-off Toward Lift -off Tow

ard Lift -off Toward Lift -off Tow

ard Lift -off Toward Lift -off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift -off Tow

ard Lift-off Tw

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard -off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off T

ward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward

-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Tw

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard -off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off T

ward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward

-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off Toward Lift-off Tow

ard Lift-off T

To

wa

rd L

ift-off

To

wa

rd L

ift-off

This booklet was published by the Marshall Space Flight Centeras part of its celebration of the 20th Anniversary of the firstlaunch of the Space Shuttle on April 12, 1981. The text is basedon information originally published in 1985 in a specialMarshall Center 25th Anniversary Report. Special thanks tothe current and retired Marshall Center Shuttle engineers whoassisted in this booklet.

Introduction

In Huntsville, Alabama, like in other places,Sunday morning often means time to enjoy theSunday paper or prepare for church. ButSunday morning April 12, 1981, dawneddifferent in Huntsville as well as all over theworld. Dawn brought the launch of Columbia,America’s first Space Shuttle—a goal thatpeople at Huntsville’s Marshall Space FlightCenter and at other NASA locations haddedicated themselves to for more than 10 years.

As lift-off approached, Marshall engineersmonitored consoles in Huntsville while othersfrom Huntsville participated at the launch sitein Florida. Their job was to give the green lightto the Shuttle propulsion elements that Marshallengineers and contractors had spent a decadeperfecting. At 3 seconds after 6:00 a.m. CST,the mission designated STS–1, lifted off fromPad A of Kennedy Space Center’s LaunchComplex 39. “Now we can breathe,” said JackLee, who served as Deputy Director of theMarshall Center in the 1980s and as Directorin the early 1990s.

Rising on a pillar of orange flame and whitesteam, the Shuttle cleared its 348-foot-highlaunch tower in 6 seconds and reached Earthorbit in about 12 minutes. “It was a beautifulhappening,” Lee said. The solid rocket boostersand external tank had been shed prior to orbit.“Man, that was one fantastic ride,” later exclaimedSTS–1 Pilot Robert Crippen. “Engineering data

A Brief History and Chronology of the Marshall Space Flight Center’s Rolein Designing, Developing, and Testing the Space Shuttle Propulsion Elements for STS–1

says that the Space Shuttle main engines, solidrocket motors, and external tank worked in anoutstanding manner,” STS–1 Commander JohnYoung said later regarding the Marshall-provided propulsion elements. “We got a smoothpush out of the launch stand,” added Crippen.

Dr. William R. Lucas, then serving as Directorof the Marshall Center, referred to STS–1 asthe start of “a new chapter in the continuingaccount of man’s exploration and use of space.”STS–1 was the first American-crewed spaceflight in nearly six years. Huntsville, along withthe rest of the Nation, was captivated by thefirst flight of the Space Shuttle, a craft unlikeanything America had previously launched. Anestimated 80,000 people gathered at theKennedy launch site, and upwards of onemillion people viewed it from nearby eastcentral Florida. Although Columbia did notcarry a payload during the 541⁄2-hour flight, itdid carry plenty of instrumentation to monitorthe system’s performance. The mission endedwith a perfect landing at Edwards Air ForceBase in California.

The story of the vital role that the MarshallCenter played in designing, developing, andtesting the propulsion elements for the SpaceShuttle represented an entirely new chapter inthe Center’s history. It was a chapter thatushered in a new era in human space flight.

Prepared by Mike WrightMarshall Space Flight Center

Historianwith assistance from

Bob Jaques, Historian,AiSignal Research, Inc.

Sunday Morning,April 12, 1981

Toward Lift-off

Liftoff of STS–1

2

The Marshall Space Flight Center, a fieldinstallation of the National Aeronautics andSpace Administration, was established in 1960and named in honor of General George C.Marshall, the Army Chief of Staff during WorldWar II, Secretary of State, and Nobel PrizeWinner for his world-renowned “Marshall Plan.”The Center was activated on July 1, 1960, withthe transfer of buildings, land, space projects,property, and personnel from the U.S. Army.Dr. Wernher von Braun became the Center’s firstdirector and is credited by many for establishingthe foundation for human space exploration inthe 20th century. “Dr. von Braun, if he could behere, would feel this was another step forward,”Dr. Eberhard Rees told a reporter for theBirmingham Post Herald following the launchof STS–1. Rees, who followed von Braun asDirector of the Marshall Center in 1970, added,“And I think he (von Braun) would have been alittle bit tense as I was because… it is quite a bitof complicated machinery.”

In 1961, Marshall’s Mercury-Redstone vehicleboosted America’s first astronaut, Alan B.Shepard, on a suborbital flight. The MarshallCenter’s first major program was developmentof the Saturn rockets, the largest of which boostedhumans to the Moon in 1969. The Center alsodeveloped the lunar roving vehicle for transportingastronauts on the lunar surface and Skylab,the United States’ first crewed orbiting spacestation. During the 1960s, the Marshall Centerdevoted every available resource to developingthe Saturn V Moon rocket to meet the goal thatPresident Kennedy set in 1961 to land a humanon the Moon before the end of the decade.

Impressive and powerful though they were, theSaturns had one disadvantage—they wereexpendable. Used only once, they wereexpensive to manufacture, stock in inventory,and use. When the Agency began looking aheadto a crewed space station as the next step beyondlunar exploration, alternatives to expendablerockets were considered. The concept of areusable Space Shuttle was particularlyappealing as a vehicle to ferry people andsupplies to and from orbit. With its expertise inlarge launch vehicles and propulsion systems, itwas only natural that the Marshall Center shouldplay a major role in the Space Shuttle program.

By 1970, NASA initiated Space Shuttledevelopment activity. At first, Marshall washeavily involved in the program definition phaseleading to the initial Shuttle configuration. Inaddition, Marshall played a vital role in thedevelopment of the launch vehicle systemhaving been chosen by NASA to co-chair twomajor integration working groups withpersonnel from Johnson Space Center. Thesewere the ascent flight integration workinggroup and the propulsion systems integrationworking group. When the final concept wasselected, the Center was given the responsibilityfor the development of the advanced propulsionsystems. Of the principal Shuttle elements—theorbiter, main engines, external tank, and solid rocketboosters—all but the orbiter were developed underMarshall Center management.

Much of the Shuttle effort at Marshall wasperformed by the same personnel and in the samefacilities that had served the Saturn program so well.As Saturn activity subsided, these resources weremustered for the Space Shuttle effort. Necessaryadministrative and physical changes occurred toaccommodate the Shuttle program, but in generalthe Center continued its proven practices in thedevelopment of large propulsion systems.

The Shuttle posed a number of technicalchallenges to Marshall engineers. Serving asboth a passenger and cargo vehicle, the orbiterrequired highly efficient propulsion systems.How could that capability best be achieved? Byintegral engines? By external boosters? By acombination of both? How could enough fuelbe provided for lift-off without burdening theorbiter with empty tanks in flight? How couldfuel efficiency be improved to get the mostenergy from every gallon?

For Saturn vehicles, the answer to thesequestions was expendable booster stages thatprovided thrust and then were discarded. TheShuttle, however, had to meet a newrequirement—reusability—and thatintroduced a host of new questions. What sortof rocket engine could withstand repeated use?How much of the propulsion system could berecycled and reused on successive flights? Whatmaterials could survive the rigors of repeatedlaunches and reentries? For each of thepropulsion elements, the Marshall Centerdeveloped unique solutions. The end productwas a totally new launch vehicle.

3

The Space Shuttle main engines became themost advanced cryogenic liquid-fueledrocket engines ever built. From the outset, itwas recognized that the main enginesrequired the greatest technological advancesof any element in the Shuttle program. Thethree high-pressure engines clustered in thetail of the orbiter would each provide almosta half million pounds of thrust, for a totalthrust equal to that of the eight-engine SaturnI first stage. Unlike Saturn engines, theShuttle main engines were designed to bethrottled over a range of 65 percent to 109percent of their rated power. Thus, the enginethrust could be adjusted to meet differentmission needs. The initial design goal foreach engine was multiple starts and a totalfiring lifetime of 71⁄2 hours, as compared tothe Saturn J–2 engine’s lifetime of about 8minutes. The engines were also designed tobe gimballed so they could be used to steerthe Shuttle as well as boost it into orbit.

To get very high performance from an enginecompact enough that it would not encumberthe orbiter or diminish its desired payload

capability, Marshall worked closely with itsprime contractor, the Rocketdyne Divisionof Rockwell International. The greatestproblem was to develop the combustiondevices and complex turbomachinery—thepumps, turbines, seals, and bearings—thatcould contain and deliver propellants to theengines at pressures several times greaterthan in the Saturn engines.

The Shuttle engine components would haveto endure more severe internal environmentsthan any rocket engine ever built. Workingout the details of this new high-pressuresystem was difficult and time consuming, butthe resultant engines represented a significantadvance in the state of the art.

The Shuttle main engine would also becomethe first propulsion system with a computermounted directly on the engine to control itsoperation. This digital computer wasdesigned to accept commands from theorbiter for start preparation, engine start,thrust level changes, and shutdown. Thecontroller was also designed to monitor

The Space Shuttle Main Engine

Test firing of a Space Shuttle main engine.

4

engine operation and automatically makecorrective adjustments or shut down theengine safely. Advances in electroniccircuitry were required for the addition of thisunit to a rocket engine. Because it wouldoperate in a severe environment, specialattention was paid to the design andpackaging of the electronics during anextensive design verification program.

Improved fuel efficiency was achieved by aningenious staged combustion cycle neverbefore used in rocket engines. This two-stageprocess called for exhaust gases to berecycled for greater combustion efficiency.Part of the fuel was combusted in preburnersto drive the turbines. After which, the exhaustgases would be channeled into the maincombustion chamber for full combustion athigher temperatures with the balance of thepropellants. The rapid mixing of propellantsunder high pressure was designed to be socomplete that a 99-percent combustionefficiency could be attained.

“During the testing of the three enginesused on Columbia, we made a significantnumber of changes as our knowledge of theengines matured,” said Boyce Mix, whoworked for 15 years at the Resident Officeat Marshall’s Mississippi test site, wherehe played a key role in the acceptancetesting of the Space Shuttle main engines.The changes were necessary for an engineof extreme complexity designed to fire notonce, but over and over again. “We felt veryconfident the engines would perform welland they did,” Mix added.

George Hopson, who now works as managerof the Space Shuttle Main Engine ProjectOffice at Marshall, recalled work on the enginein the 1970s. “I remember one particularproblem we encountered on the main oxidizervalve,” Hopson said. “It took us almost a yearto solve it. Every time we tested the engine,we took a chance of burning it up. I can’t recallany other Space Shuttle main enginedevelopment problem that even approachedthat one in difficulty. That was the biggestobstacle to enabling NASA to launch the firstShuttle on schedule.”

STS–1 Commander John Young in orbit.

5

Even though they were designed to be ex-tremely efficient, the three main engineswould also consume a tremendous quantityof propellant. The tank was referred to as“external” as a result of discussions heldwhen NASA was in the process of definingthe Shuttle. Development costs related todeveloping fully reusable vehicles with“internal” tanks was avoided by using adisposable “external” tank at the expense ofreplacing the tank after each flight. Thus, thename “external” stuck. The tank feeding theengines was much larger than the orbiteritself. Marshall also was responsible fordeveloping the external tank, a massivecontainer almost as tall as the Center’s mainoffice building. The external tank wasactually designed to contain two tanks, onefor liquid hydrogen and one for liquidoxygen, and included a plumbing system tosupply propellants to the main engines ofthe orbiter.

The external tank presented a variety oftechnical problems, both as a fuel tank andas the structural backbone of the entire

Shuttle assembly. Standing 154-feet tall witha 27-foot diameter, the external tankrepresented a towering structure. In its initialdesign, it would contain more than a halfmillion gallons of propellant and when fullweigh more than one and a half millionpounds. Marshall personnel worked closelywith the prime contractor, the MartinMarietta Corporation, to devise appropriatedesign solutions for its unusual requirements.

The Center’s prior experience on the Saturn Vsecond stage was directly applicable to thecryogenic propellant design requirements of theexternal tank. To maintain the extremely lowtemperature necessary for the liquid hydrogen,the exterior skin of the tank was covered withabout an inch of epoxy spray-on foaminsulation. This thermal wall was designed toreduce heat into the tank and also reduce frostand ice formation on the tank after loadingpropellants. The tank was also protected incritical areas from the severe aerodynamicheating during flight by a localized ablativeundercoat used to dissipate heat.

The External Tank

Rollout of a new external tank at the Michoud Assembly Facility.

6

Structurally, the external tank would beattached to the orbiter and the solid rocketboosters. The load-bearing function, both onthe launch pad and during lift-off and ascent,was a major design challenge. Engineersdevised several solutions to make the tank asstrong and as lightweight as possible. Thealuminum alloy structure was designed tohandle complex loads, and the problem ofpropellant sloshing in the tanks was solvedwith baffles to avoid instabilities that couldaffect the Shuttle’s flight.

Another important design considerationwas that the external tank would not bereusable. Therefore, its design had to besimple and its cost minimal. Solutions tothese requirements included locating the fluidcontrols and valves in the orbiter and drawingpower for the electronics and instrumentationfrom the orbiter. These economies helped tominimize expendable hardware.

Plans called for the external tank to bemanufactured at the Michoud AssemblyFacility by Martin Marietta under MarshallCenter management. New tooling, such asa welding fixture half the span of a footballfield, was required to handle production ofthe huge tank. The barge transportationsystem developed to deliver Saturn stageswas selected to transport external tanks tothe launch sites.

“We had been up all night in the HuntsvilleOperations Support Center monitoringsystems before the launch of Columbia,” saidPorter Bridwell, then deputy manager of theExternal Tank Project Office. “However,there was very little doubt in our minds thatthe external tank would perform as it should,”said Bridwell, who also served as Directorof the Marshall Center in the mid-1990s.

Preparing to mate the external tank and solid rocket boosters at Kennedy Space Center.

7

Solid Rocket Boosters

The solid rocket boosters would be the firstsolid propellant rockets built for a crewedspace vehicle and the largest solid rocketsever flown. Designed to burn for approx-imately 2 minutes, each booster wouldproduce almost three million pounds of thrustto provide 84 percent of vehicle thrust duringthe first two minutes of flight. The boosterswere also designed to help steer the Shuttleduring the critical first phase of ascent. The11-ton booster rocket nozzle would alsobecome the largest movable nozzle ever used.

United Space Boosters, Inc. was theassembly and refurbishment contractor.The Morton Thiokol Corporation wasselected to provide the solid rocket motors.The solid rocket boosters were designedto support the entire Shuttle assembly onthe launch pad. In addition, they weredesigned to provide six million pounds ofthrust in flight and respond to the orbiter’sguidance and control computer to maintainthe Shuttle’s course. At burnout, theboosters would separate from the externaltank and drop by parachute to the oceanfor recovery and subsequent refurbishment.

The major design drivers for the solid rocketboosters were high thrust and reusability. Thedesired thrust was achieved by using a state-of-the-art solid propellant and by using a longcylindrical motor with a specific core designthat allowed the propellant to burn in acarefully controlled manner. The requirementfor reusability dictated durable materials andconstruction, which led to severalinnovations. Paints, coatings, and sealantswere extensively tested and applied tosurfaces of the booster structure to precludecorrosion of the hardware exposed to theharsh seawater environment. Initial speci-fications called for motor case segments thatcould be used 20 times. To achieve thisdurability, engineers selected a weld-freecase formed by a continuous flow-formingprocess. Machining and heat treatment of themassive motor case segments were alsomajor technical efforts.

Test firing of a solid rocket motor in Utah.

8

Reusability also meant making provisions forretrieval and refurbishment. The boosterswere designed to contain a complete recoverysubsystem including parachutes, beacons,lights, and tow fixtures. The 136-footdiameter main parachutes would become thelargest and heaviest ribbon parachutes everused in an operational system, and the solidrocket boosters would represent the largestand heaviest objects ever recovered byparachute. The boosters were also designedto survive water impact at almost 60 milesper hour and maintain flotation with minimaldamage. “The recovery process for the solidrocket boosters was unprecedented in sizeand scope,” said Royce Mitchell thenmanager of Marshall’s booster recoveryefforts.” Mitchell worked on the boosteralong with others like George Hardy,manager of the solid rocket booster projectfor Marshall in the 1970s. “Our biggestchallenge was that we had no way to test therecovery system with anything near the sizeof the booster because we couldn’t get anaircraft to carry that much weight aloft,”Mitchell said.

Lowering solid rocket booster into Marshall structural test stand.

Descent of spent solid rocket booster for recovery and reuse.

9

Besides fulfilling its primary responsibilitiesfor propulsion systems, Marshall supportedmany other efforts in Shuttle systemsengineering and analysis. The Center’stechnical competence in materials science,thermal engineering, structural dynamics,aerodynamics, guidance and navigation,orbital mechanics, systems testing, andsystems integration all proved valuable to theoverall Shuttle development program.

Shuttle test activities were a majorresponsibility of the Marshall Space FlightCenter for several years in the late 1970s.Both in Huntsville and at the related NASAfacilities in Louisiana and Mississippi, aswell as at contractor sites around the country,Marshall personnel participated in manydevelopment and qualification tests. Manyworked with individual components withina laboratory. Others participated in enginestatic firings or dynamic tests of the matedShuttle elements. Preparing for andcoordinating the many different test programswas a significant technical challenge. Ratherthan build new test facilities for the massiveShuttle elements Marshall modified existing

Additional Marshall Center Support

resources. Test fixtures and equipment thathad stood idle since the Saturn era wererevived and remodeled to support variousShuttle test efforts. In addition, special newequipment was constructed.

The busiest year was 1978. That’s whenMarshall Center employees conducted theexternal tank structural and vibration tests,solid rocket booster structural tests, andmated vertical ground vibration tests.Meanwhile, single engine tests and mainpropulsion system cluster firings were inprogress at the National Space TechnologyLaboratories (now Stennis Space Center).Solid rocket motor tests were underway inUtah and subsystems tests, such as checkoutof the booster parachutes, were beingcompleted elsewhere.

Marshall played a dominant role in theyearlong Mated Vertical Ground VibrationTest Program, the critical evaluation of theentire Shuttle complement—orbiter, tank,and boosters, which had been assembled forthe first time. The phased test sequence beganin March of 1978 when the orbiter

Arrival of Enterprise at Marshall in 1978 for yearlong series of tests.

10

Enterprise arrived at Marshall and wasgreeted by thousands of employees andcitizens. The orbiter was hoisted into themodified Dynamic Test Stand originallybuilt for Saturn V testing, mated first to anexternal tank, and subjected to vibrationfrequencies comparable to those expectedduring launch and ascent. Several monthslater, the solid rocket boosters were addedfor tests of the entire Shuttle assembly. Thetest series confirmed the structuralinterfaces and mating of the entire Shuttlesystem and allowed mathematical modelsused to predict the Shuttle’s response tovibrations in flight to be adjusted so thateffects for future flightenvironments could bepredicted adequately priorto launch. Marshallmanaged and conductedthis important test programwith support from theShuttle contractors.

Concurrently, both theexternal tank and the solidrocket boosters underwentindependent structural tests.In addition, captive firingsof a 6.4-percent scale modelShuttle enabled engineers todetermine the launchacoustic environment and itseffects on both the vehicleand the launch pad atKennedy Space Center.

Marshall’s other principaltest responsibility was forthe main engine develop-ment. Engines were firedrepeatedly during theirdevelopment and later forflight qualification. Thehighlight of propulsion system testing wasthe main propulsion test series of clusterfirings, in which three engines were mountedto an orbiter mockup and fired simul-taneously while drawing propellants from anactual external tank. These tests, which beganin 1977, certified not only the operationalcompatibility of the main propulsion systemelements but also propellant loadingprocedures and propellant feed systems. In

addition, Marshall established an in-houselaboratory to test and verify the avionics andsoftware system of the main engines throughsimulations of all operating conditions.

As the launch of STS–1 drew closer in 1981,the Huntsville Operations Support Center(HOSC) in Building 4663 was a hub ofactivity during propellant loading,countdown, launch, and powered flighttoward orbit. This facility had evolvedconsiderably from the simpler Saturn eraoperations room. From the HOSC, Marshallpersonnel monitored the status of thepropulsion systems; via a sophisticated

communications network, they received datafrom sensors aboard the Shuttle and fromMarshall management teams at the launch site.

Readying the O

rbiter Enterprise for dynam

ic tests at Marshall.

11

STS–1 Legacies

In 1981, Marshall and the Nation once againwatched expectantly as a new launch vehicle,the Space Shuttle, rose from the pad. Thissuccessful first flight of the orbiter Columbiaintroduced a new era and a continuing seriesof Shuttle missions. The Shuttle developmenteffort evolved naturally out of the Saturnexperience in large launch vehicles andpropulsion systems. Marshall continued itsclose working relationship with contractorsand maintained its strong technicalcompetence in the relevant engineeringdisciplines. However, certain changes inNASA’s philosophy and resources challengedMarshall in new ways. During the Shuttleperiod, the Marshall Center became a leaner,stronger institution as it adapted to thesechanges. For example, limitations on fundingalso meant limitations on test hardware.

The principal philosophical change evolvedfrom the necessity of reuse. In a time ofdeclining budgets and increased awarenessof limited resources, reusability was a highpriority. Marshall met the technical challengeof developing durable space hardware that

could be recycled for many missions. Despitedelays along the way, the Shuttle developmentprogram proceeded successfully. Theachievement was especially noteworthybecause the Center was also tasked with theadministrative challenge of reassigningfacilities and personnel. As Saturn worktapered off and Marshall became involved inother projects, the Center had to reallocatemany of its resources. From 1965, the peakyear of Saturn activity, to the first year ofShuttle activity in 1970, Marshall lost almost20 percent of its civil service workforce asFederal budget cuts slashed the Center'sfunding in half. This trend continued well intothe 1970s until the budget and staffing levelsstabilized with staff at approximately 60percent of the peak Saturn year.

The Center managed to cope with thereductions and still tackle very ambitiousprojects. As a result, development of a vehiclecapable of routine access to space openedmany possibilities for using space as alaboratory and workplace.

Astronauts John Young and Robert Crippen at the Marshall Center following their flight.

12

Jim Kingsbury, former Director of Marshall’sScience and Engineering Directoraterecalled, “The story of the Shuttle is aremarkable tribute to the dedication of anawful lot of men and women in the mosttrying of political times—not onlytechnically challenging, but politicallychallenging. It was in the ‘70s, in the post-Apollo era, that the Nation in general turnedsour on space. In the last half of the ‘70s theNation began to respond again, but theadministration was very negative on theNASA program. And so, it was a real struggleto develop a machine as complicated as thatone with the reliability that it has, with thelimited dollars they had. And I think itsperformance is attributed to a lot of peoplewho worked awfully hard.”

Robert Lindstrom, who was Shuttle ProjectsManager at Marshall in 1981, described thelaunch of STS–1 as “flawless,” a sentimentshared by Alex McCool, who currentlymanages the Shuttle Projects Office atMarshall. As McCool points out, Marshall’sShuttle responsibilities did not end withdevelopment of operational main engines,external tanks, and solid rocket boosters. OnJanuary 28, 1986, at 73 seconds into theflight of the 25th mission, orbiter Challengerbroke up under severe aerodynamic loads.The flames from a leaking right-hand solidrocket motor caused a severe rupture of theexternal tank, destroying it. The crew andthe vehicle were lost.

The months that followed broughtunparalleled changes in NASA’s institutionalmanagement and in its technical operations.On March 24, 1986, NASA directed theMarshall Center to form a solid rocket motorredesign team to requalify the motor of theSpace Shuttle’s solid rocket booster. Inaddition to Marshall personnel, the teamincluded personnel from other NASA Centers,industry, and academia. President RonaldReagan directed NASA to implement therecommendations of the PresidentialCommission on the Space Shuttle ChallengerAccident. As part of satisfying thoserecommendations, NASA developed andimplemented a plan to provide a redesignedsolid rocket motor. After a nearly error-freecountdown, Discovery and the STS–26 crewlifted off from Pad 39B on September 29, 1988.

Throughout the late 1980s and the 1990s, theMarshall Center continued ongoingtechnology advancements to improve theShuttle propulsion system. In particular,Marshall played a key role in upgrading theSpace Shuttle main engines. The engineswere successfully test fired in 1988 using amodified Space Shuttle main engine inMarshall’s Technology Test Bed, actually areconfigured Saturn V first-stage test stand.Improvements also included the developmentof silicon nitride (ceramic) bearings for theSpace Shuttle main engine. The Center alsodeveloped a new liquid oxygen pump usingthe latest technology of investment casting(versus welded components). Space Shuttlemission STS–89 in January 1998 marked thefirst flight of redesigned Space Shuttle mainengines designed to increase the reliabilityand safety of Shuttle flights.

In 1994, the Center embarked ondevelopment of a new super lightweightSpace Shuttle external tank. The tank madeits premier as part of the STS–91 missionin 1998. The new tank featured aluminumlithium—a lighter stronger material than thealloy used to manufacture previous externaltanks. The new tank was essential forlaunching Space Station components thatwere designed to be assembled in a moredemanding orbit than previously planned.The new design resulted in payload weightsavings in excess of 7,000 pounds, whichcould be translated into 7,000 pounds ofvital payload. Structural and modal testingfor the tank was completed at Marshall. TheCenter also developed weld schedules andmaterials characteristics for the new tank.All the work on the new tank was achievedsuccessfully after a tight schedule of about31⁄2 years under cost.

Today, the Marshall Center continues tomanage safe, continuous, robust, and cost-effective operations for the Space Shuttlepropulsion elements. The Center also hasresponsibility for continuing to streamlineoperations and aggressively develop andimplement significant upgrades to enhancesafety, meet the Shuttle launch manifest,improve mission supportability, andimprove the system to sustain the SpaceShuttle for its lifetime. 13

Chronology

Late 1960s:President Nixon establishes the Space TaskGroup to make recommendations regardingAmerica’s next decade in space. The group’srecommendation focuses on the need for areusable shuttlecraft.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1971, p. 62.

Early 1970s:NASA initiates Space Shuttle developmentactivities. Marshall will be responsible forthe Shuttle’s major propulsion elements: theSpace Shuttle main engines, solid rocketboosters, and external tank.Source: NASA Press Kit, “First Space ShuttleMission STS–1,” April 1981.

April 30, 1970:NASA lets three $6 million contracts for PhaseB studies on the Space Shuttle main engine—Aerojet-General Corporation, RocketdyneDivision of Rockwell Division of NorthAmerican Rockwell, and Pratt & WhitneyAircraft. Marshall will manage the contracts.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1970, p. 157.

December 22, 1970:NASA selects McDonnell Douglas Astronau-tics Corporation and North AmericanRockwell for parallel 11-month definitionand preliminary design studies for a reusableSpace Shuttle. A Space Shuttle Task Team atMarshall will manage the McDonnellDouglas work.Source: MSFC Release, December 22, 1970.

March1, 1971:The Mississippi Test Facility (known todayas the Stennis Space Center) is selected asthe site for sea-level testing of the SpaceShuttle main engine.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1971, p. 60.

STS–1 Astronauts John Young and Robert Crippen.

14

January 5, 1972:President Nixon formally endorses plans forthe Space Shuttle. Following theannouncement, then NASA AdministratorJames Fletcher says, the Space Shuttle “willchange the nature of what man could be inspace. By the end of decade the Nation willhave the means of getting men and equipmentto and from space routinely.”Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1972, pp. 4–5.

March 15, 1972:Dr. Fletcher announces that the Space Shuttlewill be powered by recoverable, reusable,solid rocket motors in a parallel burn con-figuration rather than by pressure-fed, liquid-fueled rockets. The “choice was made in fa-vor of the solid parallel burn because of lowerdevelopment costs and lower technical risks,”Fletcher said.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1972, p.102.

March 19, 1972:Marshall’s Space Shuttle Task Team is abol-ished with the formation of a permanentShuttle Program Office at Marshall. Roy E.Godfrey will manage the office.Source: Marshall Star, May 17, 1972.

May 16, 1972:The Marshall Center reaches an agreementwith the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,Huntsville Division, to provide facility de-sign and construction in support of theSpace Shuttle.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1972, p. 184.

August 23, 1972:A definitive contract for the Space Shuttlemain engine is signed with Rocketdyne.Source: Marshall Star, August 23, 1972.

September 6, 1972:Marshall announces plans for a series of 20water-entry simulation tests with a 120-inch-diameter solid rocket casing assembly. Thetests were designed to provide data for as-sessment of Space Shuttle booster water re-covery methods and to aid in preliminarysolid rocket motor design.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1972, p. 309.

During 1972:Studies by NASA and the aerospace indus-try concentrate on the technical and economicaspects of the different kinds of boosters.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1972, pp. 4–5.

August 16, 1973:NASA signs a contract with Martin MariettaCorporation for the design, development, andtest of the external tank.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1973, p. 246.

November 20, 1973:NASA signs a contract with Thiokol Cor-poration for negotiation of a contract fordesign, development, and test of the solidrocket motors.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1973, p. 327.

November 21, 1973:The Marshall Center was conducting droptests using a solid rocket booster scale modeland a three-parachute recovery system to de-termine the feasibility of keeping parachutesattached to the booster rather than releasingthem on impact with the water. The 111⁄2-footdiameter scale model, attached to the para-chutes, was dropped from a 200-foot heightinto the Tennessee River.Source: Marshall Star, November 21, 1973.

April 24, 1974:A Space Shuttle main engine componentis hot-fired for the first time at SantaSusana, California in a successful run of apreburner assembly.Source: Marshall Star, April 21, 1974.

September 4, 1974:The Marshall Center’s first static firings re-lated to the Space Shuttle program were un-derway. A small-scale (6.4 percent) model ofthe vehicle was used to gather acoustical datavital to design and development activities.Source: Marshall Star, September 4, 1974.

15

October 9, 1974:The Marshall Center was completing a simu-lation facility, designed to enable engineersto test and verify the Space Shuttle mainEngine avionics systems using flight typehardware. No engines would be fired in theHardware Simulation Laboratory. The mainengine “firings” would be mathematical.Source: Marshall Star, October 9, 1974.

November 13, 1974:The Marshall Center announces that a con-tract had been awarded by the HuntsvilleDivision, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, toAlegernon-Blair Industrial Contractors formodifications of the Saturn S–IC Test Standfor structural testing of the external tank.Source: Marshall Star, November 13, 1974.

March 26, 1975:Rocketdyne completes the first Space Shuttlemain engine and the integrated subsystem testbed a month ahead of schedule. The enginewas not built for flight but for static testing.Source: Marshall Star, March 26, 1975.

April 16, 1975:The first Space Shuttle flight-like test hard-ware, a ground test hydraulic actuator for theSpace Shuttle main engine, arrived at theCenter. Each of the orbiter’s three main en-gines will use two of the actuators to gimbalthe engine for steering control.Source: Marshall Star, April 16, 1975.

June 7, 1975:The integrated subsystem test bed engine issuccessfully fired for the first time. The testlasted 0.8 seconds.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1975, p. 105.

June 11, 1975:The prime contractor for the external tank,Martin Marietta Aerospace, awards a sub-contract to Avco for the manufacture of theintertank to provide support between theliquid-oxygen tank and the larger liquid-hydrogen tank.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1975, p. 108.

June 24, 1975:The integrated subsytem test-bed enginemain chamber firing is conducted.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1975, p. 120.

November 20, 1975:The external tank critical design review iscompleted at the Michoud Assembly Facil-ity, clearing the way for production.Source: Marshall Star, November 26, 1975.

During 1975:The solid rocket motor design, development,test, and engineering project is definitized.The resulting development program will in-clude seven full-scale motor static tests anddelivery of 12 flight motors for the first sixdevelopment flights.Source: Space Shuttle Status Report to Congress,1978, p. 187.

September 10, 1975:Marshall engineers were completing testsaimed at refining the means of towing recov-ered solid rocket boosters to shore for refur-bishment and reuse.Source: NASA Astronautics and Aeronautics,1975, p. 186.

October 22, 1975:Fixtures were nearing completion at theMichoud Assembly Facility for manufactur-ing the external tank, which stood 154-feettall with a 27-foot diameter and designed tohold more than a million gallons of propel-lant and weigh more than 1.5 million pounds.Several of the fixtures at the assembly sitewere more than half the length of a footballfield and several stories high. Two fixturesat Michoud, each supported by massive steeltripods anchored in concrete on each side,were so huge and so imposing that they werenicknamed “Trojan Horses.”Source: Marshall Star, October 22, 1975.

During 1975:A 405-foot-tall Saturn V Dynamic Test Standat Marshall was being modified under a con-tract between the Army Corps of Engineersand Universal Construction to provide amated ground vibration test facility. Thestructure would be used to test the vehicle inlaunch and boost configuration to determinethe bending modes and dynamic responseduring launch and ascent conditions. Theorbiter Enterprise was used later in the testsat the facility.Source: Marshall Star, November 5, 1975.

16

July 28, 1976:Assembly of the first external tank was un-derway at the Michoud Assembly Facility.Source: Marshall Star, July 28, 1976.

During September 1976:The Space Shuttle main engine critical de-sign review was conducted clearing the de-sign for further testing.Source: Space Shuttle Status Report to Congress,1978, pp. 157–158.

December 17, 1976:United Space Boosters, Inc., of Sunnyvale,California, is selected as the solid rocketbooster assembly contractor, immediatelyfollowing completion of the solid rocketbooster critical design review that was eightmonths ahead of schedule.Source: Marshall Star, January 5, 1977.

March 14, 1977:An external tank intertank test article is de-livered to the Marshall Center for structuraltests. It passed all tests by November 1977.Source: Marshall Star, March 16, 1977.

March 16, 1977:The Space Shuttle main engine had been suc-cessfully tested at rated thrust conditions for60 seconds during the previous weekend witha total test duration of slightly over 80 seconds.Source: Marshall Star, March 16, 1977.

July 18, 1977:The first firing of a solid rocket motor takesplace in Utah. The motor runs for about twominutes in what observers describe as a “nearperfect” test. The motor is referred to as De-velopment Motor–1.Source: Marshall Star, July 20, 1977.

September 9, 1977:The first external tank, the Space Shuttle’slargest component, rolls off its New Orleansassembly line.Source: Marshall Star, September 14, 1977.

During September 1977:Pressure tests are conducted to demonstratethe capability of the solid rocket motor casesto be used up to 20 times.Source: Marshall Star, September 14, 1977.

November 30, 1977:The external tank liquid oxygen structuraltest article had recently been delivered to theMarshall Center.Source: Marshall Star, November 30, 1977.

During November 1977:The intertank structural test program is com-pleted for the first external tank.Source: MSFC Release 77–234

During December 1977:The tanking test on the external tank is con-ducted at National Space TechnologyLaboratories.Source: Marshall Center News Release 77–234.

During 1977:Solid rocket booster testing begins atMarshall and other facilities in the U.S. Be-cause of renewed testing at Marshall, modi-fications are made on a Saturn test stand toaccommodate structural testing of the solidrocket boosters.Source: Marshall Star, December 21, 1977.

January 18 1978:The solid rocket motor Development Motor–2test is successfully conducted in the Utah desert.Source: Marshall Star, January 25, 1978.

March 6, 1978:The liquid hydrogen tank and interstage sec-tion of an external tank had been unloadedfrom the NASA barge Orion at the MarshallCenter docks on the Tennessee River. Planscall for this section of the external tank to beused in a structural test program at Marshall.A complete external tank, which arrived at thesame time on the barge Poseidon, will be usedfor mated vertical ground vibration testing.Source: Marshall Star, March 8, 1978.

17

March 18–19, 1978:About 85,000 people gather at the MarshallCenter to get a close-up look at the SpaceShuttle orbiter Enterprise and a completeexternal tank. The orbiter arrived piggybackin Huntsville on a 747 aircraft. Plans call forthe orbiter and external tank to be mated inMarshall’s Dynamic Test Stand. Later thesolid rocket boosters will be added. The el-ements will be used for mated verticalground vibration tests at Marshall.Source: Marshall Star, March 22, 1978.

May 10, 1978:In a static firing, a Space Shuttle main en-gine successfully completes a test at 100 per-cent of its rated power level for the full dura-tion expected during actual flight.Source: Marshall Star, May 17, 1978.

May 19, 1978:Three Space Shuttle main engines roar to lifein the first major test of the Shuttle’s mainpropulsion system. Orange flame and a hugecloud of white smoke pour from beneath thestand during the 15-second run.Source: Marshall Star, Marshall May 24, 1978.

October 19, 1978:The solid rocket motor Development Motor–3test is successfully conducted in the Utah desert.Source: Marshall Star, October 25, 1978.

February 17, 1979:The test of the solid rocket motor Develop-ment Motor–4 , the final development test,is conducted. This test series verifies the ba-sic design requirements and paves the wayfor solid rocket motor qualification testingdesignated as Qualification Motor–1 andQualification Motor–2.Source: Marshall Star, Marshall February 21,1979.

March 19, 1979:The NASA barge Poseidon, with SpaceShuttle components aboard, pulls out fromthe Marshall Center dock on the TennesseeRiver to begin an 11-day trip to KennedySpace Center. On board are the external tankused at the Marshall Center for mated verti-cal ground vibration testing and two solidrocket booster nose cap forward skirt assem-blies. The items will to be used at theKennedy Center in “Pathfinder” operations—a checkout of movement and assembly “fitchecks” at the Vehicle Assembly Building—and for training in “stacking” the SpaceShuttle on the mobile launcher platform.Source: Marshall Star, March 21, 1979.

June 13, 1979:The first of a series of test firings of solidrocket motors is initiated to qualify the mo-tors for manned flight. The test is referred toas Qualification Motor–1.Source: Marshall Star, June 20, 1979.

June 27, 1979:A major milestone in the Space Shuttle mainengine test program is reached when a flightconfiguration engine successfully completesthe first series of tests preliminary to flightcertification. The test series, which beganMarch14, 1979, totaled 16 firings and accu-mulated 5,245 seconds of firing time.Source: Marshall Star, July 4, 1979.

July 6, 1979:The first flight external tank (ET–1) is deliv-ered to Kennedy Space Center from theMichoud Assembly Facility.Source: Marshall Star, August 8, 1979.

September 27, 1979:The second in a series of test firings of a solidrocket motor is conducted to qualify themotors for manned flight. This test is referredto as Qualification Motor–2.Source: Marshall Star, October 3, 1979.

February 8, 1980:A major milestone in the Space Shuttle mainengine test program is reached when a flightconfiguration engine successfully completedthe second series of tests preliminary to flightcertification. This second series of tests be-gan September 22, 1979.Source: Marshall Star, February 20, 1980.

18

February 13, 1980:The solid rocket motor passes its last ma-jor test with a 2-minute firing at Thiokol’sUtah facility. This test is referred to asQualification Motor–3.Source: Marshall Star, February 20, 1980.

March 13, 1980:The first full-power level test (109 percentof rated power level) of the Space Shuttle’smain engine is completed.Source: Marshall Star, March 19, 1980.

July 26-27, 1980:The third Space Shuttle main engine is rein-stalled on the orbiter Columbia over theweekend at Kennedy Space Center. The othertwo engines had been reinstalled the previ-ous weekend. The three engines had beenremoved from Columbia and shipped to Na-tional Space Technology Laboratories for aseries of successful test firings that recerti-fied them for flight. The additional firingswere conducted because several modifica-tions and component replacements had beenmade since the original certification firings.Source: Marshall Star, August 6, 1980.

November 7, 1980:The mating of the solid rocket boosters andthe external tank for STS–1 is completed inthe Vehicle Assembly Building at KennedySpace Center.Source: Marshall Star, November 12, 1980.

December 2, 1980:The fourth and final cycle of preliminarycertification tests of the Shuttle’s main en-gine first flight configuration is completed.Source: Marshall Star, December 4, 1980.

December 3, 1980:Engineers in the Marshall Center’s Hunts-ville Operations Support Center gear up towork in teams around the clock to supportthe final major test of the Space Shuttle asan integrated flight system.Source: Marshall Star, December 17, 1980.

December 29, 1980:STS–1 arrives at Complex 39’s Pad A at theKennedy Space Center.Source: Marshall Star, December 3 andJanuary 7, 1981.

January 17, 1981:NASA’s test version of the Space Shuttle’smain propulsion system successfully com-pletes its last scheduled test firing. The fir-ing that lasted 10 minutes, 29 seconds is the12th and longest, test of the system to date.Source: Marshall Star, January 21, 1981.

February 20, 1981:The Space Shuttle three main engines roar tolife for 20 seconds on the launch pad atKennedy Space Center during the flight readi-ness firing of the orbiter Columbia’s engines.Source: Marshall Star, February 25, 1981.

February 27, 1981:Testing of the method selected to repair ar-eas of debonded insulation on the externaltank is completed at National Space Tech-nology Laboratories.Source: Marshall Star, March 4, 1981.

March 19, 1981:The Dry Countdown Demonstration Test isconducted for STS–1.Source: Marshall Star, March 25, 1981.

March 30, 1981:The external tank is declared ready for flightfollowing repairs to its thermal protectionsystem and subsequent testing at the KennedySpace Center.Source: Marshall Star, April 1, 1981.

April 12, 1981:Powered by Marshall Center propulsion ele-ments, Columbia begins its voyage with aflawless 6:00 a.m. (CST) launch. Com-mander John Young and Pilot Robert Crippenguide the vehicle into orbit. The historic flightconcludes two days later when Columbialands at Edwards Air Force Base in California.Source: Marshall Star, April 15, 1981.

19

Marshall Space Flight Center STS–1 Management Team in 1981

Dr. William R. Lucas

Thomas J. Lee

Robert E. Lindstrom

James E. Kingsbury

James B. Odom

George B. Hardy

James R. Thompson Jr.

James M. Sisson

Director

Deputy Director

Manager, MSFC ShuttleProjects Office

Director, Science andEngineering Directorate

Manager,External Tank Project

Manager, Solid RocketBooster Project

Manager, Space ShuttleMain Engine Project

Manager, Engineering andMajor Test Management Office

20

External tank

Solid RocketBoosters

Space ShuttleMain Engines

National Aeronautics andSpace Administration

George C. Marshall Space Flight CenterMarshall Space Flight Center, Alabama 35812

NP-2001-04-72-MSFCPub 8-1288