MSFC Propulsion Center of
Excellence is Built on Solid Foundation
Mike Wright
Marshall Space Flight Center Historian
Note: The following article originally appeared
in "Technology for the Stars: Extending our Reach,"
the Marshall Space Flight Center 1995 Annual Research and Technology
Report.
MSFC's propulsion expertise continued in 1995, as the launch
of STS-70 in 1995 marked the first flight of an upgraded version
of the space shuttle main engine. Managed by MSFC, the new Block
1 engine featured such improvements as a new liquid-oxidizer turbopump
built by Pratt & Whitney. Many of the turbopump parts were
produced through a casting process designed to eliminate all but
six of the more than 300 welds that had existed in the previously
used turbopump. "The engine performed just as expected,"
said Otto Goetz, deputy manager of the Space Shuttle Main Engine
Project. <1>
The successful flight of the new engine was in keeping with
MSFC's historic role as NASA's primary propulsion development
center. 1995 marked MSFC's 35th anniversary, but the roots of
its propulsion expertise run to the latter half of the 1940's
and to the New Mexico desert. There, members of a German V-2 rocket
team, originally assembled by Wernher von Braun in Germany, reassembled
to work on missile and rocket developments under contract to the
U.S. Army. In 1950, the Army transferred the Von Braun team to
Huntsville and expanded its membership. Throughout the 1950's,
engineers and scientists on Redstone Arsenal made new strides
in rocket and missile development for the Army. On September 8,
1960, President Eisenhower came to Huntsville to dedicate the
new George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, where hundreds of
those same engineers and scientists who had worked for the Army
formed the nucleus of the new NASA center.
The V-2 Rocket Motor
The V-2 rocket motor has been called "the immediate ancestor
of many of the American rockets to follow." <2>
The 46-foot V-2 rocket could carry a 1,650-pound warhead 225 miles.
During World War II, an estimated 1,115 V-2 rockets were successfully
fired against England and 1,675 against continental targets.<3>
After World War II, more than 100 V-2 missiles were launched at
White Sands, where they provided invaluable data in the beginning
of America's missile program.
The engine for the V-2 used a 5,000-revolutions-per- minute turbine
to develop 504 kilowatts (675 horsepower). The rocket produced
a thrust of 59,500 pounds at sea level and 70,000 pounds at altitudes
above 25 miles. According to rocket and space historian Willy
Ley, the fuel for the V-2 "was ordinary ethyl alcohol-in
this case made from potatoes-to which enough water had been added
to bring its strength down to 75 percent by volume." Liquid
oxygen was used as the oxidizer. For the first time a turbopump
was incorporated, powered by an 80-percent hydrogen-peroxide steam
generator.<4> In the late 1940's and throughout
the 1950's, V-2 rocket motor technology directly influenced plans
for the development of missiles and rockets in the United States.
Engine Proposals for Hermes C
After World War II, American rocket experts at White Sands were
anxious to exploit German V-2 rocket motor technology. For example,
they initiated the Hermes program, actually a conglomeration of
different projects and proposals. For a while, engineers proposed
building a three-stage Hermes C rocket using six rocket motors
in clusters of two in its first stage. These motors would be designed
to develop a total of 600,000 pounds of thrust during a burning
time of 1 minute. After jettisoning the first stage, the second-stage
motors would provide an additional 100,000 pounds of thrust during
a 1-minute burning time. A winged third stage would have given
Hermes C a range of about 2,000 miles. Hermes C, and an even smaller
version known as Hermes C-2, turned out to be too ambitious, and
the project was scaled back. <5> Nevertheless,
Hermes research conducted by General Electric contributed to the
advancing state of the art in rocket motor design, especially
for the Redstone. "The Hermes C-1 study was handed to our
team, and the design and development of the new rocket with a
500-mile range was given a very high priority by the Chief of
Ordnance in the fall of 1950," Von Braun said.<6>
Navaho Booster Engines
The development of the propulsion system for Redstone was also
directly linked to an Air Force project, i.e., Navaho, which had
roots in the V-2 engine. Before the Air Force became convinced
that ballistic missiles represented the most effective approach
to unmanned strategic long-range weapons, it developed early air-breathing
cruise missiles. Even though it used a ramjet engine for sustained
flight to the target, the Navaho was boosted into the air by three
liquid-propellant rocket engines originally designed with 75,000
pounds of thrust. <7> MSFC engineers Alex
McCool and Keith B. Chandler traced the development trends of
early liquid-propellant engines and noted that while early V-2
concepts were incorporated in these engines, many new design features
and improvements were also brought in for the Navaho. A new thrust-chamber
design provided better cooling for the higher heat-transfer rate
and an improved single injector replaced 18 separate injectors.
<8> Eventually the engine was updated to
135,000 pounds of thrust.
The Redstone NAA 75-110
The Navaho production contract was later canceled, but its research
and development effort directly influenced future rocket engines,
including the engine for the Redstone. The Navaho XLR43- NA-1
engine, basically a redesigned version of the V-2, came nearer
than any other engine did to meeting the special requirements
for the Redstone. "We decided to adapt to our purpose the
liquid-propulsion system then used in the Navaho test missile-a
North American Aviation engine," Von Braun wrote.<9>
The Redstone engine was designated " NAA 75-110 " and
rated at 75,000 pounds thrust at sea level, with a thrust-burning
time of 110 seconds. <10> Improvements
in the performance features and components of the engine yielded
seven different engine types, A-1 through A-7. The A-7 engine
was the power plant for the Mercury-Redstone launch vehicles.
Basically, it was the same power plant used in the latest tactical
Redstone ballistic missiles with modifications to improve overall
efficiency and safety. The engine generated 78,000 pounds of thrust
at sea level. <11> In May 1961, a Mercury-Redstone
designed by the Von Braun team in Huntsville and managed by the
new Marshall Center launched Alan B. Shepard, the first American
astronaut, into space.<12>
Jupiter S-3D Engine
On May 31, 1957, an Army Jupiter Intermediate-Range Ballistic
Missile was fired to an altitude of 250 to 350 miles and to a
range of 1,500 miles, marking the limit of its design capability
and the first successful flight of such a missile. <13>
The success was tied to Huntsville where members of the Von Braun
team at Redstone Arsenal had modified existing engine hardware
to meet new requirements. Like the Redstone, the Jupiter missile
drew power from a V-2 engine originally adapted for the Navaho.
<14> For the Jupiter, however, the engine
was scaled up to a thrust of 150,000 pounds. The engine was also
designed to operate on liquid oxygen and kerosene (RP-1) instead
of the liquid oxygen and ethyl alcohol used in the Redstone, resulting
in about a 7-percent gain in propellant performance. The engine
also utilized a tubular-wall, regeneratively cooled thrust chamber
that provided a major reduction in weight, cost, and fabrication,
as compared to previous double-walled chambers. <15>
The Rocketdyne Division of North American Aviation supplied the
S-3D engine. The Jupiter space flight that probably attracted
more public attention than any other came on May 28, 1959, when
two primates, Able and Baker, rode in a capsule aboard a nose
cone and survived the flight in spite of reentry temperatures
of approximately 5,000 °F. <16>
Jupiter C Engine
Other launch vehicles, including the Jupiter C, developed by
the Army missile team in Huntsville also received their inheritance
from the experience the team had acquired on the V-2, the Hermes,
and the Redstone. On August 7, 1957, an Army Jupiter C, developed
by the Von Braun team in Huntsville, fired a one-third-scale model
nose cone 1,200 miles down range from a Florida launch site. The
nose cone reached a summit altitude of 600 miles and was recovered
the next day. On November 7, the nose cone was shown on television
by President Eisenhower as evidence that the United States had
marked another milestone in the missile and space race. <17>
Engineers at Redstone Arsenal had solved the reentry heating problem
for the Jupiter missile. They had also modified the Redstone and
designed it to serve as the first stage for the Jupiter C. Two
clustered stages of solid-propellant motors developed by the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory in California served as the second and third
stages for the vehicle. Changes to the Jupiter C stage included
increasing the tankage so that it could hold more fuel and oxidizer,
thus extending engine burning time. The engine itself was also
modified to burn a more powerful fuel, Hydyne (unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine
and diethylene triamine), boosting the first-stage thrust to 83,000
pounds. <18> On January 31, 1958, the
engineers from Huntsville used the Jupiter C to tackle the biggest
test of all: they used the Jupiter C rocket to launch Explorer
I, the first U.S. satellite, into orbit. <19>
H-1 Engines for Saturn I and Saturn IB
As the United States planned for the decade of the 1960's, its
missile and space experts reviewed their existing inventory of
launch vehicles. The review demonstrated the clear need to develop
a large-scale engine that could be arranged in a cluster in the
first stage to launch communications satellites and other scientific
payloads, including weather satellites and instrumented probes.
<20> The engine would eventually boost
the Saturn launch vehicle. The history of the Saturn program began
in the Spring of 1957; Wernher von Braun recalled, "Our preliminary
designers were studying a large, clustered-engine, first-stage
arrangement. In the late summer of 1958, we were authorized to
proceed with the design and development of a 1.5-million-pound
thrust stage based on this bunching concept." The H-1 engine
based on the Jupiter S-3D engine was selected for the new booster
that would eventually be known as Saturn I. <21>
The S-I stage for the Saturn I became the S-IB first stage for
the Saturn IB. The design used Von Braun's clustering concept.
This involved using former Redstone and Jupiter tanks, which were
lengthened to carry added propellant, while the basic diameter
of the 70-inch Redstone and the 105-inch Jupiter tanks were retained.
The tank arrangement gave an alternate pattern of the four fuel
and four oxidizer tanks, clustered around the 105-inch center
oxidizer tank.
Rocketdyne was selected as the contractor to modify the S-3D
design for the H-1, which would use liquid oxygen and RP-1. <22>
"The H-1 also shed a number of accessories carried over from
the Jupiter engine system," wrote Saturn historian Roger
Bilstein. "Early versions of the H-1 relied on the Jupiter's
lubrication system, which featured a 73-liter (20-gallon) oil
tank. The H-1 designers arranged for the vehicle's own fuel, RP-1
(along with some additives), to do the same job. This arrangement
eliminated not only the oil tankage, but also a potential source
of contamination." <23> Rocketdyne's
Edward E. Straub also reviewed the modifications made to the H-1.
Two ground start tanks (with complex accessories) for the Jupiter
engine were replaced on the H-1 by a simple solid-propellant cartridge
starter. In addition, a complex thrust-level control system for
the Jupiter engine was modified for the H-1.<24>
Initial versions of the Saturn I vehicle, called "Block I,"
had eight H-1 engines-each producing 165,000 pounds of thrust.
H-1 engines were also used in a Block II design that increased
thrust to 188,000 pounds each. By the time the tenth and last
Saturn I vehicle lifted off on July 30, 1965, the United States
had clearly committed itself to President Kennedy's challenge
to land a man on the Moon by the end of the decade. The final
Saturn I flight climaxed with what MSFC officials termed as a
"program which started the U.S. on the road to the Moon with
10 straight successes."<25>
RL-10 Upper-Stage Engines
During the 1960's, many MSFC efforts were directed toward advanced
engine technology and higher energy propellants. Fuel-efficiency
assessments pointed to liquefied gases as the promising new propellants
for advanced missions, and to liquid hydrogen, in particular,
for the Saturn upper stages.<26> Liquid
hydrogen, however, introduced even more risk and danger into missile
and space research. Joel E. Tucker, who has traced the history
of Pratt & Whitney's RL-10 upper-stage rocket engine, has
noted that the company's key engineers and researchers were introduced
to hydrogen-fueled projects in 1956, with a sketch of the Hindenburg's
last fateful moments and a report on an explosion of a hydrogen
lab. <27> Undaunted, but cautious, industry
and government rocket experts were drawn by what Saturn historian
Roger Bilstein has called the "lure of liquid hydrogen."
Studies showed that "compared to an RP-1- fueled engine of
similar size, liquid-hydrogen fuel could increase the specific
impulse of an engine by 40 percent," Bilstein noted. <28>
The RL-10 engine was rooted in liquid-hydrogen engine research.
Pratt & Whitney had explored liquid hydrogen for the Air Force
for the super-secret high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft known
later as the "SR71 Blackbird." The Air Force was also
interested in a liquid-hydrogen engine that would enable it to
launch heavier payloads, such as communications satellites. <29>
NASA eventually inherited responsibility for the RL-10 engine
under development by Pratt & Whitney-and destined for use
in the Saturn I upper stages. The first flight of the engine occurred
in 1964 after engineers at MSFC and Pratt & Whitney logged
hours of engine testing in Huntsville and at other sites. The
tests helped score hundreds of innovative design breakthroughs
in cryogenic pumps, the thrust chamber, the injector face, and
the lubrication system. <30>
J-2 Engines for Saturn IB and Saturn V
The selected configuration for the Saturn I second stage, the
S-IV stage, was a cluster of six RL-10 engines, each having 15,000
pounds of thrust. But as NASA looked beyond Saturn I to large
launch vehicles for future missions, clustering the RL-10 was
not enough. Beginning in 1960, development of the J-2 engine,
a single-chamber hydrogen/oxygen engine of 200,000 pounds thrust
was underway. <31> By late 1960, the first
experimental components for the J-2 were being fabricated and
assembled by a research and development team. Like the RL-10,
the development of the J-2 engine was dependent on innovation
and design simplicity. For example, engineers had to design a
system for forming some 600 uniform posts on the face of the J-2
injector, and they had to tackle new problems of insulation, metals
embitterment, and sealing. In addition, engineers had to develop
a new method of brazing high-strength stainless-steel tubing to
form the J-2's regeneratively cooled thrust chamber. <32>
These huge engines, built by Rocketdyne for MSFC, became the powerhouse
for Saturn IB and Saturn V upper stages. A single J-2 was used
in the Saturn IB second stage and Saturn V third stage. Five J-2
engines were clustered in the Saturn V second stage for a million
pounds of thrust.
Saturn V F-1 Engine
The origins of the Saturn launch vehicle concept are rooted in
the research conducted within the Army Ballistic Missile Agency
in the late 1950's. However, interest in the program moved well
beyond the borders of Redstone Arsenal after President Kennedy's
challenge in 1961 to land a man on the Moon before the end of
the decade. In reality, the Von Braun team had recognized early
on that a rocket engine of tremendous capabilities would be needed
if man ever embarked on lunar journeys or sent probes into deep
space. As a result, development started in the 1950's on the 1.5-million-pound-thrust
F-1 engine even before a vehicle was designed for it. The F-1
would burn the familiar liquid oxygen and RP-1, and had roots
in the Air Force Navaho program. The F-1 was based on an initial
concept for a 360,000-pound-thrust E-1 engine that would burn
liquid oxygen and RP-1. <33>
Rocketdyne was selected as the contractor for the F-1, and-for
a brief while-NASA considered using the F-1 on a vehicle of tremendous
size, the Nova, which would be capable of direct flights to the
Moon. The Nova never materialized, but the F- 1 did and would
eventually be used in the first stage (S-IC) of the vehicle that
would launch men on their way to the Moon. Five F-1 engines would
provide a total thrust of 7.5 million pounds in the Saturn V S-IC
stage.
Rocketdyne's Bob Biggs has pointed out that although the giant
F-1 engine was simple, it was not developed without problems.
"Its very 'bigness' created a brand-new territory for technical
problems." According to Biggs, the most significant problem
was also the one most expected and the most difficult to solve-
combustion instability. The engine was designed to the man-rated
safety concept, which required that it be dynamically stable.
If any engine system was disturbed from any source, the system
was required to automatically overcome the disturbance and return
to stable operations. <34>
Saturn historian Roger Bilstein has recounted the efforts that
Rocketdyne and MSFC engineers used to solve the stiff challenge
of combustion instability. "The most bizarre aspect of F-1
testing (like the H-1) involved the use of small bombs to upset
the thrust exhaust pattern to measure the engine's ability to
recover from disturbance."<35> Biggs
has termed the F-1 as "the No-Frills Giant." <36>
NASA and Rocketdyne news releases often tried to put the size
and power of the engine in perspective by pointing out, for example,
that "the fuel pump of the Rocketdyne F-1 pushes fuel with
the force of 30 diesel locomotives," or that the five engines
generated "double the amount of potential hydroelectric power
that would be available at any given moment if all the moving
waters of North America were channeled through turbines."<37>
Of course, those who watched the launch of Apollo 11 on July 15,
1969, understood the power of the Saturn V vehicle that Wernher
von Braun called the "Giant." <38>
Space Shuttle Main Engine
The last Saturn F-1's that NASA employed helped lift Skylab into
orbit in 1973. By then, NASA engineers were already deep into
the design for the space shuttle main engine, a concept that broke
with the past, according to shuttle historian Dennis R. Jenkins.
The challenge, Jenkins said, was "not to build a larger,
more powerful engine, but to build a small, compact engine that
could be throttled during ascent to provide some measure of control
over the maximum dynamic pressure and speed of the vehicle."
<39> MSFC
engineers who have traced the technology projects leading to the
development of the space shuttle main engine have pointed to an
"aggressive technology program in high-pressure tubomachinery
initiated in the 1960's." They point out that much of the
work was done by Pratt & Whitney under MSFC's sponsorship,
with outgrowth known in-house as the concept for the HG-3, a 350,000-pound-thrust
engine named after Hans G. Paul, the long-time chief of the Propulsion
Division. In essence, the HG-3 concept eventually became the space
shuttle main engine.<40>
The main engines would become the most advanced cryogenic liquid-fueled
rocket engines ever built. To get very high performance from an
engine compact enough that it could not encumber the orbiter or
diminish its desired payload capability, MSFC worked closely with
its prime contractor, the Rocketdyne Division of Rockwell International.
The greatest problem was to develop the combustion devices and
complex tubomachinery-the pumps, turbines, seals, and bearings-that
could contain and deliver propellants to the engines at pressures
several times greater than in the Saturn engines. The shuttle
main engine was also designed as the first propulsion system with
a computer mounted directly on the engine to control operation
and automatically make corrective adjustments or shut down the
engine safely. For improved fuel efficiency, engineers developed
an ingenious, staged combustion cycle never before used in rocket
engines. <41>
Rocketdyne's Bob Biggs has reported on the first 10 years
of the shuttle main engine and has traced the technical hurdles
and challenges that engineers at Rocketdyne and MSFC faced during
the development period. These included predicting the transient
behavior of the propellants and engine hardware during start and
shutdown. Rocketdyne engineers and officials, such as Rocketdyne
Vice President Matt Eck, also sought solutions to concerns with
high-pressure fuel turbopump bearing instability problems, explosions,
and blade failures. On various occasions during different tests,
engineers confronted a fire that started in the engine's main
oxidizer valve, a major fracture in the housing for the main fuel
valve, the rupture of a nozzle fuel coolant feedline, and a fire
that burned through the engine's fuel preburner. Solutions were
also sought to heat-exchanger failures, weld cracks in the main
combustion chamber, and problems with the main injector posts.
A major portion of the problems were answered by conducting ground
test after ground test. In fact, a goal of 65,000 seconds of total
ground testing was reached during an engine test on March 24,
1980-a little more than a year before the first space shuttle
was launched on April 12, 1981. <42>
It is possible to draw charts and diagrams that trace the origins
of MSFC's expertise in liquid-propulsion systems all the way back
to the days of the V-2 or the Navaho missile. Unfortunately, charts
and diagrams do not adequately convey the thousands of hours engineers
at MSFC and its contractor sites have spent year after year, studying,
designing, analyzing, testing, and dissecting pumps, bearings,
valves, insulation, fuel mixtures, nozzles, feedlines, and thousands
of other rocket engine components. Better evidence of that expertise
came in 1995 when NASA launched the first flight of the upgraded
space shuttle main engine and marked more than 200 main engine
flights overall.
References
1. July 19, l995. STS-70 Sees First Use of New
Space Shuttle Main Engine: Inertial Upper Stage Deploys Last Tracking
and Data Relay Satellite System. Marshall Star.
2. Science Policy Research Division, Congressional
Research Service, Library of Congress, Serial D, Volume I. United
States Civilian Space Programs 1958-1978. 1981. Report Prepared
for the Subcommittee on Space Science and Applications of the
Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives
(Washington), 166.
3. Emme, E.M., ed. 1961. Aeronautics and Astronautics:
An American Chronology of Science and Technology in the Exploration
of Space, 1915-1960 (Washington), 50.
4. Ley, W. 1968. Rockets, Missiles, and Men in
Space. Viking Press (New York), 498-499; Schulze, H.A. 1965. Technical
Data on the Development of the A-4, V-2. Historical Office, Management
Services Office, MSFC, 22.
5. Bullard, J.W. History of the Redstone Missile
System. October 15, 1965. Historical Monograph Project Number:
AMC 23M, U.S. Army Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama,
13; United States Civilian Space Programs 1958-78, 167.
6. Von Braun, W. Fall 1963. The Redstone, Jupiter,
and Juno (reprint). Technology and Culture, vol. IV., no. 4, 454.
7. United States Civilian Space Programs 1958-1978,
166-167.
8. Chandler, K.B., and McCool, A.A. March 23,
1962. Development Trends in Liquid-Propellant Rocket Engines.
From Peenemuende to Outer Space, Commemorating the Fiftieth Birthday
of Wernher von Braun. Edited by Stuhlinger, E.; Ordway, F.I.,
III; McCall, J.C.; and Bucher, G.C. MSFC, 292.
9. The Redstone, Jupiter, and Juno, 454.
10. History of the Redstone Missile System, 54.
11. United States Civilian Space Programs 1958-1978,
186.
12. Bilstein, R.E. 1980. Stages to Saturn, A
Technological History of the Apollo/Saturn Launch Vehicle. NASA
SP-4206 (Washington), 19-20.
13. Aeronautics and Astronautics. 86.
14. United States Civilian Space Programs 1958-1978,
168.
15. Development Trends in Liquid-Propellant Rocket
Engines, 294.
16. Aeronautics and Astronautics, 109.
17. Aeronautics and Astronautics. 87.
18. The Redstone, Jupiter, and Juno, 457.
19. Aeronautics and Astronautics, 95.
20. Lange, O.H. March 23, 1962. Development of
the Saturn Space Vehicle. From Peenemuende to Outer Space, Commemorating
the Fiftieth Birthday of Wernher von Braun. Edited by Stuhlinger,
E.; Ordway, F.I., III; McCall, J.C.; and Bucher, G.C. MSFC, 6.
21. Von Braun, W. June 1963. Saturn, Our Best
Hope. Space World, 13.
22. Development Trends in Liquid-Propellant Rocket
Engines, 294.
23. Stages to Saturn, 99.
24. Straub, E.E. February 1962. H-1 Engine. Astronautics,
A Publication of the American Rocket Society, vol. 77 no. 2, 39.
25. August 4, 1965. Saturn I Program Closes.
Marshall Star.
26. Marshall Space Flight Center, 1960-1985 Anniversary
Report. 1985. NASA (Washington), 9-10.
27. Tucker, J.E. 1989. The History of
the RL-10 Upper-Stage Rocket Engine. History of Liquid Rocket
Engine Development in the United States. Liquid Rocket Propulsion
History Colloquium, American Association for the Advancement of
Science Annual Meeting, Los Angeles. Doyle, S.E., vol. ed.; Hall,
R.C., series ed. History Series, vol. 13, A Supplement to Advances
in the Astronautical Sciences, 123.
28. Stages to Saturn, 129-130.
29. Jones, L.W.; Fisher, M.F.; McCool, A.A.;
and McCarty, J.P. June 24-26, 1991. Propulsion at the Marshall
Space Flight Center. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
AIAA-91-2553. Presented at the American Institute of Aeronautics
and Astronautics/Social of Automotive Engineers /American Society
of Mechanical Engineers, 27th Joint Propulsion Conference, Sacramento,
California, 6.
30. The History of the RL-10 Upper-Stage Rocket
Engine. 123-151.
31. United States Civilian Space Programs 1958-1978,
171.
32. News from Rocketdyne, J-2 Engine Background
Information, 4.
33. Propulsion at the Marshall Space Flight Center,
8.
34. Biggs, B. Spring 1992. F-1, The No-Frills
Giant. Threshold, 22-31.
35. Stages to Saturn, 115.
36. The No-Frills Giant. 22-31.
37. Did You Know That???? Rocketdyne Division,
North American Rockwell Corporation.
38. Von Braun, W. 1975. Saturn, The Giant. Apollo
Expeditions to the Moon. Edited by Cortright, E.M. NASA SP-350
(Washington), 41.
39. Jenkins, D.R. The History of Developing the
National Space Transportation System, the Beginning Through STS-50.
1992. Broadfield Publishing (Melbourne, Florida), 75.
40. Propulsion at the Marshall Space Flight Center,
11.
41. Marshall Space Flight Center; 1960-1985 Anniversary
Report, 22.
42. Biggs, R. 1989. Space Shuttle Main Engine,
the First Ten Years. History of Liquid Rocket Engine Development
in the United States. Liquid Rocket Propulsion History Colloquium,
American Association for the Advancement of Science Annual Meeting,
Los Angeles. Doyle, S.E., vol. ed.; Hall, R.C., series ed. History
Series, vol. 13, A Supplement to Advances in the Astronautical
Sciences, 69-110.
Back to Top