NRO-MOL_2015

Introduction
xv
as determining the crew’s physical and mental viability in
space for what were considered at the time very lengthy
missions. The MOL program was nearly a decade ahead
of the first space station mission of the Soviet’s in 1971.
The MOL program also faced challenges of a terrestrial
nature—the foremost being the Vietnam War. The
challenge was that as the MOL program evolved so did
the Vietnam War. The Johnson administration was trying
to carry out its “Great Society” domestic programs as well
as sustain an escalating war abroad. The prosecution of
the Vietnam War directly resulted in delays in the MOL
schedule in order to reduce costs in the early years of
the program and spread them into the future. President
Johnson’s continued hope during his administration was
that the Vietnam War could be concluded and American
troops withdrawn to reduce costs associated with the war.
Johnson failed to entice the North Vietnam government
and its allies in South Vietnam to the negotiation table in
order to achieve this end. As a consequence, national
security programs not associated directly with the
Vietnam program suffered in resource appropriation.
MOL was one such program.
Another significant challenge faced by the MOL
program was the lingering question of whether or not it
really brought unique intelligence collection capabilities.
The NRO had already demonstrated that space could be
used successfully as a reconnaissance platform through
the Corona, Gambit, Grab, and Poppy programs. At the
time MOL was proposed, the NRO already had plans
for a more powerful high-resolution Gambit program and
the CIA was in the early stages of developing a satellite
to supersede the Corona program, and they hoped, the
Gambit program too. That program evolved into the
NRO’s Hexagon program. The Hexagon program was
designed to carry an immense film load, allowing it to
stay on orbit for six months or more. It would also carry
an improved targeting system. It promised versatility
that called into question MOL’s necessity. Eventually,
Hexagon and the improved Gambit-3 system would
suffice in the Nixon administration’s view, leading to the
MOL’s termination in June, 1969.
The MOL Program Legacy
Because of the MOL program size, complexity, and
time in existence, it consumed many millions of dollars
in funding before termination. This begs the question
of what if anything did the United States gain from the
program? There were significant legacy contributions
from the program. The first and foremost significant
contribution was the leadership that came from the
MOL crew members trained under the program. Seven
of those crew members were accepted into NASA’s
astronaut program. At NASA they would either command
or pilot the Space Shuttle. Of those, one would eventually
lead NASA as the Agency’s administrator, another would
command NASA’s Cape Canaveral launch facility,
and others would lead elements of the NASA space
program. Yet another would go on to lead the US’s
Strategic Defense Initiative. Another would serve was
Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Many would
also play important roles in corporations supporting
national defense and space programs. Other engineers,
scientists, and staff would play key roles in other national
reconnaissance programs, drawing on their experiences
and insights gained from the MOL program.
The MOL program would also make important
contributions to national reconnaissance and space
exploration programs. The Dorian camera system was
to be preserved and studied for possible incorporation
into Hexagon program. One of the options for reducing
costs of the MOL program was a series of unmanned
missions. Those missions would carry multiple filmreturn
capsules in a configuration that closely resembled
the configuration eventually developed for the Hexagon
program. The MOL program also included a segmented
mirror technology that was eventually used in a domestic
space observatory. Segmented mirrors offered additional
advances in space exploration with MOL advancing this
important technology.
Finally, MOL helped advance the technology and
science necessary for longer space missions. For
example, the MOL program required its crew members
to travel through a narrow tube or tunnel from the Gemini
capsule to the laboratory section once the vehicle was
on orbit. This in turn required a flexible space suit—more
so than what NASA had developed at the time. The
advancements in space suits under the MOL program
were transferred to NASA. MOL also included proposals
for more than one space module being launched and
then linked on orbit. This concept would be critical for the
development of today’s multi module space craft on orbit
such as the International Space Station. The research
and technology developed under the MOL program for
sustaining crew members on orbit was also transferred
to NASA, undoubtedly aiding NASA’s advancements in
manned space flight.
There is often a misplaced assumption that a cancelled
program has no important legacy. This should not be
said of the Manned Orbiting Laboratory program. For
the reasons listed above, and others contained in the
some 20,000 pages of documents associated with this
compendium, the important contributions of MOL are
clear. The MOL program should be recognized for its
rich legacy in both civilian and national reconnaissance
space histories.
James D. Outzen
Chief, Historical Documentation and Research
Center for the Study of National Reconnaissance
Chantilly, VA