Documents / Official release

Astronaut Scientific Debriefings, 1962-1963

National Aeronautics and Space Administration · 1962 · 216 pages · text from the file's own layer

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.

  • p. 64 …J Cooper: No. If I had no prev;ous experience on the light·, I don Vt…
  • p. 65 …because you ha~ e , as background'l Cooper: I think possibly so~ Of course it's…
  • p. 66 …F,.. ~ ...,, ., , - • I • l •, • 'I- - • •~ -, • ' , was? ,. • -,-~ ;' _·•: ... .,~ '-.. .. - Cooper:. I Just don't have any idea. I kept doubting…
  • p. 67 …ghtning par'tfcularly in that area. .: • '.o:. Cooper: · Well, · this is .,one possibility· that there was…
  • p. 68 Scientific Debriefing -5- Cooper: The moon was probably 14-al. It was down to about a…
  • p. 69 I' .' Scientific Debriefing -6- Cooper: Well, not realq. As I went into both night sides I…
  • p. 70 Scientific Debriefing -1- Cooper: .Almost. Almost as it began to get dark. Of course it gets…
  • p. 72 …Probably about 30 degrees G Cooper: I had a ~-:few comments that I made · on the…
  • p. 73 Scientific Debriefing Cooper: Just once. Bill Armstrong: Did you do it twice or Just once? ·'.1…
  • p. 74 ,. • I Scientific Debriefing • -ll- Cooper: I think so. I think with that brightness~ if you know…
  • p. 75 …I • l • .' • . ~ l • • . •. • - ' ' Cooper: Yeso Bill: That 1s one of t he main things we wanted…
  • p. 76 . Scientific Debriefing -13- Cooper: Those deploy marks worked real well. They were excellent for getting in…
  • p. 77 …Did you make attempts to see it· on the day side'l Cooper: I sure did…
  • p. 78 …Did .you see the ·stars during this• ~'l , I Cooper: Not this particular ··orbit. No I…
  • p. 79 …the · center of' the window? Cooper: Noo More slight¥ to the le:f't of' the…
  • p. 80 ',' I Scientific Debriefing -17- I Cooper: Maybe as long as a minute. I doubt if it…
  • p. 81 ,. 1' ' Scientific Debriefing -J.8- Cooper: Yes, it got dimmer. Mercer: Cou1d you see _lights of…
  • p. 82 Scientific Debriefing -19- Cooper: ~finite~: The ideal would be a series of lights. A better combination…
  • p. 83 I i ' I Scientific Debriefing -20- Cooper: You 're going to have to be right on…
  • p. 85 …Is this maneuver an expensive and troublesome· thing to do'l Cooper: It takes control power…
  • p. 86 …worked •very well. ' • And the lens opening of 5.6? 'Cooper: ·It was exactly-on ·what…
  • p. 87 …aey more information? There was none in the tra.ns9ript. ~ Cooper: What base was this oni…
  • p. 88 Scientific Debri efing -25- ( Cooper continued) ·a brown look, Everything predominantly had a. bluish cast . .All…
  • p. 89 Scientific Debriefing Cooper: I could not see distinct lightning patterns. It ju,st all lit ~• . I…
  • p. 90 Scientific Debriefing -27- Cooper: No. I noticed several large cyclonics. I did not notice any very…
  • p. 91 …Was the horizon always ·a sharp line? Cooper: Yes, day and 'night the hqrizon was sharp…
  • p. 92 …Which is darker, the earth or the 11ttl.e band of sky? Cooper: When there was…
  • p. 93 …Does the earth appear as blue to your eye , , as it does in the photos? Cooper…
  • p. 94 …You could see the griton\ the window? • Cooper : You could see the light actually impinging on…
  • p. 95 …More like a patch? Cooper: Smoother. It was a good sized area. • Roach: You didn't…
  • p. 96 …We are interested in horizon effect after sunset • . \' (Cooper draws some more pict~es.) Cooper: You…
  • p. 97 …Did you 'notice this was cone shaped? Cooper: A little bit cone shaped. J Roach : Did…
  • p. 98 …I Cooper : Sunset is more of a golden orange. Dr. Voas : Did you notice any of…
  • p. 99 …Then, is there some structure above the blue layer? Cooper: I never could see pattern structure…
  • p. 100 …What are your attitude tolerances •in ASCS? Cooper: I would say within about 5 l/2…
  • p. 101 …was the camera easy to use'l Cooper: Yes, after I once got it out of…
  • p. 102 …Di"d you place it vertically? Where did you place it? Cooper: I placed it vertically…
  • p. 103 …That is all I had. ' Cooper : Did you get anything at all? Warren : Particul.a.rly…
  • p. 104 …Were you listening for it at the time'l Cooper: Yes, except I had my visor…
  • p. 105 …Over the Himalayas, shot number 12, was the green true? Cooper: Yes, fairly true. Shepard : I…
  • p. 106 …Did you see any distinct shadows from the terrai!n? Mountains? l t .Cooper: •Yes. You…
  • p. 107 …O'Keefe: .Did you see anything that looked like a crater? ! I Cooper: No. I sure…
  • p. 108 …Did they actually seem to curve in? Cooper: If I would be sitting facing this way…
  • p. 109 …the smoke? Cooper : was bl~ Hanel: Hanel: in polar Cooper: an airplane. ·clouds Hanel: pictures? Cooper…
  • p. 110 …Question: · Did you see any dust storms? Cooper: At no time· did I note a dust…
  • p. 111 …I Cooper: No. I think this was purely a feeling of the straps. You're floating…
  • p. 112 …Did you see ,Calcutta? I Cooper: No. Fisher : Did you see any airports? Cooper : Ye~, I…
  • p. 113 …Could you hear better? Cooper : No. \ Dr. voas: Did you at any time hear an unusual…
  • p. 183 …it should have been (capped) ooo Gordon Cooper knows this and will have a cap on…
  • p. 184 …Schirra - Cooper will have this very same type of li ght meter. Nordberg - You know why…
  • p. 196 …Schirra = I feel at this point, for example, in Cooper 0 s flight , what we are…
Meteor ionization in the E-region 117
now the electron density. For small particles, where the number of electrons
formed per centimetre of path is small, the diffusion term is predominant, and the
train quickly decreases to the equilibrium electron density, which is thus given by
°'n2 = rate of production of electrons.
The effective recombination coefficient for the E-region is e<(O2 ) '.::::'. 5. 10- s
cm3 sec-1 , when 0 2 is present, and e<(O) '.::::'. 4 X 10- 9 cm3 sec- 1 if oxygen has been
dissociated. Thus n is approximately equal to 7 . 104 and 2 . 104 in the upper and
lower E-region, respectively.
3. Co cLusrn s
The above is app ·cable to three effects in the E-layers. First, the diurnal variation
of the E-layer is found to agree fairly well with the (cos x)t law for the variation
of the simple Ch pman region (xis -the zenith angle of the sun) . The variation is
found to be alm~st symmetrical with reference to the maximum at noon (MITRA,
1952). However, with the accepted value of the recombination coefficient, the
E-layer ionization at night should fall to a very low value. The residual ionization
density as observed is much greater than it hould be. It is therefore suggested
that this night-time value results from the bombardment of micrometeorites.
Secondly, measurements of effective electron density obtained by rockets
(LIEN et al. , 1953) indicated that a bifurcation, or two maxima, in electron density
were present in the B-region. It is suggested that one maximum results from solar
radiation, the other from micrometeoric bombardment.
And finally, it is proposed that the sporadic E-clouds of ionization result from
micrometeorites. Although some correlation with meteor showers is found, the
major portion of the ionization results from micrometeorites with a fine structure
undetectable by radio probing. The cloud-like structure of the E-layer very
possibly re ults from clouds of micrometeorites. The amount of micrometeorites,
the penetration depth, the ionization efficiency, and the distribution of the micro
meteorites are all con. istent with the conditions required for such an explanation.
Granted the laboratory evidence for the ionization process is not adequate, but
the general physical reasoning based on ionization density measurements by radio
methods of lower visual magnitude meteorites leads to an order of magnitude that•
seems very promising.
In conclusion, it may be possible also to relate the meteoric bombardment of
the upper atmosphere to the high-latitude magnetic storms and aurorae. For this
process it is necessary that sufficient photoelectric effect from solar ultraviolet
radiation be ,Present to charge the micrometeorites and thereby allow some control
by the earth's magnetic field. This investigation will be described elsewhere.
REFERENCES
ARNOT, F. L., a nd I ILLIGA , J. C. (1936) Proc. Roy. S oc. A 156, 538
BERRY, H. W. (1942) Phys. R ev. 62, 378
BERRY, H. W. , VARNEY , R.H., and NEWBERRY, S. (1942) Phys. Rev. 61, 63
GREE NHOW, J. S., and HAWKINS, G . S. (1952) Nature, Lond. 170, 355
HEALE A, M. and HoU TERMANS , C. (1940) Phys. R ev. 58, 608
liERLOFSON , N. (1948) Phys. oc. R ep. Prog. Phys. 11, 444
LIEN, J . R. , MARCOU, R. J., ULWICK, J. C., McMORROW, D. R., BLUNDFORD, L., and HAYCO K, 0. C.
(1953) Phys. Rev. 92, 508

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 216 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.