Documents / Official release
This NASA file of astronaut scientific debriefing papers from 1962 collects internal Office of Space Sciences material on the science observations made on early Mercury flights. A February 1962 memo from Maurice Dubin asks for more detail on John Glenn's report of luminous particles and the atmospheric horizon layer. A draft memo concludes that the particles were tied to the spacecraft and were not extraterrestrial. The file also holds a Los Alamos letter that attributes the high haze layer to nitrogen peroxide, and notes on Carpenter's airglow observations.
From the source:Release of 2026-06-12 This file contains memoranda, correspondence, reports, and other materials relating to contemporary scientific interest in investigating the nature of luminous phenomena reported by astronauts John Glenn and Walter Schirra during spaceflight. This collection includes transcripts from NASA interviews and debriefings with both astronauts regarding those observations. It also contains details relating to scientific observations of atmospheric phenomena, including brief descriptions of luminous particles, experiences while aboard spacecraft, and circa 1955 theoretical analysis of meteoric particles entering the atmosphere. Pages 34-35, 55-56, 57-63, 64-113, and 122-127 feature content relevant to the PURSUE initiative.
“Gray”5 pages
3 great length and I don't know whether we could be any more expansive on that subject than we have already. The only thing that I can think of that we didn't talk about is an e f fective color of the planet 1ercury. It was as white to me as any other ·star. It was not blue, red or some other color. It was definitely "star-appearing" to me. It would have a definite atmosphere where it would change colors and where it di dn't have · any · atmosphere, it didn't change colors. I would say that from that it had no different appearance than if I could see it from the earth as a star. 1ercury itself was plotted on my star chart; which is · a very valuable tool for these flights. There is just no doubt where Mercury has to be and we checked on it and, of course; it was Mercury. I think Larry · called me one day and we all were · surprised that I saw Mercury longer than I shouid have seen it and I guess this was explained by its being · seen ·through the refraction ·of the · atmosphere. Is this ~orrect? Dr. O' Keefe · - Yes, that's the answer. Mrs. Cameron is the one who made the contribution. This is her theory. Schirra - This ·was a tremendous yardstick - as far as I was concerned . It was so obvious to · me that I just had to take the time · to desc r ib e its passage through the various layers of light and the way I descr i bed · it · in the handouts "Results of -Third U. S. fanned Orbital · Space ' Flight; October -3, 1962" that you have is about as accurate · as I can · describe it now . Dr . Gill - Could you · make a little drawing on · the blackboard for us ?
Not linked to a story yet.
Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 216 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.