241-1-C, 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 Handle via BYEMAN 

Control System 

29 November 1965 

MEMORANDUM FOR GENERAL EVANS 

SUBJECT: Manned/Unmanned MOL Mission Assignments 

- Problem 

k,4 1 Define a reasonable flight schedule and mission assignments 

� for the manned and unmanned configurations of the MOL system. 

▪ Assumptions O. 

1. The primary MOL objective is to obtain at the earliest 

date high ground resolution satellite photography. 

However, the present plan to accomplish a manned flight near the 

end of 1968 should be maintained. 

2. The previously approved schedule for MOL flights is as 

shown in TAB A. 

3. Flight model primary optics will be available for an 

April 1969 launch and every two months thereafter. 

4. Manned and unmanned configurations will use the same 

booster, optics, and mission module. Gemini will be used only on 

the manned mission. The unmanned mission will use a modified laboratory module including aerodynamic nose fairing and additional (or 

larger) R/Vs. 

5. The overall system effectiveness for the configurations is: 

Manned - 0.89 

Unmanned - 0.50 

6. The WTR minimum launch cycle is three months. 

Discussion 

One of the main considerations of early schedule definition is 

primary optics availability. Neither the manned nor unmanned configuration can be completely tested without the flight model high 

resolution camera system. This sets a major schedule milestone of 

first "all-up" mission flight at April 1969. 

DORIAN BYE 37621-65 

Copy / of 5 copies 

Handle via BYEMAN 

SECRi7 Control System 

IMINIIMMINSIN..■•••• 

EXCLUDED FROM AUTOMATIC REGRADING; 

DOD DIR. 5200.10 DOES NOT APPLY 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 Bala Via DAMAN 

Control Systtri 

Useful testing has been planned and still can take place 

prior to obtaining the "all-up" mission module. This testing would 

consist primarily of qualifying T-III-M, Gemini B, and the manvehicle interfaces. In addition, components and subsystems of the 

final orbital vehicle available for these early flights would be used 

or simulated. This would allow common equipments of the manned and 

unmanned configurations to be tested simultaneously as well as 

individual tests of unique equipments. Since flight tests of the 

unmanned configuration prior to an "all-up" system would not 

normally be contemplated, these tests, primarily for the manned 

version, would give the unmanned configuration a good start toward 

flight qualification. In addition, man would be available on at 

least one flight for possible equipment malfunction detection, 

analysis, and correction. 

It is therefore considered advisable to continue the first 

three WTR flights on the MOL schedule with objectives as follows: 

Flight 1 - short life orbital flight without man primarily 

for T-III-M qualification aid MOL structure test. 

Flight 2 - short life ballistic (or orbital) flight without 

man primarily for Gemini B and recovery 

qualification. 

Flight 3 — moderate life orbital flight with man to verify 

manned configuration and unmanned configuration 

equipments with primary optics simulated. 

The schedule time of these flights does not appear critical and 

involves a tradeoff of early detection and correction of design 

deficiencies against equipment availability for inclusion in the 

tests. However, Flight 3 could be scheduled to maintain the 

announced late 1968 manned flight date. 

Flight number four should be an "all-up" manned configuration. 

The presence of man on this mission will enhance early acquisition 

of useful high resolution photography and permit further developmental onorbit testing of automatic equipments to be used in the unmanned 

configuration. This launch date is presently set for April 1969 because of flight model camera availability. 

Parallel developments of the two configurations will allow either 

to be launched as Flight 5 and succeeding flights. The availability 

of flight model camera systems is not expected to affect this 

approach. To comply with the desire for early test of the unmanned 

DORIAN W id prAlfs ,S.^ 

Control tnn 

2. BYE 37621-65 

Copy of 5 copies 

4Ebr'"""* . 
NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 Handle via HAMAN 

ratio! System 

configuration, this version should be scheduled for Flight 5. 

Depending on the success of Flight 4, it may be desirable to again 

fly the manned configuration to take advantage of its higher 

system effectiveness. 

The frequency of flights succeeding Flight 4 is determined 

primarily by the launch facility cycle time of approximately three 

months. The number of planned development flights of each 

configuration will be a function of their respective expected 

mission effectiveness. Using the present estimates, three manned 

configuration flights should provide roughly better than 99% confidence of successful mission demonstration. The equivalent cumulative 

confidence of the unmanned configuration for varying numbers of 

flights is: 

Cumulative 

Number Confidence 

3 .875 

4 .937 

5 .969 

6 .984 

These figures however do not account for the earlier testing of 

the many components and subsystems expected to be common to both 

configurations. Hence the confidence of the unmanned configuration 

successfully demonstrating mission capability should be higher than 

that reflected by the table above. It is concluded that approximately 

four unmanned flights during the development phase should be 

programmed. 

The sequencing of the manned/unmanned flights after the 5th flight 

should provide sufficient time between like flights to apply to the 

second the experience gained on the first. This implys alternating 

manned and unmanned configuration tests. Conversely, scheduling of 

two successive flights of one configuration to provide a backup 

flight in case of catostrophic failure is also desirable. The application 

of these two conflicting rules are reflected in alternate 

schedules as shown in TABS B and C. 

Conclusions 

1. The schedules shown in TAB B and TAB C for the manned/ 

unmanned program appear reasonable from the preceding considerations 

and based on the stated assumptions. They both depict an additional 

requirement of three flights for the combined program. 

DORIAN 

3- 

Handle via i\iii!6N, 

Cantrel SIO.ern 

BYE 37621-65 

Copy / of 5 copies 
3 Attachments 

TAB A 

TAB B 

TAB C I concur: 

M. iA YAR OVYCH 

Technical Direct 

MOL Program Office 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 4tika... Handle via BYEMAN 

forte' "—lel 

2. Parallel developments of the manned and unmanned 

configuration for flights succeeding Flight 4 should be implemented. 

S S. ORMAN,JR. 

Colonel, USAF 

Chief, Mission Planning Division 

(SAFSL-5) 

BYE 37621-65 

Copy / of 5 copies 

DORIAN 

4. 

Handle via bliiitiAN 

Contra! System 
O 

4a. 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 Handle via BYEMM 

Control System 

c0 

0' NO 

<JO 

‘,EC - EYE 37621-65 

Copy / of 5 copies 
14) 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 bridle via MEM 

z 

O 619 

R.. 

CREE BYE 37621-65 

Copy I of 5 copies 
1-p *0. 

0 

o 

4.) 

cd 

a 

ei 

o 

0 

Ts 

, 

0 

•ri 

4-1 

0 0 

0 

0 0 

ti 

z 

z 

0 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

RELEASE 1 JULY 2015 

tlandle via IPIEMMil 

Sr."ET ovtyni 

0 

U) 

Crs 1-z al! 

ti 

CD 

1-z 

0 

cn 

rn 

z 

1-z BYE 37621-65 

rf Copy / cf 5 copies 

E.P6..111.1