Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: Apollo trivia (was Challenger tragedy)
Message-ID: <1988Aug8.171526.29814@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <1001@scicom.alphacdc.com> <5827@dasys1.UUCP> <14876@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> <12716@ames.arc.nasa.gov> <1988Aug3.151700.8678@utzoo.uucp> <12959@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 88 17:15:26 GMT

In article <12959@ames.arc.nasa.gov> mike@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Mike Smithwick) writes:
>... Interestingly enough however, the
>Apollo Chronology series lists Apollo 1, Apollo 1-A, Apollo 2, and Apollo 3
>as "rejected numbers" in the index then refers the reader to the AS-20X 
>entries.

The proposal that NASA HQ rejected in favor of doing nothing about the issue
was, in fact, to call the pre-fire unmanned tests Apollo 1A, 2, and 3.  But
the Apollo 1 designation is official, I think, although this didn't happen
right away.  (My reference is "Chariots For Apollo", the NASA History book
about the Apollo spacecraft, which is probably the most authoritative source
in printed form, but my copy isn't handy for me to check.)

>The crew's personal reference to the Apollo 1 title would explain it's
>presence on their patch. 

Yes, the patch was one of the ways in which the crew were displaying their
preference.  It's a bit surprising that things got that far without NASA HQ
ever issuing an official pronouncement on the subject.

>Oh, by the way Henry, have you ever seen an Apollo 1, er, AS 204 flight
>plan?? ...

No, I haven't, although I haven't made any particular effort to look for
it.  It wasn't meant to be a particularly exciting mission.
-- 
MSDOS is not dead, it just     |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
smells that way.               | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu