telescope at Kitt Peak National Observatory on April 28, 1973 under the Skylab program.
S74-17688 (11 Jan. 1974) --- This color photograph of the comet Kohoutek was taken by members of the lunar and planetary laboratory photographic team from the University of Arizona, at the Catalina Observatory with a 35mm camera on Jan. 11, 1974.
S74-17688 (11 Jan 1974) --- this color photography Comet "Kohoutek" was captured by members of the Lunar and Planetary Photography Laboratory team at Arizona State University, Catalina Observatory, using a 35mm camera on Jan. 11, 1974.
On Earth, they made do with a simple telescope, but in US space, only ultraviolet was needed to observe the comet. Without it, it is impossible to see either comets or stars in the black “sky” of American “space”.
S73-28411 (February 1973) ---The three members of the prime crew of the third of three scheduled manned Skylab missions (Skylab 4) go through Skylab preflight training in the Mission Training and Simulation Facility at the Johnson Space Center. Astronaut Gerald P. Carr (on right), Skylab 4 commander, is seated at a simulator which represents the control and display console of the Apollo Telescope Mount which is located in the space station"s Multiple Docking Adapter
S73-28411 (February 1973) --- Three prime crew members of the third of three planned manned Skylab missions (Skylab 4) entered through the pre-flight training system on a training and facility simulation mission at Johnson Space Center. P. Astronaut Gerald Carr (right), Skylab 4 commander, sits on a simulator that represents the controls and console display of the Apollo telescope that was on the space station, in the "Dock Adapter."
S73-32854 (10 Sept. 1973) --- Astronaut William R. Pogue, Skylab 4 pilot, uses the Skylab Viewfinder Tracking System (S191 experiment) during a training exercise in the Multiple Docking Adapter (MDA) one-G trainer at Johnson Space Center. In the background is astronaut Gerald P. Carr, seated at the control panel for the Earth Resources Experiments Package (EREP). Carr is Skylab 4 crew commander, and Gibson is science pilot.
S73-32854 (September 10, 1973) --- Astronaut William, Skylab 4, Skylab Viewfinder uses the tracking system (S191 experiment) during Adapter Dock One-G training at Johnson Space Center. In the background is astronaut Gerald P. Carr sitting at the console of the Earth Resources Experiments Package (EREP). Carr "Skylab 4" crew commander, and Gibson science pilot.
Without this system, it would have been impossible to see stars in American “space.” The Americans had their own “space” that was different from real space.
Now it was possible not to film again for the show “Skylab-4” on November 16th! everything was filmed in advance. Start day November 16, demonstration of a modest breakfast:
A modest breakfast, that's more the result financial crisis USA, rather than the realization that it is dangerous to fill your stomach before a space flight, and the demonstration of copious absorption large quantity junk food is a sign of flight tampering. Exit to the start:
And finally the start itself. Everything is as usual, heavy icing on the first stage, albeit in stripes where there were tanks with liquid oxygen, and an almost clean second stage, without abnormal icing, as on the first stage. The presence of a tank with liquid gas at a low temperature in the 2nd stage was declared; the thermal insulation is similar to that of the first and second stage.
Loading...
