Documents / Official release

Gemini 4 Experiment Debriefing, 1967

National Aeronautics and Space Administration · 1965 · 224 pages · text from the file's own layer

This NASA file from 1965 combines Mission Operation Report M-913-65-04 on the Gemini 4 (GT-4) flight with related correspondence. Memoranda from the Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight describe the planned four-day mission with James McDivitt and Edward White, including a spacewalk, a rendezvous with the booster second stage and thirteen experiments. Later letters and telegrams from NASA's Manned Space Science office concern the astronaut debriefing and requests for GT-4 photography and film for scientific analysis.

From the source:Release of 2026-06-12 Incident: June 3-7, 1965, Low Earth Orbit. Gemini IV was the second crewed mission of the Gemini series. Astronauts James McDivitt and Edward White successfully completed the four-day flight between June 3 and June 7, 1965. The mission included the first American spacewalk. This collection of documents contains a transcription of the astronauts recounting their observations of bright particles outside the spacecraft, dated circa June 25, 1967, on pages 78-81, and page 101.

  • p. 20 …Figure 14 shows one of the photos taken by Gordon Cooper which is similar to the…
  • p. 91 3Belt 17 And I personally asked Glen, Cochran, Schirr a , a nd Cooper if they say…
  • p. 99 …Were Cooper and :·ic.:hi r.ra i n the d.::tyti!ne '! Go.w a…
  • p. 100 …And when Cooper woke up , he was mostly in the daytime. He (not iced) out on…
  • p. 132 …The point streaked through space on its Cooper had repaired his of closest approach to the…
  • p. 133 …tha~ barring Cooper reported that he had the day's assigned experi- At that time Cooper…
  • p. 134 …You look real Cooper and Conrad got a fine strange readouts" from their each, "pretty nearly…
  • p. 135 …Strong told the engi- perform." Cooper continued thge ah 3~~et b't the 32d with…
' . .
Belt 18 9
it ' in the proce sing - must be in the lens under the film. The - down
at the bottom part ki nd of duplicates and lets magnitude look on top and
that's really not fair . It doesn't reflect down and what you see is only
on top .
Did you see any difference between moonsets and moonrises?
No, I dido ' t .
Did you see any (classing) .......... of t he moon?
The elongation that you see?
No. I didn't . I didn ' t notice any.
I thought the interesting thing, too, about the moon is that clarity - t hat
I
you see it ' s quite clear whe·n you l ook at it here, but also it just looked
l i ke a little silver globule going down. It just goes right down. You
have no scanning or anything associated with it .
And no ....... , either.
That 's right, it goes right down . And also, your vieWing of the stars
beyond my cpmment on this earlier doing this. It doesn't obscure your
vieWing - the moon being up there doesn ' t particularly bother you as far
as the ( stars?) ...... .
Then you could always tell where the horizon was because of the stars
which you know appeared.
And then the airglow.
Could you also tell from the stars? ...... sort of a supplemental picture
of the horizon from the stars?

Cases discussed

About this file

Official release, from the pursue collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 224 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.