NASA Johnson Space Center
Oral History Project
Edited Oral History Transcript
Aleck C.
Bond
Interviewed by Rebecca Wright
Houston,
TX –
15 July 1999
Wright: Today is July 15th, 1999. This oral history session with Aleck
Bond is being conducted at the Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas,
for the Johnson Space Center Oral History Project. The interviewer
is Rebecca Wright. Thank you, Mr. Bond, once again for taking time
to participate in our project.
Bond: Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to do this.
Wright: Well, your career with NASA spanned almost 3 decades, with
the first days being at Langley [Research Center, Hampton, Virginia]
with the Space Task Group. You arrived here in Houston in 1962, and
then you were assigned to head up the Systems Evaluation and Development
Division. Now this was a very large Division, and the task of this
area had not even yet been identified, and now that became your project.
Could you show—tell us how you were able to identify those areas?
And what resulted with your leadership?
Bond: Well, the Space…Evaluation Development Division [SEDD]
was conceived—it was really part of the Flight Systems Division
that had existed under the Space Task Group. And that was back when
we were still back at Langley. I was Assistant Division Chief of the
Flight Systems Division, and we had many of the same elements that
were finally put into SEDD, which included structures and mechanics
and materials; propulsion and power elements; the communications activities
that we were involved in at the time; and another big activity that
we were given was the responsibility for the design and development
and subsequent operation of a number of major test facilities that
the Engineering Develop[ment] Directorate was responsible for.
At the time, in—I was officially transferred to Texas in about
19—in February of 1962, and our organization totaled somewhere
in the order of 130/140 engineers. These were people that had signed
on to the Space Task Group back at Langley, and at that time we were
also given the responsibility for building up, hiring, interviewing,
hiring people that had the qualifications and background to be able
to help us in our mission for the design and development of spacecraft
and the final test and evaluation—and certification—of
spacecraft for flight.
…We had quite a number of the people that were assigned to SEDD
at that particular time finally were assigned to other major positions.
A number of them became Division Chiefs themselves. When we finally
split up SEDD into several Divisions—Structures and Mechanics,
Propulsion and Power, Tracking and Communications, and Space Environment
Test and Development Division, and then eventually the Crew Systems
Division—those were Divisions that people from SEDD finally
were reassigned to as we began to expand and get more people on board
to handle the issues and areas of engineering that we were responsible
for in not only a continuation of Mercury, but also the Gemini Program
that came on the heels of Mercury. And then subsequently, the assignment
to do Apollo was really the instigation for the expansion and development
of the final E&D [Engineering and Development] organization that
I knew back in those days.
Wright: Well, tell us how E&D evolved and how the Apollo Program
did have an impact on its future?
Bond: Well, a lot of the reason for it—the development of E&D,
Dr. Max [Maxime A.] Faget, who was responsible for the concept of
the Mercury-type of vehicle, the idea of seating the passenger in
a forward-facing position going out and then in a rearward-facing
position coming in, in order to be able to withstand the forces of
gravity [and] the multiple forces…created by the rocket thrust
and also the deceleration that was experienced during reentry. He
came up with the idea that that was the only way that we could fly
a man safely into space and then bring him back in the reentry process.
And he worked many hours I guess, with Dr. [Robert R.] Gilruth and
convincing the powers that be up at not only [NASA] Headquarters but
all the other scientists around the country that were, you might say,
a lot of the [opposition]—we were newcomers to the whole idea
of getting into spaceflight—well, that is, NASA. And we had
a competitor. The Air Force was a big competitor at that time…
They had a program, the Man In Space Soonest, that was competing with
the civilian space program that President [Dwight D.] Eisenhower wanted
set up. And so, we had a number of detractors along the way. A number
of political issues that were continually coming up. A lot of criticism
in the early program.
Particularly when we had a few failures in Mercury. And these critics
didn’t let us forget that we were [the new kids on the block]—we
had a hard problem. But in spite of that, Dr. Gilruth, who was chosen
to head up the whole project, persisted; and he didn’t let things
like that bother him. And in fact, he—the man amazed me at times
about how he could keep his eye on what the ultimate mission was and
make sure that we progressed and didn’t let things like that
bother us.
And E&D was, like I said, was one part of the Manned Spacecraft
Center [Houston, Texas], which Johnson [Space Center, JSC] was originally
called that when we first [were] established, and then subsequently
was renamed as Johnson Space Center. But there were a number of elements.
E&D was only one part. We had several Directorates that had to
make up [the Center’s overall organization]—Flight Operations,
Administration, and so forth, that made up the activity. But with
Max Faget being the lead engineer and he had, of course, made many
contributions to space systems design, he was chosen to head up the
Directorate and more or less lay out what the various requirements
and job functions and responsibilities would be for the evolving organizations.
Wright: And what was your role at this time that the E&D was beginning
to evolve?
Bond: As I said, I was assigned as Chief of the SEDD. And our responsibility
at that time was early systems design and development in the spacecraft
area. But then additionally, we were assigned the responsibility for
conceiving and doing the early design and development of many of the
test facilities that you now see here on the site at Johnson Space
Center. So, we had a big job ahead of us, not only to do the flight
programs but also to establish a Center and provide all those kinds
of implements and tools that we were going to be able to do our job
with.
One of the things that still has remained with me all of the years
of my career is the fact that, Dr. Gilruth—all of us that came
from NACA were hands-on type of engineers. We got our hands dirty.
We got involved with the hardware and equipment. And that was Dr.
Gilruth’s background. And he insisted on having all the necessary
tools to be able to do a complete job, not just sit down and write
contracts for others to do the design and development. He wanted us
in from the initial point of conception up through the time that we
verified and certified an article for a flight, and then the completion
of the flight program, as we have done over the years.
And his admonition to me at one time, when we were designing facilities,
he told me that he wanted to be sure that we did not create any white
elephants in our process of coming up with all these different facilities
that we thought we were going to need. And that stuck with me. In
fact, it made quite an impression. I wanted to be darn sure that we
didn’t come up with a bunch of facilities that were going to
be so far out that they were not going to be useable. And I had particularly
wanted to maybe say something about several of the rather unique,
major test facilities that we did develop back in those days that
are still in use today.
There are some five major facilities. The first of those is the Space
Environment Simulation Laboratory (SESL). That consists of two very
large space chambers that were specifically designed to test all the
Apollo hardware. But in addition, it was also designed to be able
to accommodate human beings in the space environment during the time
of testing. The facility consisted of two large chambers. One of them
was 65 ft in diameter—the large one was 65 ft in diameter and
120 ft in length, in overall length. This would accommodate the Apollo
hardware that had to go to the Moon.
And it was designed so that we could test the command module with
the occupants, the three astronaut occupants, in the command module
for the full duration of the flight activity that was going to take
place—8 days or 8-plus days. These astronauts were to live,
sleep, eat for that whole period in that command module while the
command module was subjected to the complete environment of space,
which is practically no air molecules within the chamber, and also
with the radiation of the Sun striking the spacecraft so that we could
do—simulate the thermal heating from the Sun. But in addition,
space has another property; it’s very, very cold in space whenever
you’re not facing the Sun. When a body is in space, it radiates
to all the surrounding areas and, essentially, it sees a temperature
that is of the order of around 4 Kelvin—which is just 4 degrees
above absolute zero.
So, we had to be able to produce that kind of an environment. But
at the same time, since these chambers were designed to be man-rated,
we had to be able to re-pressurize, go in and do a rescue, if necessary,
if any of the inhabitants were in any kind of a problem. We had to
be able to re-pressurize to a breathable atmosphere within 30 seconds,
and then within one and a half minute, bring down the—bring
the pressure back up to 14.7 psi, which is the pressure that we live
with on Earth. So, that was quite a challenge, to be able to design
a chamber or two chambers of that very large size when at that time
the technology says the farthest we had gone was to—or people
had gone were to develop chambers that could produce hard vacuum that
were only the size of bell jars. Only maybe a foot or two in diameter
and maybe a couple of feet in length. And when we took that on, it
was quite a challenge.
We did have a lot of help along the way. We had a number of companies
that had been working with vacuum at that time. But there was a lot
of new pioneering work that we had to go through. The second chamber
in that facility was a smaller chamber that would accommodate the
lunar module for testing and, at the same time, would allow for accommodating
or testing the astronauts to EVA activities and also lunar surface
kind of environments.
And now the second facility that was in that particular group was
the Vibration [&] Acoustics Test Facility. And it exists here
on the site, and has been used, I think for quite a number of other
kinds of projects since that time. There are two towers in the facility:
one which would [accommodate] the full Apollo—the part that
housed the lunar module and the command and service module. And we
were able to—we designed that to be able to subject that whole
package to the vibratory environment that the vehicle would see during
the initial light-up of the rocket engines and the subsequent travel
into space with the rocket engines functioning. But along with that
is a very intense acoustic kind of an environment that’s involved.
And we [tested] that separately. The second tower that the facility
has was to be able to provide the very, very severe noise environment
that the vehicle has to see whenever it sets off on the launch, and
then subsequent travel during the propulsive part of the mission.
And again, we were able to provide this kind of an environment for
testing the Apollo components in that particular kind of environment.
And we did find problems along the way. We had various pieces of equipment
that failed or were near-failure; and were able to make those kinds
of design changes along the way before the actual test article[s]
were flown…without occupants and be able to verify that we had
solved all of those kinds of problems on the ground before we undertook
[manned] flight.
Another facility is a large anechoic chamber… Anechoic means
that it is completely noise-free. We were able to design a large chamber,
again to house major components of the vehicle and test them in a
noise-free environment so that we could test and verify the early
concepts of the communication systems and then finally the—certify
the communication systems that were used on the actual flight articles.
Another facility, the fourth facility, was the Thermochemical Test
Area. And it has been invaluable in the kinds of testing that—capability
that it has provided here on the Center. One of the—it had separate
test facilities. Each separated from each other because of—hazardous
operations were conducted in each of those. So, we separated the facilities
by some space in order to be able to make sure that, in the event
we had a mishap in one, it didn’t give problems to the other
part of the facility. And we had the ability to test pyrotechnics;
to test fuel cells where oxygen and hydrogen were brought together,
and so forth; to test propulsive systems, fluid systems, and so forth
in that facility. And, like I say, is has been invaluable throughout
the years—and is continually in use at this day and time.
And a final facility that we developed was an Arc Jet Test Facility,
where we would be able to test and certify thermal protective materials.
An electrical arc jet is used to produce the very high energy that
is injected into a supersonic—it’s really a wind tunnel
with high thermal capabilities, with the energy being produced electrically
that we inject into the stream for the testing of materials that are
used for the nose cones, leading edges of the shuttle, the thermal
protective material, the TPS [thermal protection system] that’s
used on shuttle these days, and also was used early on in the testing
of some of the ablative materials that we used back on Apollo—although
it didn’t come in, in time, to do extensive testing there. We
did use—we used another facilities in order to test out the
ablative materials that we used on Mercury and then subsequently Gemini
and Apollo.
But those five facilities and along with, oh, a lot of the other laboratories,
the standard laboratories, that were created to give our people the
hands-on capability to be able to test and verify the designs that
were being conceived and eventually developed and used. One of the
admonitions again from Dr. Robert [C.] Seamans [Jr.], who was an Administrator
of NASA at the time, was that we would make extensive use [of these
facilities.]… He, of course, and Dr. Gilruth [being] of the
same school… [had a philosophy of] making sure that you did
all your testing on the ground to the fullest extent that you could.
And he said, “We will do all of our testing on the ground to
the fullest possibility, make sure that before we go into flight,
even unmanned flight we will have tested and verified the capability
of the hardware to do what they were designed and conceived to do.”
That way we would be able to make sure that we had the ability to
very confidently go into space, knowing that we had done the testing
to our fullest extent. To be able to verify and certify the designs
before—certainly before we ever put man—subjected man
to fly on those articles.
And that more or less became one of the philosophies that we used.
We more or less did what we called “man-rating.” Man-rating
was a term that was, I think, coined by the Air Force back—and
I think NASA in the early days when they were going through the supersonic
airplane developments, back in the 1950s and so forth. And it envisioned
a—it was a philosophy that says, again, that you will do everything
that you can do technology-wise and knowledge-wise to be able to assure
that you have designed a safe vehicle to put man into. And before
you do it, you want to be able to certify that you have done everything
in the design that promotes safety.
So, that was more or less the marching orders that we had, whenever
we set out to design a lot of these facilities. And I felt like over
the years, I guess in a lot of the exposure, the publicity, and so
forth, the engineers in the Engineering and Development Directorate
were not given the proper, I guess credit because there was so much
publicity that was focused on—of course on the astronauts—and
certainly they deserved the publicity and the exposure—but also
the other element of the organization, …Flight Operations people.
They were always in the limelight. Whereas the engineers from E&D,
even though they worked those problems and solved them and came up
with solutions for in-flight problems that—like we had on Apollo
13.
The engineers of E&D were responsible for working out, “How
do you retrofit the environmental system on the command module to
be able to extend its capability—the capability of the environmental
system on the LM [lunar module] to accommodate three passengers instead
of two that it was originally designed for?” It was things like
that that the engineers did. They, like I said, I didn’t think
they received the due credit that they deserved. And many of the other
kinds of problems of design and development along the way that allowed
us to proceed on meeting schedules and making sure that the programs
were able to maintain the progress that was desired by the management.
And, well, for instance, back in the days of the Skylab. The engineers
that were responsible for making the fix to the initial Skylab problem,
where the thermal protection material was ripped off the part of the
vehicle that contained a lot of the stores, and we were beginning
to find that we were going to be—we’d be damaging all
the storable materials that had been taken up, some of the medications,
the food, the water, etc., unless we did something rather quickly.
Now the whole Center, of course, really came together and—but
a lot of that testing that was done was done by a lot of unsung engineers
in the back 40 that had to work around the clock and come up with
those solutions and how we were going to be able to save the day.
Which did happen with the parasol that was finally put over Skylab
to protect it from—and also the solar elements that were damaged
in that early flight.
Wright: How did you learn that there was a problem on Skylab?
Bond: Well—
Wright: Were you among the first?
Bond: Beg your pardon?
Wright: Were you among the first to know that there was a serious
problem that needed to be corrected?
Bond: No, I don’t think we—I was among the first. It was
pretty evident, very quickly, that something had gone wrong and that
the temperatures on a lot of the thermal-sensing information that
we were getting back indicated that something drastically wrong had
happened. And it was very quickly conceived just what had happened.
And it was a matter of very quickly trying to come up with, “How
do we protect this area that was so vital?” And the idea of
a parasol was suggested, I guess by several people. It was—and
we all worked together, too.
But the material of the parasol and how it was going to be verified
and certified that it could function for this length of time was done
by a lot of our people who had experience in materials. We—people
from our Structures and Mechanics organization suggested several materials.
We went to work exposing those in the vacuum chambers, round the clock.
And we had the ability to do what we call accelerated testing, this
thing had to last at least three months. So, we were able to, in less
than four, five, six days, to certify material that was going to be
able to hang together to stay together and still function after the
three-month period.
Wright: Quite a remarkable feat in such a small amount of time, to
save such a large project. And I think your remarks are wonderful
for us to hear, because these engineers have left quite a legacy for
others to follow.
Bond: Well, thank you. I have always felt that, you know, that the
fact that, you know, a lot of these laboratories and facilities are
still operating full tilt in this day and time is really—speaks
well for the ingenuity and thought that was put toward trying to pull
all these requirements together and develop them.
Wright: And that leads me to my next question. Each one of these facilities
has its unique and very important purpose. Could you share with us
how you and your coworkers developed the plans to build them? And
how did you decide which one would come first? Or were they all done
parallel? Give us some insight on how you were able to take these
facilities from the plans and make them into the realities that they
were.
Bond: Well, actually the idea for test facilities, like I said, the
people that came from Langley were people that worked in test facilities
and with test facilities. And a lot of the test facilities that were
developed back at Langley were developed by the you know, the engineers
that were to operate them back then. And the whole idea of creating
a new Center and what we were going to need, one of the first things,
of course, I’m sure Dr. Gilruth thought of, he says, “What
facilities are we going to need?” And there was a lot of thought
given to that, and a lot of people had inputs and requirements. We—
Back in 1961, I guess, when it was first determined that we would
become a Center, some—several people were asked to contribute
inputs and thoughts about, “Well, what kind of facility will
this new Center require in order to be able to do that program?”
And even back then I guess there was some thought, well, of going
to the Moon. So, back in 1960, ’61, I guess at the time there
were some early studies of a lunar mission. And so, the idea of, “Well,
what kind of facilities will we need?” Not of just going into
space, but going to the Moon and beyond that?
So, these people submitted their thoughts and ideas. They were all
pulled together. We had some groups that Dr. Gilruth pulled together
and said, “Well, now, let’s do some general [jaw-boning]
sessions here and find out, well, what do we think we really need?”
Because whenever you ask people for inputs and ideas, of course, you
get a whole conglomerate of stuff that engineers think they do need.
But this was all sifted through and, gradually, it finally came down
to a number of major kind of facilities that I’ve just talked
about. But then there are those standard kind of laboratories.
For instance, Structures and Mechanics. Joe [Joseph N.] Kotanchik,
who was my Assistant Division Chief in SEDD, came from the Structures
and Mechanics—from the Structures Laboratory at Langley. And,
of course, his background was testing structures and, “What
do I need for testing structures?” He says, “Well, one
of the first things we’re going to put in the Structures Laboratory
is what is called a strong back.” And all a strong back is,
is really a very, very strong structure of—made up of very,
very high [strength] I beams that are embedded in concrete for quite
a number of feet so that it—even though you put very, very large
forces on the strong back, it doesn’t deflect and so forth.
So, one of his first requirements was, “We will have a strong
back,” he says, “because I know we’re going to be
testing some structures here, if we’re going to do anything
of that sort.”
So, that was one of his requirements. And then coming from the testing
field myself, at Langley we had some jets—free jets, heated
jets—that we did some early testing in. And so, one of the first
thoughts was, “We needed an arc jet.” So, that was where
we conceived the idea that we ought to have a testing facility that
would be able to test materials under the very high, intense heat
that you see on the reentry.
A lot of the other people, like the Communications people, thought
they needed this anechoic chamber because, “Hey, if we’re
going to get into space, we’re going to have large expanses
that we’re going to have to communicate over. And so, we need
to be able to test these communications systems in an environment
where we can make sure that we don’t have any clutter from outside
noise,” and so forth. The Propulsion people say, you know, these
are kind of propulsive facilities [that will be needed].
At one time, we thought the—we would have a test facility that
we could do a lot of the kinds of testing that we did on the lunar
module engines, here at JSC. And then after we looked at the territory
and the proximity of the residential areas to us, we said, “No,
we can’t really do that. Not here at JSC. That’s got to
be someplace else.” And we looked at several sites. In fact,
Matagorda Island [Texas] was one of the sites that was looked at for
possibly a propulsion test facility where we could do that medium-size
engine testing. And we ended up with White Sands [New Mexico], and
the facility was sited out there.
And at one time, E&D was responsible for developing that particular
facility. I was glad to [when]that responsibility was reassigned to
another group and we said, “No, it will be an independent, separate
facility at White Sands.” But E&D was required to look in
on it occasionally, from time to time, because we had other people
out there that were—more or less wanted to make sure that we
were coordinated and following along the same provisions and concepts.
So, for a while I traveled to White Sands a number of times for reviewing
the activities out there. But I was glad to, then, have my responsibilities
just remain what we had here on site.
Wright: I’m sure there was plenty to keep you busy here, without
traveling back and forth to New Mexico.
Bond: Well, back in those days, I remember when we first came to Texas,
I came without my family. They didn’t come down. I came in February
of ’62 and they—after my wife sold the house back in Virginia,
she and my two daughters came down in July of that year. And since
there was no family to have to come home to every evening after work,
we continued work. And Joe Kotanchik and I, we lived at the Bachelor
Officers’ Quarters at Ellington [Field, Houston, Texas]. And
so, we worked six to seven days a week and, many times, 12 to 15 hours
a day. A lot of times, I’d have to grab a hold of Joe and say,
“Joe, it’s time to go get some sleep. We’ve got
to recycle for tomorrow.”
But those were the really—they were the fun days, but they were
also the hardworking days. And for several years, we did work through
a very, very tough schedule of trying to develop the Center here,
maintain our responsibilities for the Mercury and Gemini Programs,
and then get involved into what Apollo was going to be all about.
Those were really the real high-activity days. And like I say, it
wasn’t unusual to work 12 to 15 hours a day a lot of times.
And most weekends a lot of times.
Wright: The way that the missions and the programs were structured,
there wasn’t a lot of time off in between. So, did you ever
have much time that you were able to go off and spend with your family
during those days between Mercury and Apollo?
Bond: During those days I accumulated a lot of leave that I think
paid off handsomely when I finally retired! Every now and then, we
had to take off a bit. And I was able to, every now and then, take
off a couple of weeks and go off with my family and kind of get reclamated
a little bit there. But you couldn’t keep up this kind of activity
indefinitely without becoming burned out. And so, it was necessary
to take off every now and then. But I did accumulate a lot of leave.
Wright: Well, let’s stop for just a moment and then we’ll
come right back.
Bond: Okay. [Recorder turned off.]
Wright: Mr. Bond, before you joined NASA you were a member of NACA
[National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics] and spent many years
there. Could you share some of the nice memories that you have working
with this pioneering organization?
Bond: I’ll be glad to. The NACA—I attribute NACA for really
training me how to be an engineer and a manager, I guess I might say.
I graduated—after getting out of the service in ’46, I
went back to school for my Master’s degree at Georgia Tech [Georgia
Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia]. And upon completing my
Master’s, I was hired by NACA in March of 1948, [when] I reported
for duty. And in the course of being interviewed, I had gone up—I
guess my majors in Aeronautical Engineering were in aerodynamics and
structures. And I did my Master’s thesis on fatigue in airplane
structures. And so, at that time when I first went up to be interviewed,
I thought that, well, maybe I would like to go to work in the Structures
Laboratory and do some fatigue work.
But I had been told about Pilotless Aircraft Research Division [PARD],
and I went over there for an interview and I was interviewed by Dr.
Gilruth himself. And I was so impressed with the kind of work they
were doing, the freedom of activity, and the ability to more or less
express our ideas about how to—what kind of research we wanted
to get into, it just—I was sold on that almost immediately.
And the other thing that sold me, of course, was Dr. Gilruth himself.
He just seemed to be such a—very much a down-to-earth type of
an individual. A very warmhearted man, very capable. I had—was
quite aware of all the things that he had done, and his career up
to that time and quite impressed with the man. And I—to be able
to work for a man like that was just something that I immediately
decided that I wanted to do. That was where I wanted to work.
And Dr. Gilruth had come up with the concept, a number of years before,
of flying rocket-propelled models designed according to whatever configuration
you wanted to investigate; and flying those to get aerodynamic data
in free flight. Wind tunnels had a certain limitation on what they
were able to do, particularly when you get into higher and higher
speeds and going through the velocity of sound, then some funny things
happen in wind tunnels that—but we were not hampered by that
in free-flight flying. We could actually go through the speed regimes
without any kind of problem at all and do whatever aerodynamic testing
that was necessary just with using free-flight models.
And initially I had—was assigned to a couple of projects. Eventually,
I got into the testing of one of the major missile systems that was
being developed by the Air Force at that time, and that was the Navaho.
And gradually aerodynamic heating of reentry ballistic missiles became
one of the main focuses of the Air Force.
The ballistic missile penetrates the Earth’s atmosphere and
comes down almost vertically into the atmosphere. But as it gets into
the atmosphere, of course, intense heat and the very high velocity—intense
heat is generated on the surface of the vehicle. And the problem was
the nosecones were burning up or encountering severe heating problems.
And the issue was to try to solve, “What are the materials,
what are the configurations, and so forth, that we can solve that
kind of a problem?”
The Air Force, of course, was working on it. It had a number of companies
GE [General Electric] was one in particular that was working on the
problem. But at Langley and PARD, we were free to work on problems
like that. And it was—it came to my mind that we ought to do
a little bit of testing and work—investigation in that particular
area. So, in the—about the mid-1950s, I began to do some work
on various kinds of materials that could withstand reentry heating.
And ablation was—an ablation process is where the material itself
is consumed gradually on the surface, but the heat pulse through the
material doesn’t come through the material. It doesn’t
burn the whole layer of material at one time. It gradually creates
a surface reaction that is much—at a much lower temperature
than the energy that the airstream imparts to it and actually provides
a protective layer across the face of the material.
Anyway, I had—we had a couple of facilities there at Langley
that were being developed to do ablation or high-temperature materials
testing. And one of them was a jet—provided a small jet stream
where you could test very small models. And I tested a number of materials
in it. It had its drawbacks because it was a facility that depended
on heating zirconia pebbles up to high heat and then forcing the air
through it to pick up the heat. In doing that, it also picked up the
particles of zirconia; and in the airstream you also had the other
problems of trying to figure out, well, how much did the impact of
these particles have to do with whatever your test results showed?
But the University of Chicago had a—was developing a facility
in an old streetcar barn that had at its disposal a number of electrical
generators in which they could use to impart the energy to an airstream.
And I ended up going to the University of Chicago several times with
test models to test up there.
And in the course of time, I had tested a number of different ablative
materials and was sort of becoming a test expert at Langley on materials
performance in those kinds of environments. So, when the idea of Mercury
started, I was invited by Max Faget, who had been my boss and colleague
at—in the first several years that I was at Langley, invited
me to come over and talk to him about doing something on a project
that was going to be a man in space project. And when I went over,
he told me that there was an idea for doing a flight verification
of a shield—a heatshield—that would go on the Mercury
capsule. And he asked if I was interested in being the project engineer.
Well, at that time I had flown a number of rocket models to investigate
aerodynamic heating at Wallops Island [Virginia]; and the idea of
doing testing on an Atlas certainly seemed like quite a challenge,
to be able to go from some of the smaller models that I was testing
at Wallops to something big and monstrous like the Atlas missile at
that time. So, I asked him to let me give it some thought; and he
gave me 24 hours to think it over. And I went back and talked to my
wife, and we were very comfortable living in Virginia at the time.
I had a job that she could set my comings and goings by the time that
I left and arrived back home. It was a 8-to-5 kind of a job, and really
wasn’t a whole lot of pressure. And we talked it over, and then
the idea that this new organization would probably be moving to another
location that was going to—that was not intended to stay at
Langley.
So, we were kind of cool to the idea. And I came back and told Max
that ‘I thought it over, but I didn’t think that that
was what I wanted to do.’ And when Dr. Gilruth heard that I
was not interested, he began to twist my arm a little bit, telling
me this was a natural and so forth, and something I was going to have
a big opportunity to get in something real big. And I guess with all
the urging by Dr. Gilruth, I went back and talked to my wife; and
she said, “Well, if they want you so badly, well, why don’t
we do it?” So, that was how I got into the Space Task Group
and I was one of the first 35 that was selected to work on the Mercury
Program then. And my job was to be project engineer of the Big Joe
vehicle, which was to be the proof and verification of heatshield
material for—of a heatshield design for the Mercury spacecraft.
And I was given the opportunity to actually select the material and
do the design of the shield that was going to go on the prototype
vehicle. And I had been in touch with the General Electric Company
off and on in their activities on ballistic missiles, and I had been
invited up to see a recovered nosecone that had recently flown. And
it was with a glass-phenolic combination that we ended up using on
Mercury. The difference between the ballistic entry—ballistic
missile entry and for a manned entry vehicle was quite different.
The ballistic nosecone would come in very, very quickly and steeply
and would enter the atmosphere. And there would be a short time for
the heat pulse to actually get through the material. But in the case
of the manned reentry, because of the G limitations that we could
subject a man to, we had to come in and more or less graze into the
atmosphere gradually so that the g-forces did not build up too high.
We had to maintain something less than 3G’s for the reentry
portion. So, that meant that the entry was then extended over a much,
much longer period of time; and the concern at that time about ablative
materials was whether this extended time would then cause the heat
to penetrate through the material and actually impair the structural
integrity, and whether the material would actually fall apart after
it heat—it had heated through.
So, the problem was: “Let’s test it and find out,”
under those particular conditions. And so, we designed the trajectory
of the Big Joe, the entry module, to simulate then the conditions
that we had selected for Mercury. And there was an alternate material
that had been also selected; a beryllium heatshield had also been
conceived. And the reason for selecting beryllium was that, it is
a lightweight metal, and it also has a tremendous, tremendous heat
capacity. And you can soak a lot of heat into it, and it contains
it without melting. And copper is another such material. But copper
would begin to melt earlier than beryllium. So, beryllium was suggested
as an alternate to the ablative material in the event the ablative
shield didn’t work.
Actually, there were two of the ablation—excuse me, of the beryllium
shields were actually built. It was a very expensive material at the
time, and it involved manufacturing that did involve some considerations
of safety from the toxicity of beryllium. And the—but the ablative
material worked so well that we never had to use a—we used the
beryllium on a couple of development shots that needed a heatshield,
but it was not required to actually have a heated entry. The other
concern about beryllium was, what would happen to it in a heated condition
after it was heated to, maybe, 1000, 1200, 1500 degrees and then suddenly
was plunged into the cold water of the ocean? Would it actually cause
a minor explosion? Would it—and how it would affect the spacecraft?
So, we were just as happy whenever the beryllium shield did not have
to be used and the ablative process was shown to really work fine.
And it allowed us then to turn over the information to the McDonnell
Company, who was building the actual production versions of Mercury.
And they, in turn, took that information and designed the production
shield that was subsequently used.
Gemini used an ablative process also. The material was changed slightly.
Improved. And Apollo used ablation in its—for its reentry shields.
Wright: It seems, from your very first day, you’ve had one challenge
given to you after another. Looking back through all the years that
you spent with NASA, was there a time or a task that was given to
you that you would consider the most significant challenge that you
had to overcome to turn it into success?
Bond: Well, of course, Big Joe was a significant challenge. You know,
coming from a kind of an environment where we used small rocket motors
and—well, much smaller than the Atlas. We did end up eventually
using some fairly large motors, but nothing of the size of the Atlas.
But coming from that kind of activity, going into using the Atlas
as a booster was quite a challenge, and was—I considered it
a little bit awesome to begin with. And then it began after we got
down to the brass tacks of designing and developing the Big Joe that
became, more or less, just a real tough job that we had to do and
do well. And I might say that, back in those days, we were not encumbered
by a lot of restrictions and requirements that we have imposed on
the designers today.
We were able to design, develop, and actually test and prepare the
vehicle in less than nine months and put it on the Atlas vehicle.
And as I recall, when I was down at the Cape for the flight of Big
Joe, we—during one of the testing phases, we noticed that there
was a problem with one of the instruments that’s—it was
called a barostat, that’s required—sense the atmospheric
pressure as the vehicle comes into the atmosphere, and it determines
the time whenever the parachutes were to be deployed.
We sensed in one of the testing sessions that we had a problem in
one of the barostats. And so, Scotty [H.] Simpkinson and myself, we
went up onto the gantry, removed the barostat, brought it back down
to Hangar S, where we were housed at the time; and we took the barostat
apart, found the problem. We made the fix to it, and I believe Max
Faget and Chuck [Charles W.] Mathews, a couple of the other guys that
were with us, we all kind of conferred on the fix and so forth, and
went through the process of actually testing it and checking it out
to make sure it was okay. Took it back up on the gantry and reinstalled
it. It worked fine in the flight.
Those things you couldn’t do this day and time. And to be able
to do a test vehicle in nine months and—from concept to flight
was just unprecedented—I mean, is unprecedented these days.
Wright: And how did you come up with the name of Big Joe?
Bond: Well, that wasn’t difficult. Max Faget, well, he had already
named Little Joe. And Little Joe was a composition that was a cluster
of four rockets that were put together; and, since—and if you’re
familiar with the game of dice, the number four, when you come up
with a four, is called a Little Joe. So, when Little Joe came up and
then the idea of a bigger vehicle, he says, “Oh, I’ve
got the name for that. Big Joe. We have to—” So, it was
very quickly decided that ought to be the name.
Wright: And it has lasted through history.
Bond: Right. The other challenge that, I think, was a major challenge
in my career was the Space Environment Simulation Laboratory. And
I think I’ve hit on that already. The idea of being able to
design and develop and operate such a facility that had all those
requirements of man-rating and providing the very severe environments
of space was extremely challenging at the time. And since no large
chambers were even—Tullahoma, the Air Force Base in Tullahoma
[Tennessee], they were in the process of developing a facility of
somewhat similar size. But it was not going to have the man-rating
capability that we envisioned we needed in ours.
And we, of course, we used whatever expertise and information that
was available from that facility to put into the design of our Space
Environment Lab. But that was a really a major challenge to be able
to design and develop that facility and then have it operationally
ready to be able to do the Apollo Program in time. And I sweated many
nights over the problems that we encountered there. But, of course,
along the way there were other kind of challenges as we got into operations
to support Apollo and the Shuttle Program subsequently. And always
many interesting things that I considered myself to have been very
privileged to be able to come along at this time and work with the
many, many, many notable and capable people that I was able to rub
elbows with and work with and—
George Low was really, he was—we were colleagues, I guess at
the time. He worked back at the Cleveland Laboratory [Lewis Research
Center]. And he was also involved in some heat transfer work. And
so, we had kind of a common bond at that time. But George was a fantastic
engineer and manager. And I learned a lot from George, working with
George. It was really a privilege to be able to work with that man.
And, of course, Dr. Gilruth. I don’t think enough could be said
about Dr. Gilruth and his ability to psych out problems. And he was
very low key. He was very low key type of individual. I think everybody
loved the man. He was really a real human being. And he cared about
his workers, and their families! And just—it was a privilege
to work with him and Max Faget and quite a number of the guys that
worked with me and under me in the Engineering and Development organization.
Chris [Christopher C.] Kraft [Jr.] had, of course—we were close
colleagues at the time when we formed the Space Task Group. Chuck
Mathews. There were quite a number of those guys that made very, very
large contributions. And I felt very, very privileged and fortunate
to have been able to work with all these guys. And to work on the
manned space program from its very beginning.
Wright: Well, the program certainly has had many historic firsts.
And tomorrow, in fact, we are looking at the anniversary of one of
those. And it’s the launch of the Apollo 11 crew. Share with
us where you were 30 years ago when the excitement of what was going
on here at the Center and help us understand, from the folks that
helped create this historic event, what it was like here.
Bond: Well, I’ll tell you, it was very exciting. It was very
exciting. I guess the—no, this was the culmination of all the
activities, the inputs, the work that had been put together by so
many hundreds and thousands of people. You know when you think about
it, the manned space program employed, I remember the number it was
something like 250,000 or 300,000 people from all over the country.
Not just this area. And the flight to the Moon at that time was—this
was going to be it. This is what we’d been working so hard for.
This is—
And like the—back in my days at Wallops, whenever I would take
a vehicle up to be tested and we’d run down behind the sand
dunes, and there was a lot of excitement to watch this thing go off,
you know. This was it, you know. This was the time that you said,
“Well, did you do everything right or didn’t you?”
And, golly, it was just fantastic to see [Neil A.] Armstrong step
down out of that lunar vehicle and make those famous words about,
“This is a small step for man but a large step for mankind.”
I get a kick out of Pete [Charles] Conrad’s [Jr.] remark. And
I was sorry to, you know—very much touched by the fact that
he had that accident and passed on just recently. But he, you know,
Pete was always very much of a witty, comical individual. He always
had something to kind of set you off. But his, you know, his remarks
were, “It might’ve been a small step for Neil, but it’s
one big step for me.”
Wright: Were you here on the Center when the event happened? Or were
you home?
Bond: I was on the Center and at home, and then back at the Center.
I was back and forth. I think I went home to be with my family when
we were watching part of the lunar activity, the—and then, of
course, a lot of us would have to be available in the Control Center
in the event we had some problem or issue that had to be addressed.
And as I remember, I was back and forth. And it was really an exciting
time. So, I don’t think that I’ve ever experienced as
exciting—I mean, as that particular occasion.
Wright: Many, many individuals, as you said, made that happen. And
then, of course, just two missions later, you were all very closely
working together to save a mission. And you mentioned early that one
of the test facilities was very, very instrumental in dealing with
the issue with Apollo 13. Could you elaborate a little more on your
participation? On how you were able to help solve some of the problems
with the Apollo 13 mission?
Bond: Well, the—of course, the fact that we had an explosion
on the spacecraft was devastating. And at that point in a mission,
whenever the vehicle’s headed toward the Moon, there was nothing
else that you could do except to let it go around the Moon and then
head it back, if you could. And, of course, the people in the Control
Center were frantically trying to figure out what had happened.
Our engineers were—we always manned, in Building 45, a comparable
activity where all the systems people were made privy to—all
the information that was coming in was also available in Building
45 at various stations for all the various systems of the spacecraft.
And, of course, we had E&D people, who were the systems managers
and engineers, that were responsible for the—a lot of the detail
work of the systems. And also, a lot of the company representatives;
their systems people were brought in with us.
And so, they were in the—you know, going through the job of
trying to figure out exactly what had happened and determine what
to do. But the E&D people, the Crew Systems people, were really
called upon to figure out how we could retrofit the canisters of the
command module to fit into the lunar module to extend the stay time
and also to extend the capability to accommodate three individuals
in the LM, which was originally only designed for two, and still provide
them a breathable atmosphere. But then in addition, all the other
systems people that had to do with power consumption had to figure
out exactly what could be powered down and what could leave only the
essential stuff operating.
So, that went on behind the scenes. The—you know, the communications
people, the people that had to do with the fuel cells, all of those
people would huddle together and review the information and determine
just what we could do, how to power down, and so forth. But after
the flight, we had to ascertain what was the real cause of the problem.
And as I mentioned, the Thermochemical Test Area had a facility in
which we developed fuel—did the testing and development of fuel
cells.
And in that facility, we were able to reproduce the problem that had
caused the explosion. And we did this. There was an investigating
committee that was set up; and, I believe, Ed—Edgar [M.] Cortwright
of the Langley [Research Center, Hampton, Virginia] Laboratory had
been sent to—assigned to head that up. And we were able to brief
him and actually simulate and reproduce that—the cause of that
malfunction, where some switches actually, because of a wrong process
having been used at the Cape, actually was the cause of those switches
actually fusing and continuing a continuous buildup of heat in the
system until there was so much heat that generated that the fuel cell
exploded.
Wright: I guess it was such a relief to everyone that this was not
the normal practice, of having to come up with the answers to these
problems that most of your missions were very well orchestrated and
people sat and reviewed the accomplishments, not all the problems.
Bond: Well, there were always problems. Always problems that had to
be solved. I can enumerate any number of problems along the way in
Apollo and—that had to be solved before the mission could actually—or
the vehicle design could continue. We had problems with the environmental
system. With the air-conditioning system.
We had problems with metallurgy, with what was called—some materials,
whenever they’re being processed, if they’re in the presence
of hydrogen you can get what’s called hydrogen embrittlement,
which weakens the material and eventually it can actually begin to
fail.
We had chemical—chemistry problems, like I say, in the environmental
control system, where the control system had been put together by
a number of dissimilar materials and eventually, with the fluids tending
to pick up the ions from these different metals, would—caused
a problem. And we finally had to introduce other constituents in the
cooling system in order to gather up those excess ions that were causing
the problems.
We had problems with titanium tanks. We were buying hydrazine from—through
the Air Force, and it was—it came with a certain specification.
And this is kind of surprising: the Air Force went through a process
of making the hydrazine more pure. It took out some of the impurities
that were in it, and that was—it turned out that those impurities
were actually protecting the titanium tanks. Once that was taken out,
we began to have problems with them. So, we had to reintroduce the
material—the impurities in order to stop that process.
Now some unusual kinds of things like that, but these were problems
that were sorted out and solved by many of the engineers in E&D.
And along with that, you know, the company engineers also participated
in these kinds of investigations. But it was a process of excellent
engineering and understanding of materials, so a lot of times that
we found whatever materials were used that there wasn’t a good
understanding of the capabilities. That’s where we had problems.
So, one of the advices that I’ve always given my young engineers,
“Know the materials that you’re working with. Know what
they can do, what they’re capable of doing, and how they’ve
been tested to be able to accommodate that. If they haven’t
been fully tested for all the conditions that you’re going to
see, well, don’t use it. Or else make sure that you do test
it under those conditions.”
Wright: It sounds like sound advice. Very sound. We’ve spent
a lot of our time visiting today about your Apollo time. But you also
moved on through and worked some with the shuttle era as well. Could
you give us a brief review of some of the things that you did that
affected that time of NASA’s history?
Bond: Well, yeah. It’s—well, the shuttle, of course, was
another big challenge for the Center and for many of us. The shuttle
concept was initially envisioned by, oh, several engineers. Dr. Faget
had a big hand in the shuttle concept. And in the early days—well,
in the latter days of Apollo, Max did set up an organization that
we installed in the back 40. It was a group of engineers. I think
Jim [James A.] Chamberlain was one of the—was head of that group.
And Jim was one of our Canadian engineers that had come down with
us back in the early days of Mercury. And he was assigned to come
up with a preliminary conceptual design of a shuttle kind of a vehicle.
And these guys were set off in the back 40—I think there were,
I don’t know 30 or 40 of them—and asked to do their work
quietly and, you know, come up with what they thought a usable kind
of a vehicle would be like. And once they went through a lot of—there
were a lot of evolutionary changes that went along. And then, of course,
people at [NASA] Headquarters got involved. John [F.] Yardley, who
was formerly with McDonnell, of course, went to Headquarters as an
administrator up there. And there was a lot of going back and forth,
and—but Max was quite involved. He had ideas for a delta-wing—excuse
me, for a straight-wing shuttle. And others had an idea of the delta.
And the delta finally won out.
But Max still got a lot of his ideas incorporated into the shuttle.
It, you know, we were quite excited starting off on a new kind of
a test article. And there were other issues and problems to be addressed.
Again, the material that you would use for thermal protection. That
was one of the big items that we had to make sure that we solved and
solved properly. If it was going to be a reusable vehicle, the thermal
protection material, the TPS [thermal protection system], had to be
able to sustain repeated use without having to have major retrofits,
and so forth.
The leading-edge material. The nosecone material. Though each of those
were different kinds of—I mean, the nosecone and the leading-edge
materials were different from the TPS that would go under the grosser
parts of the vehicle. And so, there were major developments there.
And our Structures and Mechanics people participated with Rockwell
[International Corporation] in designing and coming up with materials
and selecting materials, and then testing them to make sure that they
did meet the bill. Then there were issues about, you know, whenever
you had moving surfaces, how did you protect certain areas where the
airstream could get in and maybe create zones of impingement of hot
gases and so forth?
So, there along the way, there were many of those kinds of problems
that had to be solved along with the communication systems. We came
up with the SAIL, Shuttle Avionics Integration Laboratory, that put
all the control components together and exercised them as a integrated
system. And, there, many kinds of problems were deduced and corrected
and so forth. And so, yes, it was a major challenge again but in a
different kind of way. But many of our engineers, again, contributed
to the solving of these problems and putting together a system that
is working today—and working very well.
Wright: Yes, it is. Yes, it is. And hopefully will continue for a
long time as the new ideas are thought up.
Bond: Well, there’s a major upgrade that’s going to be
going on, on shuttle, too, that I think will extend its time—its
useful life—for another, I believe, 10 or 15 years, if I’m
not mistaken. Something like that.
Wright: So, the years that—your contributions will still be
making impact for many more years to come. And we certainly have enjoyed
listening to the ones that you shared with us today. And I know that
you have many more; and hopefully in the future, we’ll be able
to visit with you again.
What we’d like to do now is take a break. We know that you brought
some photos for us, and we’re going to ask you to go through
some of those and give a brief kind of like a photographic history
of what those photos are and how you had the—your contributions
made a difference in those as well. So, we’ll stop for now,
and thanks for—
Bond: Well, thank you. It’s been a pleasure, and I’ve
enjoyed doing it.
Wright: Thank you.
VOICE OFF CAMERA: Okay. We are ready, sir.
Bond: [Photograph One] We’re looking at a photograph of the
Big Joe vehicle. It’s the—includes the—on the top
part, of course, is the Mercury prototype test capsule mounted on
the adapter that attaches it to the Atlas booster.
Bond: [Photograph Two] In the Big Joe capsule, the key individuals
that worked on Big Joe composed a letter that we sent to Dr. Gilruth.
And the letter has been—in this particular scene, the letter
has been retrieved and is being read by Dr. Gilruth as the—it
was a first. It was the first mail from space to Dr. Gilruth. And
I believe for many years, he had actually framed and had this in his
office for some time.
Bond: [Photograph Three] This scene shows a picture of the recovered
Big Joe. And one of the things that’s particularly noteworthy
is the letters “United States” are still showing up very
good, even though it has gone through the reentry heat phase and also
in the Atlantic Ocean for a while, that there was still—the
letters show up quite a bit there. This is part of the crew that worked
on it. The fellow standing on the left is Scotty Simpkinson, who worked
directly with me on putting the Big Joe instrumentation together.
A couple of other guys: Marty Eiband is on the other side, opposite
Scotty. [G.] Meritt Preston on the left, myself in the middle, and
golly, it—another guy, I—it escapes—I know his name
like I do my own, but I can’t remember the name just now!
Bond: [Photograph Four] This shows a view looking in directly toward
Chamber A. We can’t see all of Chamber A because the chamber
is so very large. But we do see the 40-ft opening door, and we can
see a test article in the chamber. It was a satellite article that
was subsequently tested for one of the other agencies of the government.
But one of the things we wanted to point out here is that this chamber
has been useful for many different kinds of tests, even beyond those
of test activities that—for support of JSC programs.
Bond: [Photograph Five] This again is another shot of the large chamber
in the Space Environment Simulation Laboratory. And we see, inside
the chamber, we’re looking through the 40-ft door. We see inside
the chamber the Apollo command and service module as it was tested
back in those early days of Apollo. And the individuals that you see
in front of the door are the key individuals that were involved in
running the facility. The middle fellow is Kurt Strauss, who was the
head of the organization. And the other individuals were very key
in running the test organization and test activities that SESL undertook.
Bond: [Photograph Six] As mentioned earlier, the—one of the
tasks that was undertaken in the Space Simulation Lab was to test
the Apollo command and service module for the full duration of the
mission—some 8-plus days. And these were the three crewmen that
were subjected to that testing. We’re looking through the hatch
in the command module, and they’re all looking out; and they
were in there for some 8 days, eating and sleeping and carrying on
all the mission activities as they would in an actual mission going
to the Moon.
Bond: [Photograph Seven] This is just another shot of the crew, looking
into the command module. The crew was quite relieved, of course, to
get out of that thing after lying on their backs for that many days.
It was unlike going to the Moon actually. In the zero-g environment,
of course, the astronaut has the ability to get up and stretch and
move around and so forth; whereas in the one-g environment, they were
essentially on their backs for quite a bit of the time that they were
in the command module. But they did everything they had to do. They
had that space mission odor that astronauts have whenever they get
back after being cooped up together. Of course, they didn’t
realize they smell bad because they all smelled each other. And it
was—but the people in the facility, of course, understood it
as soon as they opened up the hatch.
Bond: [Photograph Eight] This is a shot of Chamber B. Actually it’s
hard to really discern that there is a chamber under all that mass
of equipment that’s installed around it. But it was the smaller
chamber of the facility, and it was used primarily to test the lunar
excursion module, the LM, in its entirety as well as to accommodate—test
and accommodate the astronauts to the lunar surface kind of environment
with tests that simulated those kinds of conditions.
Bond: [Photograph Nine] This is a shot looking directly into the Chamber
B, the smaller chamber. The top has been lifted off. And we can—the
lunar module has been installed into the chamber. After all the connections
and everything had been made, the top would be put on and we would
proceed into the testing—achieving the test environment for
the lunar module.
Bond: [Photograph Ten] This is a photograph of Eugene [A.] Cernan
being fitted up for an excursion into Chamber B, where he was going
to actually undergo some training using one of the pieces of equipment
that he used in EVA [extravehicular activity] on one of the subsequent
flights.
Bond: [Photograph Eleven] And this scene shows the astronaut in the
chamber with the hardware that he [Cernan] was being tested with.
And the chamber is actually—has been pumped down to space conditions;
and the test is being carried out to give him some exposure to what
kind of conditions that he would be seeing in the space environment.
Bond: [Photograph Twelve] This is just another scene of an astronaut
in the small chamber, being subjected to the thermal conditions that
can occur in the Moon The cage that you see around the astronaut is
actually a thermal cage that provides a simulation of the kind of
heating that he would see whenever he’s in direct sunlight.
Sunlight on the lunar surface. And he is using the backpack, the EMU,
extravehicular maneuvering unit, for his breathing supplies, as he
would on the lunar surface.
Bond: [Photograph Thirteen] This is a composite photograph of the
Vibration and Acoustic Test Facility that you see. You can see the
building in the center part of the photograph. And it has several
photographs around it that show the various test articles that had
been tested in the facility. Of course, it provides both the mechanical
vibratory environment that the vehicle sees on its—during its
launch—the launch process, and also the acoustic environment
that it has to endure when the rockets are firing.
Bond: [Photograph Fourteen] This is a photograph of the lunar module
test article in the vibration facility. The little nodules that you
see all over the vehicle are instrument locations. It’s been
very highly instrumented with vibration pickup so that we can ascertain
how the structure will respond to the vibratory environment that it
has to see on the—with the rocket firing.
Bond: [Photograph Fifteen] This is a photograph inside the anechoic
chamber. The anechoic chamber is a noise-free—provides a noise-free
environment, free of any electromagnetic radiations from the outside.
And here we’re—we see two astronauts seated on the lunar
rover, in which they were testing the communications systems that
were on the lunar rover that communicated back to Earth.
Bond: [Photograph Sixteen] This photograph is another shot inside
the anechoic chamber. And here we see a scale model of the orbiter
[shuttle] vehicle being tested, communications-wise again, for its
systems that had to do with communications back to the Earth.
Bond: [Photograph Seventeen] This photograph is really an architect’s
rendering of the layout of the Arc Jet Facility that was built, and
is presently functioning, here on site. And it included two test positions
for the testing of reentry-type materials. The nosecone material and
the thermal protective material that’s used on the shuttle were
tested there, as well as some of the ablative materials that were
tested in subsequent programs after the Mercury Program.
Bond: [Photograph Eighteen] This is a composite photograph of the
Thermochemical Test Area [TTA]. There’s an overview—an
aerial view in the top center photograph that shows the central control
system with the five individual laboratories that make up the TTA.
On the left-hand side is a fairly large vacuum chamber that is housed
in that facility that was used for testing fuel cells and other kind
of equipment that required exposure to hard vacuum.
On the upper right is the Fluid Systems Test Facility, where we were
able to test different kinds of fluid systems that were used in the
various control rocket systems and so forth of the various vehicles
that we—had been developed. Pyrotechnics was the—were
a big entity, of course, throughout our space program, one we used
on all the programs. The lower left test facility was exclusively
used for testing and developing pyrotechnics.
The middle photograph is the Propulsion Test Facility, where the small
rocket motors used in the RCS system, reaction control systems, on
both Apollo and then subsequently the shuttle orbiter have been tested.
And the—on the right hand we have the Space Power Test Facility
that, again, tested certain power systems that were used.
Bond: [Photograph Nineteen] This is a composite photograph of the
Crew Systems Division. And the Crew Systems Division had several medium
size to small chambers that were used for different kinds of testing
activities in developing suits and developing certain pieces of hardware
and so forth. We had—20-ft chamber was developed, and I understand
is presently in use, actually, to expose a number of volunteers to
the kinds of conditions that they would have to endure on a long-duration
mission to Mars.
The 8-ft chamber was just an ordinary—not a space chamber, but
just a vacuum chamber for—the Air Force actually gave to the
JSC for just exposing occupants to the reduced atmospheres that you
see in flight, high-[altitude] flight, and so forth. Then the—on
the lower left-hand side, we have an 11-ft chamber and also a 10-ft
chamber. And these were used extensively in the developing and testing
of spacesuits.
Bond: [Photograph Twenty] This is a photograph in the Structures and
Mechanics Laboratory and it shows the people that were in Structures
and Mechanics involved in the Apollo-Soyuz along with the Russian
engineers that had come over and spent quite some time with us in
several different tests during Apollo-Soyuz. The Russians passed out
red hats for everybody to wear. And it was a—they were quite
interested in this docking facility. In fact, they were quite interested
in all of our facilities, and carried back a lot of information on
details that we were able to make available to them, public information
that they could take back with them and use in their thinking.
Wright: Thank you.
[End of Interview]