Lunar Landing Vehicle
Sorry for the delay but real life has been kicking my butt right now. As always any feedback positive or negative is appreciatted.
A critical pacing item for the Apollo LESA program was Lunar Landing Vehicle (LLV) manufactured by Grumman Aerospace Corporation. The vehicle would be the enabler to allow the Astronauts to live and work on the lunar surface for months at a time. As before with the smaller lunar module the success of the lunar missions would hinge on the capability of the new lander. As Grumman was building the first 15-ton Lunar Modules it’s designer had started looking ahead to the possible future of lunar exploration. The near future for landings was the modification of the original Lunar Modules to the ELM (Extended Lunar Module). The ELM would be used for the Apollo J class missions. The ELM supported increased scientific payload to be delivered to the lunar surface including a Lunar Rover. The Extended Lunar Modules also enabled a significant increase in lunar surface stay times. These modifications increased the mass of the Lunar Module by 3,000 Lbs. Grumman had thought the next logical step would be what they had called a Lunar Module shelter, which was closely based on the existing ELM spacecraft. This was a Lunar Module modified to support an automated unmanned landing and that had it’s Ascent engine and fuel tanks removed. With no weight devoted to a Ascent stage the Lunar Module Shelter could support a 2-man crew on the lunar surface for 14-days. The missions would be dual launches. A Saturn-V would launch the unmanned lunar module shelter. Another Saturn-V launch, would carry the astronauts and a modified Lunar Module which would take two astronauts to the lunar surface and return them to lunar orbit. The other astronaut would remain in the Command module waiting in orbit. Grumman was extremely surprised in 1967 to hear that NASA had much more ambitious plans for improvements to it’s Saturn V vehicle. Grumman had expected some incremental performance improvements in the Saturn-V. Instead the Kennedy administration agreed to the Von Braun’s proposal from the MSFC to replace the Saturn-V with the much larger Saturn-VB vehicle. This monster rocket would be able to launch 260,000 lbs to the moon versus the 100,000 lbs of the earlier Saturn-V. NASA planned to still use a dual launch but the increased payload capability of the Saturn-VB made possible 3-6 month lunar surface missions. This was a huge change from the incremental program that had been part of previous NASA studies for lunar missions to follow the Apollo program. This forced a radical rethinking by Grumman as to lunar lander design.
Grumman engineers started with clean sheet design for a new lunar lander that could take advantage of the increased payload performance of the Saturn-VB. NASA was calling the next series of Lunar exploration, Apollo-LESA(Lunar Exploration System for Apollo). Grumman over the last several years had gained significant experience in lunar landers from it’s work on the current Lunar Module and this experience showed in it’s design for the lander for the Apollo-LESA missions. This new lander would be over 200,000 lbs which made the current Lunar Module which tipped the scales at around 33,000 lbs seem tiny by comparison. Grumman leveraged their experience in lunar landers to win the contract to build the new lunar lander in 1968. This contract would require a whole new set of design problems to be solved and as before NASA was on a tight time schedule. The current Apollo mission planning called for the first LESA landing in the middle of 1974. Grumman managers took one look at the ambitious schedule and knew they would have their work cut out for them. It was extremely helpful that Grumman now had a experienced team of engineers in Lunar lander design and these engineers could carry all the accumulated experience into the design and testing of the new Lunar LESA lander. However as before it was a overly optimistic schedule.
Grumman had worked hard to shed every possible ounce from the current Lunar Module. This new Lunar Lander would have some very different design problems. One of the first decisions that needed to be made was what Descent and Ascent engines would have to be used for the new lunar lander including propellant choices. The engine choice was complicated by profile of the dual launch missions. The unmanned lander would need to either reduce it’s Delta-V before reaching the moon or the Descent engine would have to brake the lander as it neared the moon, this would add over 800 m/s to the delta-V requirement of the vehicle. For the manned Apollo LESA missions, the mass of the Apollo spacecraft stack with the CSM and LLV would exceed the Delta-V capability of the Apollo CSM using the current service module tankage. The fuel tankage in the service Module just wasn’t sufficient to slow down the greatly increased mass to allow it to enter Lunar Orbit. NASA was treating the required Delta-V change for the manned and unmanned Apollo missions as separate issues that required separate unique solutions. Grumman engineers in consultation with Convair employees had a possible solution that worked for both mission profiles.
Convair was working on a new Centaur stage that was under development for the replacement for the Saturn-IB, the Saturn-IC. The Centaur upper stage on the Saturn-IC would be used for launching large unmanned probes beyond Earth’s orbit. This Centaur stage could be adapted for the Apollo LESA Missions to brake the the new lunar lander as it neared the moon. The critical adjustment to the new Centaur design would be the ability to minimize cryogenic fluid loss during the 3-day journey to the moon. This change would increase overall mass of the Apollo-Centaur but would allow the stage to be used for the Apollo LESA missions. The Apollo LESA program actually would become the savior of the Centaur Upper stage for the Saturn-IC. With the cuts to unmanned programs the Centaur upper stage for the IC was a prime target since it wouldn’t be needed to launch unmanned probes from Saturn-IC’s. There was no funding for probes that required the launch capability of the Saturn-IC with it’s Centaur upper stage. When first approached about using the Centaur in Apollo the program managers had refused since the modifications to support Apollo would increase mass. When it was realized that they either worked with the Apollo program or face having the program cut completely the decision was quickly made to accept the increased mass penalties. This saved the new Centaur development program for the Saturn-IC. By 1972 the new Centaur stage, which was now called Apollo-Centaur was assembled and tested. The Apollo-Centaur stage was designed to be used on either the Saturn-IC or on the Lunar Landing Vehicle for lunar braking purposes for both the manned and unmanned Apollo LESA Missions.
Even with the lunar braking requirement needs meet by the Centaur, the new landers would still need to have a Delta-V budget of around 2000 m/s to land on the lunar surface. The current LM used Hypergolic engines for both ascent and descent but had a much smaller mass than the planned mass of the new lunar lander. The Grumman engineers could agree that the ascent stage would use a hypergolic engine because it would have a dry mass of 7500 kg. The ascent stage engine needed to both have a high degree of reliability and the stage would have to be able to spend 6 months or more on the lunar surface before lifting off. The use of hypergolic fuels assured a simple and reliable engine that would function even after sitting for months on the lunar surface. The current LM descent stage engine could be easily adapted to lift the LLV ascent Stage with it’s fully loaded wet mass of around 15 tons from the lunar surface. This then left the problem of the descent stage engines. To land such a large mass on the lunar using Hypergolics would require an inordinate amount of fuel. The Grumman designers after much discussion finally settled on using the same RL10 engine that was to be used on the Apollo-Centaur. Throttling capability would need to be added to the this engine. The RL10 engine, which used Liquid Hydrogen and Liquid Oxygen had an extensive flight history. The RL-10 was a much higher performing engine than the Hypergolic fueled engines and would require less propellant to land such a high mass on the lunar surface. The use of RL-10 would require about 14 tons less propellant to land on the lunar surface when compared to hypergolics. The use of the Cryogenic propellant would require additional insulation to minimize fluid loss during the lunar coast but the additional weight in insulation was a minor compared to how much additional hypergolic fuel would be required. The other reason to select the RL-10 was the ability to use the residual cryogenic propellants in the fuel cell power system that would power the LLV. By including some additional plumbing the residual Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen could be moved into the reactant tanks for the fuel cells.
The actual LLV itself would be built as two distinctly different versions that shared a common structure but would have different purposes for the LESA missions. Grumman’s original proposal had two different vehicles that didn’t share a common structure. Within months of starting the contract both NASA and Grumman came to the realization while using different bus structures would save weight it would mean more development time and would increase costs. NASA asked Grumman to continue the development using a common bus structure for both LLV’s. The more massive vehicle was LLV- LESA Base (LLV-LB). This vehicle would be launched on a Saturn-VB about 30-60 days before the actual planned moon landing. The LLV-LB would have a overall wet mass of 100 Tons, not Including the Apollo-Centaur stage. At a little over 25 tons was the Apollo-Centaur which would do the initial braking as it neared the moon. Unlike previous Apollo vehicles the LLV-LB would not enter lunar orbit. Instead it will be launched on a direct trajectory towards the moon and the Apollo-Centaur would do the initial delta-V change before being ejected to crash into the lunar surface. After the Apollo-Centaur is ejected, four RL-10 engines would fire to guide the LLV-LB on it’s landing trajectory towards it’s target on the lunar surface. The LLV-LB Guidance computer would do handle the landing of the vehicle on the lunar surface. The LLV-LB would have no ascent stage and was designed as the astronauts home on the lunar surface for the duration of the mission. The mass of the LLV-LB minus landing propellant would be 67,700 kg. The other lander was the LLV-LESA Taxi (LLV-LT) which would be launched with the mission crew on a Saturn-VB 30-60 days after the LESA Base had landed. The LLV-LT would also use a Apollo-Centaur to do the braking near the Moon. However unlike the LLV-LB, it will be entering lunar orbit before descending. The Apollo-Centaur after it’s burn would be ejected and the engine fired again to take it into a solar orbit trajectory. The astronauts then entered the LLV-LT for the descent. The CSM would be left unmanned in lunar orbit. The LLV-LT would then descend to the lunar surface using a beacon from the LLV-LB on the lunar surface to to help them landing within 1km of the LESA Base. After landing the LESA Taxi would be unloaded and placed placed in hibernation status on the lunar surface. The LLV-LT would have a total dry mass on the lunar surface of 45,000 kg including the 15,000 kg Ascent module.
The LLV-LB base’s overall exterior pressurized structure was a cylinder 8 meters in Diameter and 14 meters high. The lander would rest on 4 legs on the lunar surface that could self adjust to level the vehicle. The bottom portion was unpressurized and had the 4 RL10 engines and fuel tanks that supported the landing and the fuel cell. Then above this was the pressurized volume for the living area. The Airlock entrance was reached by climbing up a ladder that was deployed after landing. As a backup a ladder was also mounted on a landing leg that could also be used to reach the airlock. Directly outside the airlock was a porch that was large enough for two astronauts. The porch area had a electric winch that could be used to move equipment, supplies, lunar samples from the lunar surface to the porch or lower it back down onto the lunar surface. The porch area would be used to do the initial brushing of lunar soil of the space suits before entering the airlock which was large enough for two astronauts. After exiting the airlock the astronauts would enter the equipment room. This room featured a powerful vacuum to be used on the space suits and a heavy duty filtration system for the room. The feedback from the earlier Apollo missions was that lunar dust would be an issue. It was critical to minimize lunar dust transfer from the space suits to the environment inside of the LLV-LB. The equipment room had a airtight door added that sealed it off from the rest of the lunar base and was specifically designed to prevent dust from entering the other areas of the base by an over-pressure system that kept the rest of the base at a slightly higher pressure than the Equipment room so dust in the air would stay in this room. The equipment room featured storage lockers with room for 2 spacesuits for each astronauts and additional lockers for the storage of equipment that was used on lunar surface but should be brought in after each EVA. The room also had a storage drawers for lunar sample containers. The drawers could also be opened from the laboratory area next door. After changing into coveralls the astronauts would then enter the rest of the lunar base. The next room from the equipment room was a work room to do maintenance on equipment like spacesuits, tools etc. This room also had a sink to allow the cleaning of hands and a urinal. The next major room on the first floor was a laboratory area with a computer terminal, teletype machine, communication equipment, scientific equipment and a high resolution imaging system. The laboratory area could also double as a photography darkroom so photos and film could be developed on the surface. These rooms all surrounded a room at the center of the cylinder, this was a 2 meter diameter inner cylinder. The design of these inner cylinder walls was a aluminium composite sandwich that provided the most radiation protection that had ever flown on a US spacecraft, 20 g/cm² which was double the radiation protection of the Apollo CSM. In addition the inside of the cylinder was lined with emergency supplies of food and water and also had a emergency communication terminal. This was the astronaut’s storm shelter, which would protect them from the increased radiation during a solar flare. This inner cylinder also had a main ladder, which was for moving between the 1st and 2nd floor of the LESA base.
The 2nd floor was devoted to the astronauts living, eating and recreation area. The 2nd floor living area had been carefully designed by the same industrial design firm that designed the interior of Skylab to maximise both form and function. With the rapidly increasing body of knowledge on long term living in space that was being gained with Skylab missions, special attention was paid to the overall habitability of the lunar base design. It was being realized that a happy and comfortable crew made for a much more productive mission. Previous Apollo missions had emphasized function and weight savings over crew comfort. This was worked fine for a 1-2 week long mission but it wasn’t realistic to expect even highly motivated astronauts to work in such conditions for 6 plus months. So NASA was paying a lot attention to the overall habitability for the LESA missions. It was found that even choosing the correct paint color could positively affect crew morale. The 1st floor kept a more utilitarian approach but the 2nd floor emphasized comfort. Extensive testing had been done on Earth including having a 4 man team spend 3-months in a prototype of the lunar base in a polar desert region located in Canada. This testing was so successful that this facility was now turned into a full time research station for testing lunar mission procedures, equipment and habitability with rotating crews usually spending 3-months at time at the facility. The 2nd floor featured 4 small but functional private rooms for each astronaut. While not very big, they still offered privacy and a place for a astronaut to relax but still only took up about 30 square feet. A big debate had been about using hammocks or some type of mattress for sleeping. While sleeping in Zero-G had never been a concern, an astronaut could simply slip into sleeping bag and just secure it to a wall. In ⅙ lunar gravity some type of substantial sleeping arrangement needed to be implemented. The final decision was to mimic a sleeping arrangements of naval ships with bunks that could also fold against the wall when not in use. The rest of the 2nd floor had a small but functional kitchen, a dining table for eating and relaxation, Television set, bathroom, shower and a computer terminal and communication console. The 2nd floor also featured multiple windows that could be used to look out at the lunar and each private room also had a small window. Each window was equipped with a air tight shutter that could be closed if necessary. The last feature was a crawl space in ceiling of the 2nd level that had storage for food and and spare equipment. The last area of the LLV-LB was what some astronauts called the basement. This was beneath the first floor and provided additional storage for supplies but also provided access to the Environmental systems and the primary and backup power systems. By having these systems in a pressurized area it was then possible to provide easy access to these critical systems if repair or maintenance was needed. Overall the long term feedback for living in the LLV-LB would have to wait for the first mission but Grumman engineers and designers had high hopes that it could function as an efficient lunar home for astronauts.
The next lander was the LLV-LT and while sharing the same bus structure had a very different function for the mission. It’s primary job was to get the crew down onto the lunar surface and at the appropriate time get them off the lunar surface and back to CSM waiting in orbit. The secondary job of the LLV-LT was to transport to the surface the MOLAB vehicle and an improved version of the Lunar Rover used on the Apollo J missions. The MOLAB vehicle was a key part of the LESA missions and would have a mass of 7,000 kg and could support 2-astronauts for up to 21 days with a range of 600 km. MOLAB was fully pressurized and was analogous to a small lunar RV that would give a crew unprecedented mobility to fully explore a lunar region. The vehicle was powered by a fuel cell and would also tow a trailer with the reactant tanks for fuel cell. The vehicle could be refueled from either Liquid Hydrogen in either the LLV-LB or LLV-LT. It was in the mission planning that the vehicle would be able to do the first fueling from the residual propellant in the LLV-LT. The Lunar Rover vehicle was unpressurized and was designed to range upwards of 10km from the lunar base. The vehicle was designed to improve on the original LRV, including additions like aluminum fenders so the fenders would not break when brushed by an astronaut in spacesuit. The vehicle also featured an improved camera, improved radiator and rechargeable batteries that would be charged from the fuel cell on the lunar base. The vehicle also was equipped with a tow hitch for a equipment trailer was included. This would allow the easy transport of equipment from the LLV-LT to the LLV-LB and to also transport equipment like the lunar core drilling rig to a selected site. The LLV-LT beyond the ascent stage had a small airlock for access to the lunar surface. The rest of the LLV-LT was unpressurized and could carry an additional 6-tons of cargo which included supplies and equipment for the mission. For power the LLV-LT would use a solar power to charge a 1-ton battery that would then provide the necessary power to allow monitoring of the hibernating vehicle while on the surface.
The most controversial item for the Apollo LESA base was the power system. Maintaining power to a long term lunar base was extremely challenging because the moon takes a little over 29 days to complete one full rotation of it’s axis. This long 29 day rotation meant for around 355 hours a lunar region has sunlight and then it is plunged into darkness for 355 hours. This made designing a power system that only used solar panel extremely challenging because of the weight of batteries required to power the Lunar base through the long lunar night. The first thought was to use a SNAP(System for Nuclear Auxiliary Power) for this requirement. A nuclear reactor weighing about 5 tons could be developed that could generate 20+ KW for 5-years. Using a nuclear reactor quickly started losing support for the initial LESA exploration because of the cost of development and production of the the nuclear reactor. A nuclear reactor was possible when the final base location was selected but NASA wanted to see if a different route for power was possible that didn’t involve nuclear for the Apollo LESA missions. The final choice settled on a power system that combined both fuel cells, solar panels and electrolysis.
The General Electric designed power plant for the LESA base weighed a total of 6 metric tons without reactants. The system was designed to generate continuously supply 12kw of power through the complete lunar cycle. The Power System used Solar Panels during the day to both supply power and run a electrolysis cell that would separate out the water that came out of the fuel cell into Hydrogen and Oxygen gas. The Liquefiers would turn the gas into a Cryogenic liquid. While in testing the actual electrolysis process would run without issue the liquefaction of the gas back into Cryogenic liquid caused so many headaches that at some point the General Electric designers did look at scrapping the liquefaction piece of the power system and just depend on storage of the Hydrogen and Oxygen as gas. The engineers persisted with the testing of liquefaction system and making adjustments. By early 1974 the LESA base power system had been developed into a fully functioning system that would use the water produced from the fuel cell and convert it back into Cryogenic Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen. The power system was tested on the SA-602 launch in a LLV in Earth Orbit. The system functioned for a little over 3-months and then cryogenic process started to break down so by the 4-month the Cryogenic system had completely failed.
While some observers looked on at this test as a complete failure the General Electric engineers gathered valuable data on how the system would function in a vacuum environment. By early 1975 the LESA 12-kw Mark-II Power system for the Apollo-22 was being assembled for installation in the first LLV-LB intended to land on the lunar surface. General Electric incorporated all the knowledge gained from the years of testing into the Mark-II. The system had redundant Electrocyclic Cells and redundant liquefier units. The system also included 16x415 AmpHour rechargeable batteries. The batteries served as a backup power source and could power the life support and basic systems of the LESA base for 2-days in-case of complete fuel cell failure. Also as part of the system was the solar panels. The amount of solar panels that would be needed far exceeded what was practical to include on the vehicle. A 10kw Solar System was incorporated into the LLV that would extend on two wings from the side after landing. One of the first steps the crew would have to undertake soon after landing would be the construction of the solar field. The crew would need to erect a 50 kw solar field which would take planned 30 hours of EVA surface time. This was the longest and most time consuming part of the setup of the LESA base. Overall 60 hours of EVA hours surface time was dedicated to setup of the LESA base for the 6-month long mission. However a considering over a 6-month mission over 1,200+ man-hours of surface EVA time would be planned for so this loss of surface time was considered acceptable. The Mark-II power system was also designed for ease of access to critical systems from inside the LESA Base. This type of access would make it easier for astronauts to conduct maintenance or repairs on the system. The system would be launched with 2000 kg of reactants in it’s storage tanks and it was expected that at least 1,000 kg of reactants can be scavenged from the descent tanks after landing. The storage tanks of the system would have a capacity of 4,000 kg of reactants. Despite the closed loop nature of the system it was expected that over a year from cryogenic loss and the losses through the system that 20% of the reactants would be loss.
The other critical component of the LLV fortunately didn’t have nearly as many issues in development, the ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System). Over the years NASA had improved on it’s ECLSS and the LLV-LB was a continuation in that evolution. The Skylab ECLSS was the first time at adding a closed loop system but this was only for Oxygen. For the LLV-LB things would be taken a step further. The Skylab Oxygen recycling system was improved to create a system that could recycle 70% of the Oxygen. The next part was for water which was a critical mass item The water system was separated into a greywater and blackwater system. The blackwater system, which was human waste was simply stored in tanks and was not processed any further. If any waste samples required for medical reasons the samples would be stored in bags with the solid waste being exposed to vacuum to freeze dry it. The greywater system was designed to recycle 80% of the water used so it could be re-used again. The basic LLV-LB configuration was to launch with 240 days of Oxygen, food, and water for 4-people. For those basic consumables .5kg of dry good and 1Kg of Whole wet food was allocated per person per day. While this seemed generous, NASA had learned from experience that food was critical to moral. With the heavy planned EVA load astronauts would be needing the energy from a healthy diet. Included in this allocation was 4kg of drinking water per astronaut per day and this water was not recycled. With the amount of exercise the astronauts would be getting on the lunar surface and overall grime of working on the lunar surface the astronauts would have a generous allocation of 26kg per person per day for wash water. This grey water would be 80% recycled by the ECLSS system. It had been discussed that possible more efficient ECLSS systems could be created including the recycling of urine and moisture in the atmosphere of the base from sweat and respiration. However in the interest of having a reliable ECLSS system this type of recycling of water would not be occurring with the initial deployed system. This left the possibility in the future of improvements to the ELCSS to improve the recycling of both Oxygen and water. The LESA base also had stored for emergencies 60-days of emergency dehydrated rations and water and Oxygen.
The LESA base also featured several emergency systems. The LESA base had stored for each floor 50kg of Emergency Oxygen. In the event of a hull breach the LESA base ECLSS system would immediately start dumping Oxygen from these tanks into the atmosphere of the base. By doing this depending on the size of the breach, this would give the astronauts several additional minutes to evacuate the area and done spacesuits if necessary. This system had been incorporated into the design of the ECLSS system by Grumman from the beginning. With the deaths of the Cosmonauts from the Zvezda-2 mission by a loss of pressurization on the the lunar surface. NASA had conducted a deep review of the LESA base to determine if any “corner scenarios” had been over-looked in the design. The ability of the LESA base to handle unexpected depressurization events meant that Grumman had already in-place a system to handle the type of emergency that probably doomed the Zvezda-2 crew. The next emergency situation, was the possibility of fire. To minimize this risk Grumman had switched from the 100% Oxygen environment at 5psi of the Apollo and LM systems to a 5psi atmosphere with 72% Oxygen and 28% Nitrogen that was used in Skylab. By the inclusion of 28% Nitrogen the risk of fire was greatly reduced and facilitated the easier inclusion of items like books. Still fire was a risk and the base was equipped with chemical fire extinguishers for fires.
The key feature that Grumman built into the LLV’s was adaptability and flexibility. Through experience with the Lunar Module Grumman engineers had planned that changes would be made as flight experience was gained. The original lunar module had been adapted to support mission durations over twice as long as the first landing missions. The other key ingredient was going to be feedback from the first lunar crew. Grumman had worked closely with the Apollo-22 crew for several years and had been working with specifically Astronauts Ed Mitchell and Pete Conrad for over 4-years. Pete and Ed know the LLV inside and out and Grumman felt confident that with the tools and parts on-board that Pete and Ed could handle about any issue that came up and if they couldn’t they could clearly communicate the issue back to Houston so Grumman engineers could then troubleshoot the problem remotely . Pete reminded all the scientists that supported the mission that Apollo-22 was essentially a shakedown flight of the LLV on the lunar surface. Which for the engineer and test pilot side of Pete this was just fine. That meant that they should plan on extra time would have to be devoted to the LLV over any planned science. Science was a focus of the mission but for Pete he knew how important it was to discover any issues before Apollo-23 landed inside of Tsiolkovskiy Crater on the far side of the moon.