50 years ago the last Saturn rocket rolled out of NASA's Vehicle Assembly Building
- Reference: 1742994910
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/03/26/50_years_since_last_saturn/
- Source link:
The super heavy rockets were built and used for nine crewed flights to the Moon from December 1968 to December 1972, as well as for launching US space station Skylab in 1973.
[1]
The final Saturn has left the building.... Saturn IB rolls out of the Vehicle Assembly Building in March 1975 ( Pic: NASA ) - click to enlarge
As for the launch vehicle pictured above, the Saturn IB was the final in a series that began with the Saturn V check-out vehicle, followed by 12 flight Saturn V rockets for the Apollo Moon program and a final Saturn V to launch Skylab in 1973. Four of the smaller Saturn IB rockets, including three for Skylab missions and the one pictured above – for the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project mission – were also stacked. A further Saturn IB was assembled for the Skylab rescue mission but was not needed and so not launched.
The March 1975 [2]rollout of this final Saturn IB happened relatively early in the life of NASA's cavernous VAB, which the agency finished building less than a decade previously, in 1966. In July 1975, NASA used the rocket to launch the first international human spaceflight collab – the [3]Apollo-Soyuz test project .
As for what was rolled out of the building in March that year, the Saturn IB rocket sat atop a "milkstool" and was attached to its Launch Umbilical Tower (LUT) as the crawler-transporter carrying it made its way to the launch pad. The 39-meter (128 ft) tall pedestal allowed the smaller Saturn IB rocket to use the same facilities on the mobile launcher as the larger Saturn V.
[4]
The rocket itself comprised a Saturn IB first stage and a Saturn IVB second stage. As well as the Command/Service Module (CSM), the payload also included a docking module for the joint US and USSR mission.
Absolutely VAB-ulous
Fifty years later, the VAB continues to endure and is currently being used to stack NASA's Space Launch System (SLS). Earlier this week, technicians [5]completed attaching the stacked solid rocket booster to the core stage, preparing the vehicle for the upcoming crewed Artemis II mission around the Moon.
The launch vehicle stage adapter, interim cryogenic propulsion stage, Orion stage adapter, and the Orion spacecraft itself will be lifted atop the core stage over the coming weeks.
[6]SpaceX hits 400 launches of Falcon 9 rocket
[7]Testing spacecraft material the Sandia way: Setting it on fire with mirrors
[8]Stargazing with the Beaverlab Finder TW2
[9]Bugging out: 53 years since humans first drove a battery-powered car on the Moon
A hint of the future is visible beyond the VAB, next to the launchpads, where SpaceX is assembling the launch tower for its Starship vehicle. Starship has yet to reach orbit, and its last few test flights have [10]not gone well , but SpaceX intends to launch it from Florida at some point in the future.
The VAB does not feature in SpaceX's plans though. While it hosted the Space Shuttle after that final Saturn rocket rolled out, its future is all about the SLS.
[11]
However, considering the structure was initially built for stacking Saturn rockets, please raise a glass to commemorate half a century since the final rollout of a Saturn-class rocket from the cavernous building. ®
Get our [12]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/03/25/saturn_1b.jpg
[2] https://www.nasa.gov/history/50-years-ago-final-saturn-rocket-rolls-out-to-launch-pad-39/
[3] https://www.nasa.gov/apollo-soyuz-test-project/
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z-QyskBn7zjH6q00VzHklQAAA5g&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.nasa.gov/blogs/missions/2025/03/24/nasas-artemis-ii-core-stage-integration-complete-at-kennedy/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/29/400_falcon_9_launches/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/16/testing_spacecraft_material_the_sandia/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/17/beaverlab_finder_tw2/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2024/08/03/moon_buggy_feature/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/07/spacex_starship_mission_fail/
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z-QyskBn7zjH6q00VzHklQAAA5g&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Consider the glass
Hear ! Hear !
Congratulations to the lowest bidder !
Re: Consider the glass
“I guess the question I'm asked the most often is: "When you were sitting in that capsule listening to the count-down, how did you feel?" Well, the answer to that one is easy. I felt exactly how you would feel if you were getting ready to launch and knew you were sitting on top of two million parts -- all built by the lowest bidder on a government contract.”
― John Glenn
The Best
Saturn V was the most elegant rocket ever; I sorely regret never catching a launch. Sorry, Starship doesn't work for me (but I also like old British sports cars so I may be warped).
So, what's developed in the last 50 years?
Yes, 50+ years ago, the Saturn rockets worked, taking people to the moon and back again.
50 years later, now, we seem to be stuck with basic engineering issues on a successor to Saturn. What happened to the skills and experience of the 1960s and 1970s that building working rockets has become so difficult once again?
Re: So, what's developed in the last 50 years?
What happened to the skills and experience of the 1960s and 1970s that building working rockets has become so difficult once again?
Building rockets has always been so difficult - and is likely to remain so difficult well into the future. The joke is that rocket science is easy - it's rocket engineering that's hard.
You've got a massive explosion, barely under control, being pushed through tremendous forces at increasingly ludicrous speeds - and if you've got people on top, then you'd like to keep those people alive. It's bloody difficult.
Also the Apollo budget was absolutely enormous. $25.8 billion - which from a quick lazy search equates to $257bn inflation adjusted to 2020. That's fine for a Cold War prestige project, but you don't normally get that kind of political backing and so even government struggles to spend that kind of cash on spaceflight - let alone prviate companies. The only way NASA is going to see that kind of budget again is if we find an asteroid on a collision course, and the politicians realise that Bruce Willis isn't available and even Clint Eastwood and Tommy Lee Jones admit they're too old.
Finally, SpaceX are trying something even harder than the Apollo program. They're trying to make their spacecraft re-usable. Obviously we've got better metallurgy than back in the 60s - plus more accurate manufacturing techniques and computer modelling. But everything in a rocket engine is operating at extreme temperatures, pressures and levels of mechanical stress. You need to make it strong enough to cope with that, but also light enough to get a decent payload in orbit. SpaceX have to make theirs even stronger, to survive through multiple uses, but also have to get a decent payload to orbit.
Re: So, what's developed in the last 50 years?
The people who had the skills and experience to design and build those rockets 50-60 years ago are probably all dead by now. That might have something to do with it.
An engineer who was in their mid-20s in the 1970s would be nudging 80 today.
Shameless plug
I listened to the BBC World Service's '13 Minutes to the Moon' again last week. An excellent podcast. They did two series, the first focused on the 13 minutes of lunar descent during Apollo 11, and the second series on Apollo 13 (the one I listened to). They're both great, I think the second series is slightly better. Really enjoyed listening to it a second time.
It is interesting how much less bureaucratic NASA was in 1970. They were pushing key decisions down to a very low level in order to find solutions to get the astronauts back alive. And gave a lot of leeway to the flight controllers.
I could listen to the mission control audio from Apollo 11 all day. Can't remember the one who shouts "Go" though.
Consider the glass
raised!