This article is an in-depth and comprehensive guide to the manufacturing of Apollo spacecraft. It will include all of the stats and numbers of this fantastic machine that took humankind to the Moon and back. Also, a great summary of all the components. So welcome, and let’s delve into this incredible innovation.

The complexity and variety of components in the Apollo command and service modules and the degree of reliability and quality demanded each imposed many fabrication problems.

The solution of these manufacturing problems required application of skills in such areas as advanced electronics, fire retardant organics, plastics, and cryogenic insulation, welding and brazing, adhesive and diffusion bonding, and machining, plus design and development of many tools and fixtures.

For the Apollo spacecraft, there are five major manufacturing assemblies: the service module, command module, lunar module, launch escape subsystem, and the spacecraft-LM adapter.

All but the lunar module (LM), are assembled by North American Rockwell.

The command module (CM), service module (SM) systems, and launch escape subsystem are at Downey, Calif.

The SLA and basic service module structure are produced at North American Rockwell’s Tulsa (Okla.) Division.

The lunar module (LM) is produced by Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp., Bethpage, N.Y.

In the first basic mastering programs, standard airframe mastering techniques were used.

Tooling experts soon realized that while plaster model masters had been satisfactory for constructing aircraft, they could not maintain the tolerances required for critical space hardware.

The procedure was conceived of fabricating control masters, masters, and assembly tools from like materials, harmonious with the end hardware: for example, aluminum tools and aluminum masters for the aluminum hardware and steel tools steel masters for the steel hardware.

So, basic tolerances could be combined into these tools and were not annulled by differential expansion during operations involving the application of heat.

Primarily because of this enhanced tolerance control, some heat shields have been delivered without any defective weld despite the 718 feet of weld in the crew section heat shield and the difficult access to some areas.

Several welding innovations have been developed during the program. And one of these was the use of a pressurized transportable cleanroom that enclosed a total weld station to maintain dust particle control and temperature.

Another was the construction of closed-circuit television for controlling manufacturing and monitoring tasks.

Small weld skates were developed for use in tight areas.

The tiny unit is used to join stainless steel fluid system parts in remote and relatively inaccessible regions of the spacecraft.

In the portable brazing tool, a radiofrequency current flows within coils and produces a high-frequency magnetic field around the workpiece.

The magnetic field produces the induction heating (up to 2,000 degrees) needed for brazing.

The brazing material is made of a thin gold alloy inside the sleeve, which connects the two ends of a cable.

The most substantial part of the spacecraft plumbing joints is induction-brazed stainless steel. This successful joining process offers a number of benefits.

The links are light (compared with mechanical joints), robust, and low cost. X-ray tests have determined that more than 97 percent of these braze joints are adequate.

In addition, this system permits the joining of tube stubs having widely various wall thicknesses.

The protecting boost cover is an example of problems solved in the Apollo program.

It is a resin-impregnated multi-layer fiberglass assembly 11 feet tall and 13 feet in diameter, and weighing approximately 700 pounds.

It fits perfectly over the command module like a glove. Initially, it was concluded that the protective cover would be a standard configuration adaptable to all spacecraft.

As the program improved, however, it was clear each cover needed to be tailored to each heat shield.

And in the process, heat shields are attached to a holding fixture and a blend of resin and fiberglass blown against the shield to create a fiberglass female mold identical to the heat shield.

Through a series of precisely controlled casting operations, a full-size plaster master was created to duplicate the outer mold-line of the heat shield.

The plaster simulators harmonize so exactly the actual heat shield that the finished boost protecting cover is examined for a match with the simulator rather than with the real heat shield.

It was eliminating hundreds of hours of inspection and other operations for the spacecraft.

The combined hatch for the command module is seemingly the most precisely engineered and manufactured door ever built.

A system of twelve linked latches seals the door shut. Several advanced technologies were used to create this hatch, both in tooling and in the different tool fabricating and assembling areas.

One unique innovation was the transformation of an existing fixture to machine three complex components: edge ablators that fit around the side of the hatch opening and the door. And the ablator, which connected to the inner crew compartment door.

About 150 innovative tools were invented and built for the hatch. An essential part of the environmental control subsystem is the cold plate.

And a mounting plate through which coolant flows to stop overheating of electronic parts.

Originally, cold plates were manufactured, ladder-type cores that were eutectic bonded between two face sheets. These were hard to bond, and the rejection rate was limiting.

And to resolve the problem, a pin-fin arrangement was produced, which could be machined by electrical discharge and which immeasurably decreased fabrication complexity yet proved more effective in heat distribution.

Also, heated platens with precise thermal controls were developed to provide the degree of heat, pressure, and flatness necessary to diffusion-bond the cold plates.

Although expected to function at a pressure of 90 psi, the cold plates now being manufactured are being tested at 1 000 pounds without any evidence of failure.

One of the most stringent requirements of the Apollo program was for a heat shield that would endure the intense aerodynamic heating experienced during entry from a lunar mission.

The heat shield is fabricated of a unique stainless steel honeycomb sandwich produced by the Aeronca Co., Middletown, Ohio. And it serves as the external structure of the vehicle.

The shield is constructed from 40 unique panels produced by means of a unique electric-blanket brazing process.

The brazing alloy used to join the steel skins to the honeycomb is a silver-copper-lithium alloy in a nickel matrix. Each panel is controlled to X-ray inspection after brazing to assure quality.

The heat-dissipating material is a phenolic-filled epoxy mixture developed and applied by the Avco Corp.’s Space Systems Division, Lowell, Mass.

The ablative material is dielectrically heated and injected with specially developed guns into each of more than 370,000 cells in the glass-phenolic honeycomb bonded to the outer surface of the three heat shield sections.

Every section is X-rayed to assure that all cells are completely filled, then cured in specially designed ovens.

To manufacturing the various diameters required of the contoured shields, computers operate machining heads of giant lathes. Pore sealer is applied as the last process, and thermal paint is applied to the heat shield.

Assembling Apollo Command Module

The fundamental command module structure consists of a nonpressurized outer casing (the heat shield), and a pressure-tight inner shell for the crew compartment. 

The inner section is composed of an aluminum honeycomb sandwich while the heat shield is made of stainless steel honeycomb sandwich. 

The space separating the inner and outer structures is packed with special fibrous insulation (Q felt). 

The Assembly

The heat shield construction consists of three major assemblies: the crew compartment, forward, and aft sections. 

The entire construction envelops the inner crew section and gives thermal protection during entry. 

The forward construction of the heat shield consists of four conical-shaped honeycomb boards, one forward bulkhead, one machined aft ring, and four launch escape tower leg fittings. 

The segment is constructed in the following sequence. The tower leg fittings are fitted, trimmed, and joined to each of the four honeycomb panels. 

The panels are fixed in a fixture that accommodates all four panels; the boards (panels) are trimmed longitudinally, then butt-fusion welded. 

The fused panels, forward bulkhead, and aft ring are installed in another fixture for circumferential weld and trim. 

The aft ring and front bulkhead inside the ring are finish-machined subsequent welding. 

The finished assembly is fit-checked to the inner crew section and crew compartment heat shield and then removed for the application of ablative material. 

In addition, the front heat shield device has an outer access door. This door consists of two shaped rings that are weld-joined to a brazed honeycomb panel. 

The central ring and outer ring are manufactured after welding. The door seals the forward end of the entrance tunnel of the crew compartment. 

It gives thermal and water-tight strength and may be opened from within or outside. 

The crew section heat shield is made from numerous brazed honeycomb panels, various machined edge members who provide for door openings.

And three circumferential machined rims connected by fusion welding. The rings and panels are installed in a series of jigs for assembling, welding and trimming. 

The fused sections are placed in a huge fixture for accuracy machining of the bottom and top rings. 

The construction is fit-checked with the interior crew compartment and the forward and aft heat shields.

They are then removed for the use of ablative material. The heat (aft) shield consists of four brazed honeycomb boards: four spot-welded, sheet metal fairing sections, grooved, and one circumferential machined ring. 

The honeycomb panels are connected laterally by fusion welds. The four fairing sections are connected to the honeycomb panels and machined ring utilizing conventional mechanical locks. 

Holes for outer and inner structure attachment points and tension tie locations are made through the assembly. 

The entire section is fit-checked with the crew section heat shield, then removed for utilization of ablative material. 

The inner crew compartment

The internal crew compartment is built in two parts: the system support structure and the compartment structure.

The compartment construction is composed of aluminum and fabricated in two sections.

The first section consists of an entrance tunnel, a forward sidewall, and a forward bulkhead.

The aft part consists of an aft bulkhead, an aft sidewall, and a circumferential machined ring.

The two segments, when assembled, form the spacecraft’s pressure vessel.

The first section fused inner skin is fabricated from panels, four machined longerons, a machined circumferential girth ring, window frames, and fittings.

Aluminum honeycomb outer face sheets and core are thermally bonded to the internal skin and cured in a large autoclave (similar to a large pressure cooker).

Fittings and attachments are later bonded to the construction for installation of the system support construction, tubing, wiring, and other equipment.

The entrance tunnel, which is bonded to the forward bulkhead, comprises a forward ring for attaching the pressure hatch cover docking ring, and outer frames that absorb pressures from parachute deployment and the recovery sling.

The aft section fused inner skin is fabricated from the machined ring, panels, and fusion-welded bulkheads.

Aluminum honeycomb outer face and core sheets are thermally fused to the inner skin and cured in a large autoclave.

Outer frames and internal attachments are fused (bonded) to the structure for the system support construction.

The inner crew section is completed when the forward and aft parts are circumferentially trimmed and fusion-welded at the girth ring.

The last assembly operation is the bonding of aluminum honeycomb core fillers and facing sheets.

The system support structure consists of the central display console and the material for the equipment bays. 

The windows are fabricated of sheet and machined aluminum panels and vertical frames. 

Each equipment bay is assembled outside and then transferred into the inner compartment through the crew access hatch. 

The final assembly of the command module includes the installation of the mechanical attachment of the two structures and the heat shield over the inner crew compartment. 

Fibrous lining (Q felt) is installed between outer and inner structures. “Egg crate” connections were developed for a more efficient and accurate installation of command module (CM) interior components. 

The rounded tooling structures simulate a bay of the spacecraft and give workers the exact location for stringers, brackets, and other mountings. 

The adjuncts are placed with the jig and secured in place with metallic tape, and the egg crate is then removed. 

Later the devices are bonded to their positions. The egg crate device is used again to define whether any of the components have moved when bonding. 

The most extensive of the egg crate jigs comprises about one-quarter of the inner circumference of the command module (CM). 

Technicians say the egg crate jig is more flexible in use and more accurate than the “wrap-around” device that was applied for the same purpose but included the whole circumference of the inside of the module. The old tool was much bigger and less pliable for close tolerance work. 

Subsystem assembling and installation

Subsystems are installed in a large clean room in Downey. When structural parts of the command module are complete, it is moved from the main production area to the cleanroom. 

There it goes into an outer airlock and is installed on a particular machine that tumbles and vacuum-cleans it, eliminating all dust and other particles. 

After this purification operation, it goes through an internal airlock to a location in the cleanroom for the installation of subsystems. 

Technicians entering the room need to pass through an air shower and wash their shoes with an electric buffing device before entering the anteroom. 

There they don clean coveralls and head covers and pass through the air shower again before entering the cleanroom proper. 

Even the workers’ clothing is bound. Wool is banned (too much lint), and leather soles may not be worn. 

Workers accessing the command module need to remove everything from their pockets, and even tie tacks and rings, to ensure that no foreign substance will be left in the module. 

They also need to put on personal “booties” to protect the crew compartment. 

A hatch watchman is stationed at the entry to each command module to monitor each worker in and out. 

Devices used by the cleanroom workers in installing the spacecraft’s subsystems and wiring are given in specially-designed, fitted boxes. 

And these boxes are again checked at the beginning and at the end of each shift to account for every tool and item of equipment. 

During subsystem installation and the many testing, operations are completed, the module is moved to the mother part of the cleanroom for the approval checkout tests described in the sector on Checkout and Final Test. 

The Service Module (SM)

The SM is a tubular construction consisting of forward and aft honeycomb sandwich bulkheads, four outer honeycomb sandwich panels, six radial beams, and four honeycomb sandwich reaction control system, the aft heatshield assembly, and panels, and a payload fairing and radiator assembly.

The external sector panels are one inch thick and constructed of aluminum honeycomb bonded amid aluminum face sheets.

The radial beams, built from milled aluminum alloy plates, divide the module into six irregular sectors around a center section.

Maintenance entrances are situated around the outside of the module for access to equipment in each sector.

Radial beam reinforcements on the forward portion of the SM provide the means to connect the command module (CM) and SM.

Beams 1, 3, and 5 have compression pads for holding the command module.

The other beams, 2, 4, and 6, have shear-compression pads and tension ties.

A horizontal center segment in each tension tie contains explosive charges for service module-command module separation.

The six radial bars are machined, and Chem-Mill etched (made thinner by chemical action) to decrease weight in sectors where there will be no critical stresses.

These beams and separation devices are contained within a fairing 26 inches high, which seals the connection between the SM and CM.

Eight radiators that are part of the spacecraft’s electrical power subsystem are shifted with ten honeycomb panels to make up the fairing.

All EPS radiator has three tubes running horizontally to space, to radiate excess heat produced by the fuel cell powerplants.

Two of the four external honeycomb panels have radiators to waste heat produced by the spacecraft’s environmental power subsystem.

The ECS radiators, each about 30 square feet, are placed on opposite sides of the service module. After its construction is complete, the SM is mated with the CM for a fit-check and alignment.

The modules are then de-mated, and the SM follows the same methods as the command module for the installation of subsystems in the cleanroom.

The Apollo LM Adapter (SLA)-Spacecraft

This construction is a tapered cylinder composed of eight 2-inch-thick aluminum honeycomb panels, four aft and four forward, linked together with outer and inner doublers. 

The four front panels, each about 22 feet tall, are joined at the bottom. The aft panels are all about 7 feet tall. 

Other main components of the SLA include devices to separate it from the service module, fold back and eject the forward panels, and separate the SLA from the LM. 

The bonding of the surface to both sides of the honeycomb panels is made in one of the biggest autoclaves in the aerospace industry. 

The autoclave, at North American Rockwell’s Tulsa Division, is a large pressure heater, 40 feet long and 20 feet in diameter and, with a heat capacity of 500 degrees and a pressure capacity of 1 10 psi. 

Furthermore, an epoxy adhesive is utilized to bond the sections. The autoclave is big enough to support one of four large SLA forward panels at a time. The autoclave further is used to bond all of the service module panels.

The Apollo Launch Escape Assembly

The basic construction consists of a Q-ball instrumentation assembly (the nose cone), canard assembly, a ballast compartment, and a pitch control motor, the launch escape engine, a tower jettisons motor, a structural skirt, and a latticed turret. 

The assembly (nose cone) is scarcely more than 13 inches in diameter at its base and narrows to a rounded apex. 

Its entire height also is a few more than 13 inches. Its covering is made of Inconel, a heat-resistant nickel alloy, and stainless steel fixed together. 

The cone has four ports to allow the electronic instrumentation inside to measure pressure variations and the angle of the launch vehicle. 

The ballast compartment further is composed of Inconel and stainless steel and includes lead weights. 

Two canard subassemblies, all consisting of an actuating arm, a thruster, and a deployable surface, are faired into the ballast compartment surface.

The pitch control motor device is made of nickel alloy steel sheet skins fixed to ring bulkheads and frames. 

The case for the tower jettisons motor is made of high-carbon chrome-molybdenum steel forged. 

The launch escape motor is fifteen feet long and has a cover made of steel. The outer structural skirt is made of titanium, and also the tubing of the launch escape tower. 

Assembling Apollo

Shifting requirements, trial and error, and thinking outside-the-box were all behind the design of the crafts that carried Apollo astronauts to the Moon and back.

President John F. Kennedy On May 25, 1961, stood before a joint session of Congress and asked America to put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade. 

“No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind, or more important for the long-range exploration of space, and none will be so difficult or expensive to accomplish,” he said. 

His words started arguably the most magnificent engineering feat in modern history.

Building a Moon spaceship

The Apollo CSM (Command/Service Module) was made out of as the mothership.

It was made to be the main spacecraft that would keep the Apollo astronauts alive during the lunar mission, and all the way to splashdown. 

At the beginning of the Apollo project, no one knew what that mothership would look like or need to do.

With the experience from the Mercury program into consideration, NASA had just one suborbital Mercury mission under its belt when Kennedy promised America the Moon.

NASA learned that the (CM) Command Module would be a trimmed cone with a rounded bottom. 

The plan was equal parts necessity and simplicity. It was more straightforward to replicate an existing design than to start from scratch.

Furthermore, the blunt end shielded the crew from the heat produced during atmospheric reentry. 

It was also coupled to the tubular Service Module, which carried the consumables like oxygen, water, and power the astronauts needed in space. 

Only the CM would bring the astronauts through reentry, and the SM would be jettisoned beforehand. 

Apollo Moon mission planners thought that the most straightforward mission mode was Direct Ascent, in which a craft would go straight to the Moon. Then land, and later return. 

The whole spacecraft would have to land on the Moon’s surface upright. 

The Apollo spacecraft would also have to carry the fuel required to launch from the Moon’s surface and produce enough speed to return to Earth. 

Not only was this option difficult, but it involved a massive payload that would need a gigantic, not-yet-developed rocket named Nova to get off the ground. 

An alternative plan included launching this massive spacecraft in pieces on two smaller Saturn rockets and efficiently building it in Earth orbit in a mode designated Earth Orbit Rendezvous.

NASA published its first call for proposals on July 28, 1961. What NASA didn’t ask for was the landing payload. 

The contractors were left to assume that some new landing stage would turn their cone-shaped mothership into the landing ship. 

The year 1961, on October 11, NASA was presented with five bids: two from single companies, three from groups of contractors and, one of which was North American Aviation.

A month earlier, North American Aviation won the bid to build the second stage of the now-famous Saturn V rocket. And no one thought it could win a second major piece of Apollo. 

When NASA evaluated the bids, North American got second behind the Martin Company. 

And North American had a unique experience. Not only had they built great planes like the B-25 bomber and P-51 Mustang, it also had made the rocket-powered X-15. Famous for breaking speed and altitude records flying to the edges of space. 

North American conclusively knew more about the mechanical and physical stresses of spaceflight than the other constructors, and so it won the contract.

A New Mission Mode: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous

As North American commenced developing the CSM ( the Apollo command and service module) in early 1962, NASA started to consider a new mission mode: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous. 

This mode kept the Apollo command and service module and its heavy load of fuel for the return flight in orbit around the Moon, while a dedicated landing vehicle (LM)descended to the Moon’s surface. 

Though the rendezvous made the mission more complicated, it also made the payload lighter, the fact that the lander could be smaller and thus require less fuel to leave the Moon’s gravity. 

The total payload would be light enough to launch on a single Saturn V rocket. It was much easier to develop and gave NASA the highest chance at meeting Kennedy’s end-of-decade deadline. 

To the astonishment of many within NASA, Lunar Orbit Rendezvous soon became the preferred approach; NASA committed to it July 11. 

North American had not only lost the glory of their module landing on the Moon.

But they were also now responsible for transforming its spacecraft to allow docking with the second ship and giving the astronauts some means to travel amidst the vehicles while they were connected. 

The expected changes were significant; it was about building a whole new spacecraft. 

To retain its first year of work, North American came up with the “Block” idea. 

The original spacecraft, which couldn’t support a mission in connection with the Lunar Module, was called Block I. The Block II CSM (Apollo command and service module) would be created to support a lunar mission. 

The first Block I mission was scheduled as Apollo 1 in 1967. It owed in significant part to the amount of combustible material in the cabin. 

The pure oxygen atmosphere under high pressure, and the massive, three-part hatch, an inward-opening hatch, when a fire broke out during a routine pre-launch test, the crew had no possibility of escape. 

Roger Chaffee, Virgil “Gus” Grissom, and Ed White were all killed on the launchpad January 27, 1967, and for a moment, it looked like the Apollo program might not recover from the tragic accident.

The following accident investigation forced NASA to cancel all Block I manned missions. 

Block I CSM flew only on uncrewed missions, in some cases with parts of the Block II version added to test them in advance of human-crewed flights. 

Block II experienced several design changes following the disaster. Possessing a safer mixed gas environment on the launchpad as well as a different layout of material inside the spacecraft and a more simplistic two-part hatch.

It made its first flight with Apollo 7 in October 1968. The CSM successfully flew on 10 Apollo missions, six of which landed on the Moon, bringing every astronaut home securely and working as their home away from home en route to the Moon and back to Earth.

Landing on the Moon

When NASA began working out the aspects of how to land on the Moon, the mission included one spacecraft, not two. 

But when the agency shifted its approach in July 1962, perpetrating instead to Lunar Orbit Rendezvous, a new plan emerged. 

That meant one astronaut would stay aboard the large mothership around the Moon, while his two crewmates would descend to the Moons surface.

No one comprehended how to land on another world, much less how to make something that could land on the Moon, so NASA invited interested contractors to submit bids to build the Lunar Excursion Module. 

The Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation got the contract on November 7, 1962. 

Work formally began January 14, 1963, just a little under seven years to the “end-of-decade” lunar landing deadline. 

Things moved quickly, but while North American Aviation tried to preserve a year’s worth of work with the Block idea, the Lunar Excursion Module suffered through its development changes.

The first and simplest change was the name. NASA decided the word excursion sounded like a school field trip, and so renamed it the Lunar Module (LM). The rest of the spacecraft’s development was much more complicated, right down to the most basic question of how it would be flown. 

Grumman engineers merged necessity and experience. Necessity and NASA’s contract specifications dictated the LM would be a two-stage vehicle, wherein the descent stage would land on fixed gear and then serve as a launchpad for the ascent stage. 

Experience told Grumman that the most straightforward vertical landing vehicle was a helicopter, so designers created the Lunar Module with two seats and four bubblelike windows for adequate visibility. 

But the windows created a huge problem. Not only were they bulky, but they were weak points that exposed the Lunar Module to potentially fatal temperature variations. 

To solve this matter, engineers at either Grumman or NASA retrospections are divided recognized that there was no law saying astronauts had to fly sitting down. 

Standing closer to smaller windows would give equal visibility, and in the Moon’s lower gravity field, just one-sixth what we feel on Earth.

The human legs would be more-than-adequate shock absorbers for the time of lunar touchdown.

A “buglike” Lunar Craft

After only two years of development, by the fall of 1964, the Lunar Module had become a spacecraft designed to do the incredible: to land on the Moon.

On the outside, it almost didn’t look up to the task. Because it would be launched in a protective shroud and would only fly in a vacuum, Grumman engineers created the Lunar Module from the core and out without bothering about aerodynamics. 

Inside the Lunar Module, the astronauts would fly standing up, secured in place by hook and loop hooks on the floor, as well as cables that clipped into their suits at waist level. 

Round them were twelve instrument panels housing 16 variable controls, 158 switches, two computer keyboards, four hand controllers, and a host of displays. 

Housed inside this hardware was the PGNS or Primary Guidance and Navigation Section, pronounced “pings,” the onboard digital autopilot system. 

While the computer watched the craft’s environment, position, and consumables necessary to the landing, the crew could keep an eye on displays and the lunar terrain, taking over hand-operated control if needed. 

The crew cabin was a small 234cm (92 inches) in diameter and 107cm (42 inches) deep with the LM’s external structure built immediately around this hardware. 

The outcome was an uneven ascent stage over an octagonal descent stage, which provided extra room for surface experiment containers, lunar rovers (on following missions), and a special section for the flag. 

The crew didn’t love the Lunar Module at first blush. As alpha fighter pilots used to aerodynamic, streamlined planes, they thought the buglike spacecraft looked more gangly than flight worthy. 

The astronauts of Apollo IX even gave their Lunar Module the call sign “Spider” when it flew in March 1969. But they came to love it.

Even though each spacecraft played a specific role, the (Command/Service Module) CSM and Lunar Module together became the backbone of 11 Apollo missions.

 And even famously so, on Apollo 13. Through triumphs and one triumphant failure, the Apollo Command/Service and Lunar Modules kept 24 astronauts alive on what was arguably humanity’s most daring journey.

Constructing a Moon Rocket

Picking a way to the Moon

President Kennedy’s determination to land men on the Moon ere 1970 required the fastest, most effective method possible. Three landing methods below were proposed.

(EOR) Earth Orbit Rendezvous 

Earth Orbit Rendezvous or EOR entailed launching the lunar spacecraft in parts aboard numerous rockets and joining them in Earth orbit. 

Each section would serve a particular function through the mission and would then be discarded.

“Direct-ascent”

The direct-ascent used a single launch vehicle and one craft to land on the Moon and following return to the Earth. 

This method needed no docking maneuvers in space but did need a more massive rocket than the Saturn V that was already in construction. 

Such a colossal rocket would have been very difficult to complete by 1970.

(LOR) Lunar Orbit Rendezvous 

Lunar Orbit Rendezvous or LOR required several sections, sent upon a single launch vehicle. 

During a lunar journey, each craft completed a specific part of the mission. 

After entering lunar orbit, the lander departed from the main craft and descended to the surface. 

After completing its function on the surface, part of the lander would lift-off for meeting with the orbiting ship that returned the astronauts to Earth, leaving the lander in lunar orbit.

Administrator James Webb and Associate Administrator Robert Seamans chose the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous option in June 1962 after a conference with agency managers. 

This choice influenced the basic design of the principal vehicles of the moon journey, particularly and the lunar module and the Saturn V rocket.

When Apollo started, not the United States, neither the Soviet Union owned a rocket powerful enough to send three brave astronauts to the Moon and back. 

Both the Soviets and the Americans had to produce a super-booster or Moon rocket. 

The United States won with the all-powerful Saturn V rocket.

Saturn V is the biggest rocket booster ever built by the United States. 

A three-stage vehicle. The liquid-fueled launch was designed to propel a crew of three astronauts and Apollo spacecraft on their way to the Moon. 

These enormous rockets were used only eleven times, on Apollo missions 8 through 17 and for the Skylab Orbital Workshop.

Rocket Specifications

• Height: 363 feet (110 meters).
• It was developed by Dr. Wernher von Braun at NASA’s George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama.
• Thrust at takeoff: 3.4 million kilograms; 7.5 million pounds (33.4 million newtons).
• Weight at liftoff: 6,100,000 pounds (2,767,000 kilograms).

Saturn V F-1 Engine

The Saturn V F-1 engine was developed to accommodate propulsion for the Saturn V rocket used throughout the Apollo lunar landing missions. 

Saturn V was developed during the early 1960s, the Saturn V rocket was the most massive rocket in the throughout the world, and the F-1 was the most powerful rocket engine ever built.

The first of the three stages of the Saturn Rocket (S-IC) was powered by a group of five F-1 engines producing a total of 33.4 million newtons (3.4 million kilograms; 7.5 million pounds) of propulsion at liftoff. 

They consumed 2,021,000 liters (534,000 gallons) of liquid fuels in the 2½ minutes before first stage burnout. 

By then, the massive rocket had reached 9,660 kilometers per hour (6,000 miles per hour) and an altitude of 38 miles or 61 kilometers.

Engine Specifications

• Length: 18 feet 4 inches (5.6 meters).
• Weight: 18,000 pounds (8200 kilograms).
• Propellants: kerosene and Liquid oxygen.
• Company: Rocketdyne, A Division of North American Rockwell Corporation.
• Maximum diameter: 11 feet 11 inches (5.6 meters).
• Maximum thrust at sea level: 1,522,000 pounds (690,000 kilograms).

The five grouped F-1 engines produced propulsion only for the first stage of the rocket, while J-2 engines produced thrust for both upper stages (five on the S-II second stage, one on the S-IVB third stage).

An enormous amount of engineering, design, planning, and creativity went into the successful lunar landing of the Apollo 11 on July 20, 1969, and the following missions to the Moon. I hope you enjoyed this article.

That’s it, and I hope you enjoyed this essay. Check out this article that reveals the inside of the Apollo Saturn V rocket and its significant components. See for yourself these fantastic drawings. You will be amazed.