posted 01-02-2008 10:06 AM               

Wouldn't it be great if, in 2012, on the 50th anniversary of John Glenn's solo flight in the Friendship 7 Mercury capsule to become the first American to orbit the Earth, we celebrated by recreating that achievement?

And wouldn't it be great if we did it with private contributions and resources, at least as much as possible?

Russell, 54, is a former Air Force and cargo jet pilot now retired and living in Madison. He formed a nonprofit organization called Americans in Orbit-50 Years to get his plan moving.

His plan? Raise money to buy a rocket; refurbish one of the old Mercury capsules that never flew or else build one; put it atop the rocket; then launch, orbit and splash down.

Pretty much just like it happened in 1962, except he'd like this astronaut to go for the full seven or more orbits originally planned instead of coming back down after only three as Glenn was forced to.

Basically, his idea involves raising about $35 million to buy a Falcon 9 rocket from SpaceX, the company PayPal founder Elon Musk created that recently was awarded a NASA contract to demonstrate its ability to carry cargo and crews to and from the International Space Station.

Russell says SpaceX has a pad at Cape Canaveral that could be used for the Friendship 7 anniversary launch.

He thinks just another $10 million or so would be needed to build a Mercury space capsule. Why so cheaply? All the research, development and testing for the Mercury capsule was done by NASA decades ago and the plans are available in archives.

posted 01-02-2008 10:27 AM               

Building a functional Mercury Capsule shouldn't cost 10 million dollars. Replica aircraft get built all the time for less. It is an interesting dilemma to build a craft with all those relays and antiquated systems. For example, most replica airplanes use modern radios. If you started there, wouldn't it be as easy to upgrade some of the other systems. Before you know it, it would be full of modern off-the-shelf stuff...

posted 01-02-2008 01:11 PM            

I would agree that it makes more engineering sense to use modern equivalents of many of the systems. Not that you necessarily need a Mercury capsule with a glass cockpit to get tossed into orbit for 5-10 hours. But even a physical switch-n-light interface could be integrated into computerized system rather than re-creating the strictly analog original.

posted 01-02-2008 02:31 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by R.Glueck:
I'd like to raise the point that what Shepard, Grissom, Glenn, Carpenter, Schirra, and Cooper, did was damned dangerous!

---

But to draw a parallel, flying the Wright Flyer was dangerous too, taking the life of Lt. Thomas E. Selfridge, but that didn't stop several teams from attempting flights of replica Flyers on the centennial of its first flight.

posted 01-02-2008 04:22 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by SpaceDust:
...it never talks about the launch pad, support equipment, launch team etc.

---

posted 01-02-2008 07:16 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by James Brown:
Cool, a real life Astronaut Farmer.

---

That was my first thought exactly. Mmmm...former Air Force pilot...now a cargo pilot. Just who does he expect to be "chosen" for this?

Not that I wouldn't like to see it done in some form, but his chances of prying Freedom 7 II out of the hands of the Smithsonian are about the same as a giant asteroid hitting Mars!

posted 01-02-2008 07:47 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
I'm not sure if it's the reporter's error here or Russell's, but Glenn was never planned to fly more than three orbits.

---

posted 01-02-2008 08:04 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by MCroft04:
Perhaps this error has been perpetuated by the movie "The Right Stuff" where I believe the CapCom told Glenn that he was go for 7 orbits.

---

What is the origin of this story? One suspects that it comes from the movie version of The Right Stuff and the oft-repeated bit of dialogue from mission control that Glenn was "go - at least seven orbits." As he starts his third orbit, Glenn is told to begin his retrofire sequence and come down. He asks "Only three orbits?" and is told yes, only three orbits. The movie clearly implies that Glenn's mission was cut short from seven orbits to only three.

It turns out that Tom Wolfe's book The Right Stuff had the story correct. On page 332 Wolfe states "they gave him the go for his third and final orbit..."

posted 01-03-2008 11:04 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Glenn was never planned to fly more than three orbits.

---

posted 01-08-2008 09:42 AM               

On the bad side there are a lot you will have to do in order to recreate a Mercury Capsule. Two problem areas are:

1. Obtaining the needed grade of hydrogen peroxide for the thruster (and the thruster hardware to use the fuel).

2. The pyrotechnics and solid fuel rockets that are needed for the various explosive bolts, retro pack, and abort rocket.

3. Recreating all the testing needed to fine tune each capsule for their mass and moments of inertia. I.e. compensating for weight and balance.

4. Recreating the ablative heat shield and testing there of.

5. The dual life support system of the space craft (suit and cabin).

6. A lot of the documentation exists and it is enough to SIMULATE the experience. The problem comes in finding the engineering drawing and recreating the tooling for it. Otherwise you just may be better off making your own capsule from scratch and dress it up to look like Friendship 7.

posted 01-08-2008 02:09 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by robertsconley:
I had several people ask me about engineering drawings for Mercury and Gemini. The problem is that they are deeply buried and scattered in the National Archives.

---

quote:

---

Otherwise you just may be better off making your own capsule from scratch and dress it up to look like Friendship 7

---

It's difficult to draw analogies to the Wright Flyer replicas or even SS1. The Flyer reproduction only needed to fly a few feet off the ground for a few seconds. The SS1 project was done over several years and basically took place within one building. The actual flight occurred over a barren stretch of desert controlled by one agency and it was no easy task getting them to sign up for it. In both of these examples, there were very few, if any, 'what-if' scenarios that involved injury to others...

posted 01-09-2008 08:22 AM               

What Robert Conley said about the pyrotechnics and weight and balance is true. If anything but the original contractor used the original bolts it would affect the mass and flying characteristics.

After any contract is over the dies, templates, test jigs are destroyed. The government does not want anyone to have the ability to build F-15's or B-1b's.

If anyone thinks they can order up a new Mercury capsule - good luck. If you think you can get one out of NASM - good luck on that one too.

posted 01-09-2008 03:41 PM               

First of all the FAA will not issue you a launch license if you they think you will endanger somebody else life, limb, or property.

Second the two big pieces I see missing are the heat shield and the rocket itself. I know the capsule needs developed. But if you are mad millionaire you can rent a vacuum chamber to make sure that is safe.

If you have to develop your own then you run into the issues that the people behind the Falcon Rocket have.

If you want to buy a rocket. Then you will have to convince Boeing or Lockheed to allow you to buy and ride on of their rockets. That will probably get NASA and/or the military involved. You will need multiple launches to man-rate one of the rockets.

The best bet is to build your prototype capsule now get it tested in a vacuum chamber. If nothing else works out you can say you just wanted a crazy ass realistic simulator.

Wait to see how SpaceX does with their Falcon 9. If they get going. Then purchase three of them. Build two more capsule. Launch two tests to man rate everything and then put yourself on the third.

While you are waiting for SpaceX, buy whatever you want to use for the Abort Rocket. Get a high powered amateur rocket license (or professional) and start running abort tests in the desert.

I wouldn't try riding the abort tests. From what I understand the abort is better than dying but just barely. There are a lot of G's involved.

As for the Capsule Everything in the inner hull will be current technology. The original Mercury hardware was marginal and frankly nothing I would want to stick myself into.

However the control panel, seat can be made to look like the original. Just make sure you have a PDA/Laptop you can pull out to give you serious diagnostic and control if your trip starts going sour. The outer hull can be fashioned as a replica.

Also while you are waiting you want to get your heat shield made and testing preferably in a heated supersonic wind tunnel. I am not sure they are available to rent. Somebody who is an aerospace engineer would know where you get a heat shield tested.

posted 01-10-2008 11:22 AM               

The heat shield shouldn't be that much of a problem. I once worked on some high temperature, high strength materials for a Hypersonic vehicle. The stuff is out there, its just expensive. Of course it wouldn't be re-usable, but we don't care. We starting making ablative heatshields nearly 50 years ago and perfected them through Apollo. People just don't consider them today because everything has to be re-usable...

You probably really don't need a vacuum chamber. Just use a standard atmosphere and pump it up to 15 psi. This was a problem before because things became so flamable in a single gas (O2) environment. Modern manufacturing would make it easier to get the pressure vessel to take this loading (SS1 did it).

While the original idea was to simulate Glenn's orbital flight, it might be a whole lot easier to do a sub-orbital flight. It could celebrate the First American in Space. You could avoid all the public safety issues. Either fly over a desert or international waters. Logistics become exponentially simpler.

Designing sub-systems such as life support, suit, navigation, electrical, all become very easy for such a short mission. For example, the battery required to run everything for, say an hour, would almost fit in your hand. The suit and the cabin could tolerate large leaks for a short time if you had plenty of stored atmosphere (compressed air) This could all lead to less cost and shorter engineering/manufacturing/testing lead times.

Dressing something up or creating a modern looking Redstone is probably a lot easier than an orbital booster. It would require a lot less energy and give a lot more room for error.

posted 01-10-2008 06:53 PM               

Take the posigrade rockets for example. I think they were part of the Atlas missile originally (someone else can chime in on this if they are sure). Convair just is not going to hand over hardware from an Atlas missile. They are not going to do it.

Going to the other end, let's talk about the parachutes. Most parachute manufacturers use spectra or vectran lines instead of the old 550 lbs. type lll. I'm not saying you can't get it, but it's something you are going to have to take into account. Again this would throw off the weight and balance.

Back to the other end once more: There were two different heat shields. A beryllium heat sink for the sub-orbital flights, and an ablation for the orbital missions. The weight and center of gravity would be altered.

What I'm saying is a lot of engineering man hours would be required.

Every sub-system in the spacecraft would have to be re-engineered. I guess it could be done.

posted 01-18-2008 02:16 PM               

Americans in Orbit-50 Years Inc., A Non-Profit Organization, Announces Its Plan to Re-Create The Flight of the First American to Orbit

Today Americans in Orbit-50 Years has announced plans to re-create the NASA mission in which John Glenn became the first American to Orbit the Earth. Inspired by the 1962 Friendship 7 mission, the plan is to re-create the flight on the 50th anniversary, February 20, 2012. Craig Russell, President of Americans in Orbit-50 Years, stated, "This is the first attempt to re-create a manned orbital spaceflight. We plan to launch an astronaut from Cape Canaveral aboard an improved Mercury capsule." The flight is scheduled to "splash down" in the Atlantic, just as Glenn's 1962 mission.

Americans in Orbit-50 Years has been able to recruit an Advisory Board made up of a distinguished group of space program veterans: T.J. O'Malley, Charles Arthur (Chuck) Biggs, Sr., Larry R. Capps, William Coleman, Lt. Col. USAF (Ret.), Hugh W. Harris, Konrad K. Dannenberg. We will continue to add members over time.

The purpose of the project is twofold; commemoration and education. Our hope is to honor all of those who were associated with Project Mercury. Many of these people went on to work on both the Gemini and Apollo programs which resulted in the moon landing. The Dittmar Associates Study, commissioned by NASA, noted the steady decline of interest in space exploration over the last few years, particularly among the younger generations. Americans in Orbit-50 Years will re-ignite interest by allowing students to actively participate with space science experiments and small satellites in the adaptor section. Russell has contacted professors at several major universities, and they have all expressed interest and a desire to be involved in the project.

The organization proposes to use a Falcon 9 rocket for the launch. The Falcon 9 is being developed and tested by SpaceX, a California based space exploration company. The two stage rocket will be able to lift approximately 22,000 lbs. into orbit.

Astronaut applications now being accepted

Americans in Orbit-50 Years announced astronaut applications are being accepted. The minimum requirements and application procedure can be found on the website. Craig Russell made the announcement in Huntsville, Alabama at the local chapter of the National Space Society (HAL 5).

About Americans in Orbit-50 Years, Inc. - Americans in Orbit-50 Years is headquartered in Madison, Alabama, just outside Huntsville, Alabama (home of Marshall Space Flight Center, U.S. Space and Rocket Center, and Space Camp). The mission is to develop and manage a program to commemorate the 50 year anniversary of NASA's Friendship 7 mission, create excitement, public awareness of space exploration, and promote the National Space Science Education Program (NSSEP). For more information, visit their website at aio50.org.

posted 01-19-2008 10:32 AM            

ASTRONAUT APPLICATIONS NOW ACCEPTED
Posted January 10, 2008

We are now accepting applications for Astronaut on the Friendship 7 re-creation mission. I made the announcement at a local meeting of the National Space Society (HAL 5) in Huntsville, AL. on January 9, 2008.

Applicants must meet the following requirements

• U.S. citizen
  
• Male or Female
  
• 5 feet, 11 inches (Max height)
  
• Pilot
  • 1,500 hrs. (high performance aircraft)
    
  • FAA commercial pilot certificate/instrument rating
    
  • FAA medical certificate
• No previous space flight experience

Application process:

• NO EMAIL (include Your email address for receipt notification)
  
• 2 pages maximum:
  • one page bio- personal history/flight experience
    
  • one page "why I should be selected"
• photograph

Two (2) astronauts will be selected and trained. We are looking forward to hearing from you all!

posted 01-19-2008 06:23 PM            

If you assume that flight time in jet aircraft is required, then "high performance", while not defined by the FAR's, tends to indicate military fighter aircraft.

posted 01-19-2008 10:43 PM            

"For our purpose 'high performance' means Jet Aircraft"

posted 01-21-2008 10:40 AM               

The group hoping to celebrate the 50th anniversary of America's first orbiting spaceman by recreating John Glenn's 1962 Mercury mission is accepting applications from potential astronauts.

...Chris Kraft, NASA flight director for Glenn's mission, thinks it's great that people want to commemorate the achievement and honor the pioneers involved. But he doesn't think much of AIO-50's idea.

"I think it's dangerous and I don't think the government will let him do it," Kraft said Friday in a phone interview from his home near Johnson Space Center in Houston.

posted 01-21-2008 01:12 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
If the government allowed Burt Rutan to launch SpaceShipOne, why would they object to this project, if it is carried out with a similar approach?

---

posted 01-21-2008 01:42 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mercsim:
Suborbital vs Orbital...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NAAmodel#240:
I am far more excited by the efforts of Burt Rutan to open up non-governmental access to space than a dream to reinvent the wheel.

---

posted 01-21-2008 05:54 PM               

I'm sure someone will, one day, man rate a private rocket to lob someone into space. I also see them starting with suborbital flights to gain experience and prove designs and hardware.

It could resemble a Mercury Spacecraft. I just find it hard to believe it will be done in time for a 50th anniversary. I pointed out earlier, It seemed more logical to attempt a re-creation of the suborbital flights for this type of celebration. Its easy for me to see all the challenges that make an orbital attempt in 4 years nearly impossible.

posted 01-21-2008 07:56 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by mercsim:
I'm sure someone will, one day, man rate a private rocket to lob someone into space.

---

posted 01-21-2008 09:42 PM            

As most here know, the X-15 fell back through the atmosphere in a nose-low attitude which led to a low drag, high speed, high temperature re-entry.

Rutan thought, "Hey, I'll just fold my airplane in half," and built himself a high drag, low speed, low temp re-entry vehicle that works great.

I think he will solve the problem in a similar manner of brilliant thought and engineering to find a way to bring his ship back from orbital speeds.