Thus, the White House announced on 27 March 1958 that it had approved a program "to determine our capability of exploring space in the vicinity of the moon and to obtain useful data concerning the moon". The program was announced by Defense Secretary Neil H McElroy. The Air Force Ballistic Missile Division in Los Angeles was assigned a program of three lunar probes using a "Thor-Vanguard" system with "a third stage to be developed". The Army Ballistic Missile Agency in Huntsville, Alabama was authorized to "undertake one and possibly two lunar probes" using modified Jupiter-C rockets. Overall responsibility for the lunar probe launches was assigned to the Defense Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA).
The
Air Force project had its roots in the "Able project" which was probably
designed to provide a rocket that could test re-entry vehicle (RV)
technology for the ICBM that had not yet been flown successfully. To achieve
the speeds necessary to test a reasonably sized RV the USAF and its contractor
the Space Technology Labs used a Thor IRBM with the second stage of the
Vanguard as the upper stage (see picture on the right of second stages
being prepared). This combination was test flown three times in 1958, the
first time less than a month after the White House announcement and the
last less than a month before the first lunar probe attempt. (Launch
dates for the Thor-Able 0 rocket are: 23 April, 9 July and 23 July 1958).
When NASA was formed in October of 1958, all military space research projects run by the military organisations were transferred to it. This included the four remaining flights in McElroy's (ARPA's) origonal plan and the follow-on space probes planned by the USAF. This plan included a plan to launch two probes (weighing 169 kg) to Venus in the launch window opening in June 1959 followed by a lunar orbit mission. However, after the Soviet success with Luna 1 the plans were changed to instead launch the follow-on provbes to lunar orbit in the hope of beating the Soviet Union to this goal. This follow-on Pioneer program used the Atlas-Able rocket and even before the first flight the goal of photographing the far side of the Moon was snatched by the Soviet union. Howevber, the first probe did carry a camera - it was too late to change the plans. howveer, the two following oprobes did not carry a camera, but instead more radiation monitoring instruments. However, the goal of achieving lunar orbit before the Soviet union could still be achieved.
| Name |
by |
mass |
L/V | Instrumentation | Propulsion | Electrical power | RF System |
| Pioneer-0 |
|
|
Thor-Able | TV camera, radiation detectors | Falcon motor for lunar orbit
injection
Vernier motors for trajectory adjustment |
Batteries | 108.03 MHz, 1 W, PM |
| Pioneer-1 |
|
|
Thor-Able | TV camera, radiation detectors | Falcon motor for lunar orbit
injection
Vernier motors for trajectory adjustment |
Batteries | 108.03 MHz, 1 W, PM |
| Pioneer-2 |
|
|
Thor-Able | TV camera, radiation detectors | Falcon motor for lunar orbit
injection
Vernier motors for trajectory adjustment |
Batteries | 108.03 MHz, 1 W, PM |
| Pioneer-3 |
|
|
Juno-2 | Radiation detectors | - | Batteries | 960.05 MHz TM |
| Pioneer-4 |
|
|
Juno-2 | Radiation detectors | - | Batteries | 960.05 MHz TM |
| P-3 |
|
|
Atlas-Able | TV camera, magnetometers, radiation detectors | Two hydrazine engines.
66 cm tank in 1 m dia S/C body. |
4 solar panels | 378.21 MHz TM 64 bps
401.85 MHz TC |
| P-30 |
|
|
Atlas-Able | No TV camera | Two hydrazine engines.
66 cm tank in 1 m dia S/C body. |
4 solar panels | 378.21 MHz TM 64 bps
401.85 MHz TC |
| P-31 |
|
|
Atlas-Able | No TV camera | Two hydrazine engines.
66 cm tank in 1 m dia S/C body. |
4 solar panels | 378.21 MHz TM 64 bps
401.85 MHz TC |
The
first three U.S. probes aimed at the Moon carried TV cameras to take pictures
of the Moon's far side and therefore the lunar age at arrival should be
be near zero, i.e. at New Moon. This means that the launch time should
be a few days before New Moon, i.e. at Lunar age near 27 days.. This is
indeed true for Pioneer-1 and -2, but not for Pioneer-0, the failed launch
attempt on 17 August 1958. Therefore another constraint must be taken into
consideration, namely the lunar declination at arrival. Since the launches
were carried out by a direct ascent to the translunar trajectory from a
site in the northern hemisphere the location of the moon had to be in the
southern part of the celestial sphere, i.e. the declination of the Moon
needed to be negative. (This is the same launch constraint as that of Soviet
lunar probes). When the Pioneer-3 probe was launched in December 1958 the
launch constraint was not not lunar age, but negative lunar declination.
However, during the late fall of 1958 the Moon was a t its lowest declination
near New Moon, so the launch of Pioneer-3 is very close to those of Pioneer-1
and -2 in the Age/launch time diagram below.
The P-3 probe launch in November 1959 again carried a TV camera for taking pictures of the Moon and the lunar age at its launch was very close to that of Pioneer-2. In the fall of 1960 when the P-30 and P-31 probes were launched the Moon was again near its lowest declination close to New Moon.
All these factors have led to, by pure co-incidence that the early U.S. launches to the Moon are much more clumped together in the lanuch Time/age diagram that the Soviet launches to the Moon in the same period.
The arrival times are based on a flight time for
Pioneer 0-2 to the Moon of (57.5 hours until retro-firing) 62 hours to lunar
orbit. The planned flight time to the Moon for Pioneer-3 and -4 was 34 hours. It
seems that the flight time for the Atlas-Able probes was also 62 hours (1).
| Name | Date |
(UT) |
at launch |
L/V | Notes |
arrival time |
at arrival |
Decl. at
arrival |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pioneer-0 | 17 Aug 1958 |
|
|
Thor-Able | Exploded at T+77 sec | 20 Aug 0218 UT |
|
-12.14 |
| Pioneer-1 | 11 Oct 1958 |
|
|
Thor-Able | Too low speed. Hmax=110 000 km | 13 Oct 2300 UT |
|
-12.32 |
| Pioneer-2 | 8 Nov 1958 |
|
|
Thor-Able | Third stage did not ignite | 10 Nov 2130 UT |
|
-13.85 |
| Pioneer-3 | 6 Dec 1958 |
|
|
Juno-2 | Too low speed. Hmax=102 000 km | 7 Dec 1545 UT |
|
-11.32 |
| Pioneer-4 | 3 Mar 1959 |
|
|
Juno-2 | Missed Moon with 60 000 km | 4 Mar 1511 UT |
|
-17.37 |
| P-3 | 26 Nov 1959 |
|
|
Atlas-Able | Shroud splits at T+70 sec. | 28 Nov 2126 UT |
|
-13.05 |
| P-30 | 25 Sep 1960 |
|
|
Atlas-Able | Second stage fails to ignite | 28 Sep 0513 UT |
|
-18.47 |
| P-31 | 15 Dec 1960 |
|
|
Atlas-Able | Explodes shortly after launch. | 18 Dec 2240 UT |
|
-18.63 |
The figure below shows the relationship between launch time and lunar age for the flights in the table above. The blue line has been computed as outlined in "How to compute the launch time of a lunar probe" using an inclination of 33o and a flight time of 2.5 days. The fact that an inclination slightly above 30 degrees was used can be gleaned from a plot of the planned Pioneer-4 trajectory published by NASA.
The flight time must be either 0.5, 1.5 or 2.5 days to permit viewing of the lunar approach from the United States, in particular from the Goldstone station in California. A flight time to the Moon of only 0.5 days would require a very high energy trajectory with an injection velocity of 13.7 km/s, clearly an impossible figure! Therefore the shortest flight time to the Moon was 1.5 days, which was what was intended for Pioneer-3 and -4. All other probes aimed at 2.5 days flights time, i.e a period of about 60 hiurs.
