LYC Book Club

Book Review Hidden Figures

June 8, 2017

Hal Beck
drewbeck@swbell.net

1
 Hidden Figures by Margot Shetterly
The Book
the Movie and
the Story of Katherine Johnson

Comments:
First, thanks for the invitation to join you in your review of Hidden Figures. The book and
movie have been a center of controversy in the local NASA community - even before the
publication. I have thoroughly researched the subject and have vast files. This Book Club review
gave me the opportunity to consolidate some of the information that I have accumulated in a
somewhat organized way.
A good question! - How did I get involved with the author of Hidden Figures?
I started working at Langley Research Center (NASA) in 1959 and worked with Katherine
Johnson. At the time of the writing of the book, she and I were the only remaining living
members of our organization. I joined NASA just out of college. When I went to work, Katherine
had been there for some time; she will be 99 years old later this year Im a little younger!
Margot Shetterly spent several years researching the book. In the process, she contacted a
number of NASA retirees - and Jerry Bostick gave her my name. We exchanged notes over many
months. The book was supposed to be a non-fiction account of the early days at NACA/NASA.
As I provided Margot with detailed historical facts, it was evident that there were many
significant inconsistencies. The timing was poor and it was a bit late to change course in the
publication of the book.
In this package, I have provided some rather detailed comments relative to the book, the
movie, and the biography of Katherine Johnson. Im sure that it is more that you ever wanted
to know about Hidden Figures.
I structured the package to encourage group discussion. Many of the items covered are
somewhat detailed and we dont have to dwell on the details. But, anyone interested can
delve into the subjects of interest at their leisure. If you have questions or comments, please
feel free to contact me. I would be most interested in your assessment.
Hal Beck
Email: drewbeck@swbell.net

2
Group Discussion items:
1. Introduction: General comments about the book and the movie
2. A brief biography of Katherine Johnson
3. Women in early NACA/NASA organizations
4. A timeline of major events within NASA related to the book
5. My relationship to Margot Shetterly, the author
6. Major discrepancies in the book
7. The movie Hidden Figures a Hollywood production
Attachments:
Appendix A - A biography of Katherine Johnson
Appendix B Excerpts from numerous articles and biographies
Appendix C email exchange with Margot Shetterly

3
Hidden Figures: The Book, the Movie and the Story of Katherine Johnson
1. Introduction
a. The book Hidden Figures was written by Margot Shetterly; the hardcover edition
of the book was published in 2016. On the cover, the author describes the content
as The American dream and the untold story of the black women mathematicians
who helped win the space race. The book concentrates on the struggle to overcome
the racial and gender boundaries that were so prevalent in the 1950s. Also, the
author describes in some detail the technical accomplishments of the three
individuals who worked at Langley in the mid to late 1950s.
b. The author intended to provide an historically accurate, well researched document
telling the story of the lives and careers of three women: Katherine Johnson,
Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson. They were three mathematicians who
overcame discrimination, as women and as African Americans while working at
Langley Research Center in Virginia.
c. In the discussion today, I have elected to concentrate on the life and career of
Katherine Johnson. Of the three women, Katherine (as depicted in the book) is most
closely related to the early days of the Space Program. Today, Katherines story is
quite controversial in the local (Clear Lake) NASA community. In the book, despite
Shetterlys intense research, there are numerous, gross inaccuracies and
exaggerations relative to Katherines contribution to early manned spaceflight. The
author relied heavily on personal interviews with Katherine; she also gathered
material from biographies written (in the past) by other authors. Her research
relative to the racial issues of the time was much more thorough.
d. The movie, in a way, is not as controversial as the book because it was produced as a
movie based on a true story. It was not presented as a documentary. The movie
is pure Hollywood. Its interesting that though the movie really boosted book sales,
it detracted from the books credibility. In my opinion, the movie production did not
benefit the author!
e. How did I get involve in the Hidden Figures controversy? - I started working at
Langley Research Center (NASA) in 1959 working in the same organization as
Katherine Johnson. We became close friends. I was quite familiar with Katherines
work and her contributions to NACA/NASA. At the time of the writing of the book, I
was the only remaining living member of the organization that she and I worked in
except for Katherine, of course, who will be 99 years old later this year.

It happened that a year or so ago, Margot Shetterly contacted a number of local

NASA retirees in an effort to gain information relative to the history of the formation
of the Space Task Group at Langley (in the late 50s). A colleague of mine, Jerry
Bostick, gave my name and contact information to Margot. Jerry knew that I had

4
 known Katherine. Margot immediately contacted me, and we began an active
dialog. I have been in frequent contact with the author mostly via email.
f. The movie Hidden Figures was of course based on Shetterlys book and was
nominated for three Oscars. The book was on the New York Times Non-fiction Best
Sellers list.
2. Katherine Coleman Goble Johnson a brief bio sketch
a. Catherine Johnson was born August 26, 1918 in White Sulphur Springs, West
Virginia. She attended West Virginia State College and graduated with honors in
1937 with a bachelor of science degree in mathematics. After graduation, she taught
school in a black public school in Virginia.
b. Catherine joined the NACA Langley Aeronautical Laboratory in June of 1953. She
initially went to work with a group called the West Computing Section - a group of
African-American mathematicians who performed mathematical calculations
transforming raw wind tunnel data into engineering parameters. They played a most
significant part in aeronautical research at Langley. The data reduction support
services allowed the aeronautical engineers to concentrate on research activities.
This was before the advent of the digital computer and the data reduction process
was done on the Friden or Marchant mechanical calculator and was very labor
intensive. Katherine initially worked under the supervision of Dorothy Vaughan.
c. After only two weeks working in the West Computing section, Dorothy arranged for
Katherine to work in the Maneuver Loads Branch of the Flight Research Division
where her position later became permanent. Her branch chief was Henry Pearson
(my boss also).
d. Katherines claim to fame: Katherines legacy includes an extraordinary social impact
as a pioneer in space science and computing that may be seen both from the honors
she has received and the number of times her story is presented as a role model to
aspiring young people. Since 1979 (before she retired from NASA), Johnson's
biography has had a place in lists of African-Americans in science and technology. In
2015, President Barack Obama awarded Johnson the Presidential Medal of
Freedom, citing her as a pioneering example of African-American women in Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). In 2016, NASA dedicated a new
Katherine G. Johnson Computational Research Facility at the Langley Research
Center. Dr. Johnson was included in the list of BBC 100 Women, a list of 100
inspiring and influential women from around the globe (list, 2016). Her awards
include the Astronomical Society of the Pacifics Arthur B.C. Walker II Award (2016);
a NASA Silver Snoopy award (2016); an Honorary Doctorate of Science from Old
Dominion University (2010); an Honorary Doctor of Science by the Capitol College,
Laurel, Maryland (2010); the West Virginia State College Outstanding Alumnus of
the Year (1999); and an Honorary Doctor of Laws, from SUNY Farmingdale (1998).

5
e. Pictures of Katherine:

Katherine at her desk taken around 1962

Katherine receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom

Presented Nov 24, 2015 - Katherine was 97 at the time

f. Katherine Johnson retired from NASA in 1986. She still lives in Newport News,
Virginia. She will be 99 years old, later this year.

6
3. Women in early NACA/NASA organizations
a. By 1931, Langley was generally acknowledged to be the world's premier aeronautical
research establishment. Through the next decades, NACA continued to expand its influence
in the field of aviation by recruiting top notch engineers and scientists to work in ever larger
and more advanced technological facilities. In the 30s and 40s, the threat and reality of a
new world war forced rapid development and testing of new aircraft. The Langley test
facilities ran three shifts a day, six days a week. The aeronautical engineers required a great
deal of support including mathematicians to assist with data reduction and
documentation. Langleys first computing pool started in 1935. Some of the employees
were classified as mathematicians, others were designated sub-professionals (less pay).
The importance of the computers cannot be overstated the success of Langley
aeronautical research depended upon the performance of these mathematicians. By 1934,
mathematical skills were harder to come by and Virginia Tucker (Langleys head computer)
visited colleges up and down the east coast recruiting new graduates.
b. Negro female candidates In 1941, an executive order was passed creating the Fair
Employment Practices Committee. About 1943, applications of qualified Negro female
candidates began coming in to the Langley employment office. Negro women would make
up the West Computing Section, a centralized computing office.
c. Katherine Johnson In 1953 Katherine joined NACA and joined the West Computer
pool but was almost immediately assigned to the Maneuver Loads Branch Henry
Pearsons organization. Later, there were a few other women in Pearsons
organization.
d. Women in the Space Task Group The Space Task Group was formed in the fall of
58. From the beginning, the need for math aide support was evident. [in the Space Task
Group, the mathematicians were called Math Aides] A great deal of trajectory work was
done on mechanical calculators, such as the Friden and later on the IBM computers. With
the limitations of computers (in those days) there was little or no automation in the data
reduction process; computer output files had to be processed by the math aides - manually.
By August of 59 John Mayers Mission Analysis Branch was formed within the STG. A section
within that branch was the Mathematical Analysis Section. There were five women in the
section who moved to Houston in 62; Shirley Hunt, Mary Shep Burton, Cathy Osgood,
Nancy Carter, and Pattie Leatherman. In particular, Cathy, Mary Shep and Shirley Hunt
Hinson played key roles in the Mission Planning and Analysis Division and Flight Operations
over the next decades.
- Shirley Hunt Hinson had a Masters degree in mathematics. She had a
background in computers and became the lead in the branch in managing the
branch computer and in software development. She was later re-classified as
an aero engineer. She later became a specialist in the development of
software for the Real Time Computer Complex (in the control center).
- Cathy Osgood had a degree in mathematics. She worked under the direction
of a senior engineer and became a trajectory specialist. She was later
reclassified as an aero engineer and helped in the development of space
rendezvous capability.

7
 - Mary Shep Burton had a degree in mathematics and quickly became a
supervisor of the math aide group. Later in Houston she managed a large
group of math aides that supported the Mission Planning and Analysis Division
in data reduction and planning product documentation. She was responsible
for the configuration management of operational mission plans for Mercury,
Gemini, Apollo and the space programs that followed.
- In August of 59, the Mission Analysis Branch had about 25 people of that, 6
were women.

Buildup of the Math Aide Group - In late 61, in preparation for the move to Houston, John
Mayer and the MAB management were busy with a transition plan. There was one item
of concern; it was apparent that at the rate that the branch was growing, the Math Aide
group was going to be badly understaffed. It was also apparent, with the pending move
to Houston, that it would be impractical to recruit additional para-professional staff from
the Langley area for relocation to Houston. It was decided to recruit support personnel
from Houston. Working with the STG personnel office, John Mayer and Mary Shep Burton
went to Houston, screened several applicants, and selected five qualified young women
to come to Langley on TDY for a couple of months of on-the-job training. In early 62 the
newly trained math aides moved back to Houston with other branch personnel. The
young Houston recruits were: Wanda Cheatham Cash, Patsy McCaskill, Pat Claffey,
Mary Ann Mitscherling, and Donna Sanford.
4. A timeline of major events within NASA - Here is a timeline of major events within NASA
during the early phase of Space Program development this timeline will help put events as
described in the book and the movie into perspective.
a. The formation of NACA: Though today's National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) was established in 1958, its historical roots reach back much
farther. In 1915, twelve years after the Wright Brothers' flight, the U.S. Congress
created the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, or NACA. At that time, the
airplane was in its infancy and much had to be done to transform it into a practical
and versatile vehicle. The NACA's mission was "to supervise and direct the scientific
study of the problems of flight with a view to their practical solution." NACA would
perform basic research that provided "practical solutions" to serious problems facing
the aircraft industry and the military air services.
b. Early Development of the Langley Research Facility: The authors of the NACA's
charter had left open the possibility of an independent laboratory. The NACA
pointed out in its first Annual Report for 1915 that civil aviation research would be in
order when the Great War ended. And, even before the war's conclusion, plans were
afoot to acquire a laboratory. The best option seemed to be collaboration in the
development of a new U.S. Army airfield, across the river from Norfolk, Virginia. The
military facility was named after Samuel Pierpont Langley, former secretary of the
Smithsonian; the NACA facility was named the Langley Memorial Aeronautical
Laboratory, -- much later, it became Langley Research Center.

8
c. NASA is formally established: On July 29, 1958, President Eisenhower signed the
National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 establishing the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA). NASA was formally opened for business on
October 1, 1958. NACA was no more.
d. First open discussion of a manned ballistic satellite: Only three days after
Eisenhower signed the Space Act, Bob Gilruth presented preliminary plans for a
manned ballistic satellite; his remarks amounted to the first open discussion of the
technical aspects of what was soon to become Project Mercury.
e. The Beginning of the Space Task Group: In the fall of 58, after the establishment of
NASA and after the acceptance of the preliminary plan for Project Mercury, Gilruth
began to put together a more formal organization for the implementation of the
manned satellite project. Gilruth began to put together the Space Task Group (STG)
organization. The STG would be located at Langley, but STG management would
report directly to Abe Silverstein in Washington, the head of all space projects at
headquarters.
f. The transfer of key Langley personnel to the STG: In November 1958, Gilruth
arranged for the transfer of 35 Langley personnel to the STG. These people formed
the nucleus of the new manned space program (Mercury). The STG was located on
the east side of Langley Field; Langley Research facilities were primarily located on
the west side.
g. Langley Research Center support to the STG: Besides absorbing the loss of talented
personnel to the Space Task Group - which exploded in size from the original nucleus
of 35 people in November 1958 to about 350 people in July 1959, (over half of
whom came from Langley), Langley also took on much of the direct responsibility for
getting Mercury off the ground.
h. Growth of the STG: Over the next few years, the STG grew and quickly became fully
operational. Project Mercury became official on November 26, 1958. Within a few
months, NASA began to conduct the first test flights of the program; the first flight
was Little Joe 1, launched from Wallops Island on August 21, 1959. Between August
of 1959 and May of 1963, Project Mercury spanned twenty unmanned test flights
and six manned missions.
Of the six manned missions, two were Mercury-Redstone suborbital missions and
four were Mercury-Atlas orbital missions. The manned missions spanned a two-year
period from May 61 until May of 63. The first manned mission was MR-3 launched
on May 5, 1961. It was the first United States manned spaceflight, piloted by
astronaut Alan Shepard. MR-3 was a 15-minute suborbital flight.
i. Mission planning for Project Mercury: All official mission planning for the Mercury
missions was the sole responsibility of the Mission Analysis Branch of the Space Task
Group. The branch chief was John Mayer. That organization later became the
Mission Planning and Analysis Division within the Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC,
Houston).

9
 j. Mission Control for the early Mercury missions: NASA's Mercury Control Center
(MCC) at Cape Canaveral was the United States' first mission control center for both
unmanned and manned space programs. Big Joe 1 launched on September 9, 1959
was the first Mercury mission controlled from the MCC. Later, all the Mercury-
Redstone and Mercury-Atlas missions, the unmanned Gemini 1 and Gemini 2
missions, and the manned Gemini 3 mission were controlled from there. The first
manned flight controlled from the MCC (Cape) was Alan Shepards flight, Mercury-
Redstone 3, which lifted off on May 5, 1961.
k. The Manned Spacecraft Center is established in Houston: After President Kennedy
set the national goal on May 25, 1961, of landing men on the Moon by the end of
the 1960s, it became clear to NASA administrator, James E. Webb, that Gilruth
would need a larger organization and facilities to administer US manned space
programs. A site selection team was formed to select a location for the new NASA
facility. On September 19, 1961 Webb announced that the new manned spacecraft
center would be built in Houston, Texas.
l. The Manned Spacecraft Center: On November 1, 1961, the Space Task Group was
officially redesignated the Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC).
m. 1962, the original STG moves to Houston: In early 1962, the STG moved from
Langley to Houston. The entire organization occupied temporary facilities while the
MSC was being built at Clear Lake.
Sidenote of interest: This is perhaps something of an exaggeration, but as the
story goes, less than a month after Webb's announcement, a Houston journalist
went on an inspection tour of the site planned for the spacecraft center. He found
cowboys driving herds of cattle to new pasture, a crew of surveyors from the
Army Corps of Engineers mapping the prairie near Clear Lake and fighting snakes,
and a lone wolf hunter with the carcass of a freshly slain wolf. The hunter said he
had just seen several wild turkeys, a fox, and many deer tracks. (Reference:
Houston Chronicle article, Oct. 11, 1961).
5. My relationship to Margot Shetterly, the author of Hidden Figures Serious dialog
between Marot and I began in April of 2016. Here is an excerpt from an initial email
received from Margot on April 29, 2016.
Jerry Bostick gave me your contact information. I'm a writer currently working
on a book entitled Hidden Figures, which tells the story of the African American
women who worked at NACA/NASA Langley from 1943 through the 1970s. One
of the central figures in the book is a woman named Katherine Johnson, who is
best known for having coauthored with Ted Skopinski the report that defined the
trajectory math that was used in John Glenn's orbital mission MA-6. She was
awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in November of 2015.

I've been able to track down and review most of the documents involved in that

10
 mission, and I have interviewed Mrs. Johnson at length, but I was hoping that you
might be available to talk by phone, so that I could ask you some of the
outstanding questions that I have and get your memories of the time leading up
to that day. Mr. Bostick mentioned that you worked with Mrs. Johnson at Langley
before transferring to the Manned Spacecraft center in Houston.
We continued to exchange notes during 2016. In a number of published biographies
Katherine was credited with incredible accomplishments. Margot sent me technical
questions relative to the major items (See Appendix C). The timing was poor; her book
was well on its way and a lot of water had gone under the bridge. In November of 2015,
Obama had presented Katherine with the Presidential Medal of Freedom award at the
White House. The NASA Administrator, Charles Bolden, had prepared the formal
paperwork for the Award complete with a statement of her accomplishments (See
Appendix B, Item 1.). Though it was too late for a major course change, I sent Margot
very detailed notes on the timeline of events at Langley in the 1958-to-1962 timeframe.
The data included events leading up to the formation of the Space Task Group (STG) and
the Mission Planning Organization within the STG. Also included detailed information
relative to the mission planning responsibilities a statement of exactly who did what
and when (See Appendix C, Item B). I suggested that Margot carefully review my
input, then beat her story against the facts that I provided, and make necessary
corrections. She quickly responded, but I could tell that the book was too far along. She
did however write an epilogue and included a (very) few of my notes to soften some
of the words in the major text. Below in paragraph 5. I have included a summary of the
major, significant inconsistencies. I knew that unfortunately, History was being
rewritten! Margot and I soon discontinued communications. She did invite me to the
dedication of the new Katherine G. Johnson Computational Research Facility at the
Langley Research Center. I did not attend.
6. Major discrepancies in the book the following notes cover the major discrepancies in the
book Hidden Figures. My notes relate (mostly) to the history of mission planning for
manned spaceflight and my experience at Langley Research Center and the Space Task
Group.
a. Mercury mission planning responsibility: All official mission planning and analysis for
the Mercury missions was the sole responsibility of the Mission Analysis Branch
(MAB) of the Space Task Group. The MAB was formed in the fall of 58 and was
headed up by John Mayer. In the early months, Mayer was supported by his
colleagues back on the Langley side, with trajectory studies and analyses. These
colleagues soon transferred to the STG and were key players in the formation of the
MAB and in the early Mercury mission planning. Former colleagues included: Ted
Skopinski, Carl Huss, and Bill Tindall. No official Mercury mission planning products
were developed external to the MAB.
b. Racial or gender barriers within Katherines organization: It was my first-hand
experience that Katherine was highly respected by her peers and by her boss, Henry

11
Pearson there were no racial or gender barriers. The book states that Pearson
was not a big fan of women in the workplace That was not my perception.
Pearson and I were colleagues and I got to know him well. He had the highest regard
for the women in the organization (especially Katherine) the success of his group
depended upon the reliable mathematicians for vast amounts of data reduction. He
was very respectful and appreciative of Katherines skills often dropped by her
desk and shot the bull I sat at a desk next to hers and was aware of the most
cordial relationship. Also, I never did get the idea that Katherine was at all sensitive
to barriers due to race or gender. Her closest friend was a young white woman.
Katherine always worked as a team player and was very good at what she did.
Prior to the advent of the digital computer, aeronautical research at Langley (and
elsewhere across the country) depended on vast amounts of data reduction and
data processing. Without the mathematicians, research would have been severely
hampered.

12
c. The Friden Calculator: In the years prior to the digital computer, the Friden, Monroe
and the Marchant mechanical calculators were indeed the workhorse of the science
community. They were used extensively (almost exclusively) in the aeronautical
research organizations at Langley Research Center. In the 59 time frame the Mission
Analysis Branch relied heavily on the mechanical calculators for routine calculations.
They were only capable of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division. The
operator depended on log tables, trigonometric tables, etc. for engineering
functions. Computations were labor intensive, but many operators developed highly
proficient capability. When I went to work at Langley, Katherine encouraged me to
become proficient in the use of the Friden I became another human computer.
She was an excellent operator and a very persistent teacher.
Sidenote of interest:
The Friden Calculating Machine Co., Inc., was founded in the 1930's by
Swedish-born Carl M. Friden. Once customers purchased and started
using the machines, Friden calculators quickly gained the reputation of
being the 'Cadillac' of calculators. In fact, early Friden advertising
literature self-proclaimed the machines as the "Aristocrat of Calculators".
The calculator could automatically perform all four math functions.

The Friden Model STW10

The Monroe calculator was also popular prior to the advent of the digital
computers. The Monroe Calculator Company was a maker of adding
machines and calculators founded in 1912. The most famous and
successful machine was the "Series L", produced in the 30s and was in
production up until the 60s. There were several variants and models -
almost all manual models had an electrically driven version.
d. Conceptual mission design for Mercury: Prior to the formation of the Space Task
Group and the Mission Analysis Branch in November of 58, significant conceptual
mission design work was done on the Langley side within the Flight Research
Division (FRD) and within the Pilotless Aircraft Research Division (PARD). Clay Hicks

13
 was one of the first people to address the early concepts for Mercury flights. Clay
Hicks went to work at NACA in 58. Prior to his formal appointment, he worked as a
co-op for a few years. One of his first major assignments was to support the
development of the early conceptual design for the Manned Satellite Project
(later, named Mercury). This involved determining the feasible orbital parameters,
or characteristics such as orbital altitude, orbit inclination, etc. The trajectory design
was constrained by launch vehicle and spacecraft systems capability/constraints and
by operations requirements/constraints. Clay began working with a number of
mission planning specialists in the Flight Research Division including: John Mayer,
Carl Huss, Ted Skopinski, Charlie Allen, and Bill Tindall. These guys were developing
rather simple algorithms for use in orbital design and analysis. In particular, Ted
developed a two-body conic program to determine the optimum launch azimuth to
maximize tracking and communications coverage. The two-body equations were
readily solvable using the Friden calculator. Katherine Johnson worked with Ted in
the software development and in the analyses. The two co-authored the technical
note Determination of Azimuth Angle at Burnout for Placing a Satellite Over a
Selected Earth Position, by Ted Skopinski and Katherine Johnson; published
September 1960. The program was used, prior to the publication of the Technical
Note, in the conceptual design of the Mercury orbits. A basic standard orbit was
used for the Mercury missions (e.g., the inclination was 32.5 degrees)
e. Mission planning responsibility for Alan Shepards or John Glenns flight: Katherine
had nothing to do with Alan Shepards or John Glenns flight. The official mission
planning for all Mercury missions was the sole responsibility of John Mayers group
in the STG the preflight trajectory data was under strict configuration control
within the STG and was classified Confidential. It should be noted that trajectory
people all over the country were perhaps trying to replicate the preflight data using
their bench programs, but those trajectory computations had nothing to do with
the official mission planning. The following is from an interview with Katherine:
When interviewed for the book Hidden Figures, Johnson discussed her activities
in Project Mercury and the Apollo missions. She recalled doing trajectory analysis for
Alan Shepards May 1961 Mercury mission, Americas first human suborbital
spaceflight. By early 1961, the Space Task Group was fully operational. Again, the
trajectory analysis was done in the Mission Analysis Branch, not in Katherines
organization (on the Langley side). Katherine also claimed that she was involved with
the mission planning for Apollo. That is impossible. Apollo mission planning was
done within the Mission Planning and Analysis Division of the Manned Spacecraft
Center in Houston. The major mission planning for Apollo was done in the mid to
late 60s.
f. John Glenns mission data: As the story goes, John Glenn was not confident that the
official preflight trajectory data was accurate (??). According to Katherine, she
overheard a phone conversation from John Glenn to Katherines supervisor

14
 (supposedly, Henry Pearson). Glenn asked the engineers to get the girlKatherine
Johnsonto run the same numbers through the same equations that had been
programmed into the computers, but by hand, on her desktop mechanical
calculating machine. If she says theyre good, she remembers the astronaut
saying, then Im ready to go. Its not clear how that story evolved. I am certain that
John Glenn never questioned the accuracy of the Mercury trajectory data. The STG
was a tightly knit organization, if Glenn had a question, or doubt, relative to any
aspect of the mission, he would have gone to Chris Kraft or Robert Gilruth or John
Mayer. Mayers mission planning group, was responsible for the preflight mission
data. That group had generated the mission data for all the previously flown
Mercury missions (unmanned and manned). The trajectory specialists in the Mission
Analysis Branch of the Space Task Group developed and used the official trajectory
programs, including a program called CO3E which was a high-fidelity trajectory
simulation package. The software package was developed within the MAB (by John
Shoosmith) specifically to support Mercury planning. Also, Glenns nominal
trajectory had been previously flown on Mercury-Atlas 5 an orbital test flight with
chimpanzee Enos onboard. The trajectory program could be cross-checked and
verified with real flight data.
Note: Glenns flight, Mercury-Atlas 6 was the third human spaceflight for the
U.S. and was launched February 20, 1962. In early 1962, the Space Task Group
personnel were in the process of transitioning from Langley to Houston. The
mission planning personnel supported the mission real-time in the Mercury
Mission Control Center at the Cape. Katherine was still working for Henry
Pearson at Langley Research Center. She never was an employee of the STG. She
had nothing to do with Glenns flight data.
g. Katherines viewing of the overflight of Russias Sputnik I: Katherines memory of the
viewing of Sputnik is somewhat flawed Sputnik I was launched in Oct 57 The
satellite was only 23 inches in diameter and was not visible by the naked eye it
would not have been visible even with binoculars (had you known exactly where in
the sky to look). It was visible through major observatories around the world.
Katherine perhaps remembers hearing the Radio pulses from the satellite. Sputnik I
was tracked by amateur radio operators around the world the radio signals were
widely broadcast and there was a great deal of interest in the radio signal
broadcasts. Katherine probably remembers hearing the beep-beep on public radio
stations - as the satellite crossed the US.
h. Katherines involvement with Apollo 11: In several of the biographies, it is stated
that Katherine calculated the trajectory for the 1969 Apollo 11 mission. She also
computed backup navigation charts for the astronauts to use in case of computer
failure. First of all, the design and generation of the translunar trajectory for a lunar
landing mission is not at all a simple operation. Translunar trajectory design required
a most accurate, high-fidelity simulation of the earth-moon system, a simulation of

15
 the Saturn SIV-B translunar injection burn, and a simulation of the spacecraft
systems. The lunar landing mission simulation was developed within MPAD at MSC,
Houston. It was called the Apollo Reference Mission Program it was under
development for years. That software was used to develop all lunar landing mission
reference trajectories for the Agency.
As to the second point, back-up procedures for use in real-time in the case of
contingencies were developed by the flight control team and by the astronauts (here
at MSC). Detailed procedures were defined for all contingency operations and were
simulated on the flight simulators (at MSC). Katherine perhaps remembers that she
and Al Hamer (at Langley) developed celestial sphere star-charts from data derived
from the nautical almanacs, but that was an exercise and was not a part of
operations procedures planning at MSC.
i. Katherines involvement with the Apollo 13 aborted mission: Katherine states in a
number of biographies that in 1970, Apollo 13s aborted mission to the Moon made
use of her earlier research on backup parameters and charts, enabling the crew to
safely return to Earth. Apollo 13 was a near tragedy - due to an explosion onboard,
the mission had to be aborted and the flight control team had to quickly devise
methods and procedures for a safe return of the flight crew. All major Apollo
spacecraft contractors were on hand to support the flight controllers. It would be
difficult to estimate how many people were involved in the contingency planning
and operations - either directly or indirectly. Flight simulators were used to check
and verify crew procedures and operations. The mission planning team in the
backrooms ran countless what-if scenarios. The flight directors and NASA high
level management were making countless operations decisions. All of this was done
in the Mission Control Center at MSC. It is not clear how that story of Katherines
involvement came to be!
j. Katherines involvement with the Apollo lunar ascent module launch time
determination: When asked to name her greatest contribution to space exploration,
Katherine said that her calculations helped synchronize Project Apollos Lunar
Lander with the moon-orbiting Command and Service Module. It is hard to imagine
how such a story could come into being. The nominal liftoff time was calculated
preflight by lunar rendezvous specialists and was calculated in realtime using
specialized ascent/rendezvous software developed within MPAD and implemented
by IBM in the Real Time Computer Complex within the Mission Control Center.
Within MPAD, Dave Alexander and Ed Lineberry were key lunar rendezvous
specialists. The lift-off time, subsequent rendezvous maneuvers, and CSM orbit were
all of course co-dependent. The sequence of rendezvous maneuvers was optimized
within the performance capability of the spacecraft systems. The ascent and
rendezvous simulation required modeling the ascent engines, ascent guidance, the
rendezvous and the docking maneuver sequence. There was little margin for error.

16
 The simulation also required an accurate modeling of the lunar geo-potential. That
modeling in itself, took years of analysis and model development (within MPAD).
7. The movie Hidden Figures
a. General comment: The movie perhaps was entertaining but to me, it was absurd and
nothing more than poor fiction. In the beginning of the movie a statement was made
that the movie was based on the story of real-life characters. In other words, the
producers had total freedom in the writing of the script. The story was now nothing
more than fiction, and the book could now be Hollywood-ized. The book on the
other hand was intended to be an accurate historical account (that didnt happen
though, when it came to Katherine Johnsons story). The movie did nothing to add
credibility to the parent book Hidden Figures.
b. Departures from reality in the movie: Because the movie was fictional, its not
reasonable to point out discrepancies relative to an accurate historical account; but
here are a few notes:
- Katherine Johnson never worked in the STG (east side) she always
worked at Langley Research Center
- The lack of acceptance in the workplace (racial or gender barriers)
was grossly exaggerated. Katherine was highly regarded, respected
and well liked. In the movie, she was not accepted or respected by
her colleagues- (but that was supposedly within the Space Task Group
on the east side of Langley).
- The composite character who was supposed to be head of the STG
was like no one that I ever came in contact with. Perhaps he could
have been a fictional composite of Kraft/Mayer??
- It was implied that the control center for Mercury was at Langley. The
control center of course was at the Cape.
- The scene with Katherines attending the high-level meeting with the
head of NASA and the DOD management was absurd.
- The phone conversation from John Glenn was ridiculous beyond
imagination so far beyond reasonable protocol.
- The bathroom issue was ridiculous. It would be amazing if the
character had to walk all the way across Langley Field to go to the
bathroom and in the rain! Also, by the time that the STG was
operational, the bathrooms were not segregated. (they perhaps were
in the early to mid - 50s)
- Many other items, but its only fiction!

17
Appendix A - Biography of Katherine Johnson
This is a recently written biography. Katherine is to be honored at an upcoming ceremony at
Langley. Langley is celebrating their centennial and in the ceremony former outstanding
employees are being honored. I have highlighted certain items of interest.
Katherine G. Johnson
Katherine Coleman Goble Johnson (1918 ) is an African-American mathematician who made
valuable contributions to critical aeronautics and space programs of the NACA and NASA.
Overcoming the constraints of segregation and gender, she progressed from mathematical tasks,
such as computing experimental flight and ground-test data using a mechanical Frieden
calculator for the NACA, to the application of spacecraft trajectories and spacecraft control
calculations for NASA. Her life, 33-year career, and contributions are discussed in the best-selling
2016 book Hidden Figures by Margot Shetterly and the Academy-Award nominated motion
picture of the same name. Her story has become widely known and is a stimulus for the interests
of young people in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) activities across
the nation.
Katherine Johnson was born in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia, and quickly advanced
through high school because of her intense interest and demonstrated expertise in mathematics.
She attended West Virginia State College where she graduated with highest honors in 1937 with
a bachelor of science degree in mathematics and French, and took a job teaching at a black public
school in Virginia. When West Virginia decided to quietly integrate its graduate schools in 1939,
she was one of the first three African-Americans selected to desegregate West Virginia State
College. After the first session, however, she decided to leave school and start a family with her
husband James F. Goble. When their three daughters got older, she returned to teaching.
At the age of 34, she learned that the NACA Langley Aeronautical Laboratory was hiring a group
of African-American mathematicians with teaching experience to perform mathematical
calculations that transformed raw data that had been obtained using instrumentation into final
engineering parameters. The approach to data reduction would off-load technical engineers
from such tasks, allowing them to concentrate instead on research activities and plans instead of
data reduction. She began her career at Langley in the West Computing section in the summer
of 1953 under the supervision of fellow West Virginian Dorothy Vaughan. The pool of women
mathematicians performing data reduction calculations were known as computers. Just two
weeks into Katherines tenure in the office, Dorothy Vaughan assigned her to a project in the
Maneuver Loads Branch of the Flight Research Division, where her position soon became
permanent. She spent the next four years analyzing data from flight tests, and worked on the
investigation of a plane crash caused by an encounter with wake turbulence. She was assertive,
asking to be included in editorial meetings (where no women had gone before). As she was
wrapping up this work, her husband James died of cancer in December 1956. In the then-
segregated NACA workplace, Johnson and other African-American women in the computing pool

18
were identified as colored computers and subject to workplace restrictions involving working,
eating and using restrooms apart from their white peers, until the segregated computing pool
was disbanded when NASA was formed in 1958.
The launch of the Soviet Satellite Sputnik in October 1957 changed aerospace historyand
Katherine Johnsons life. In 1957, Johnson provided some of the descriptive material for a 1958
document Notes on Space Technology, a compendium of a series of 1958 lectures given to staff
members by engineers in the Flight Research Division and the Pilotless Aircraft Research Division
(PARD). Engineers from those groups formed the core of the Space Task Group (STG), NASAs first
official foray into space research, and Katherine, who had worked with many of them since
coming to Langley, came along with the program as the NACA became NASA later that year.
While not a member of the STG, she developed an interest in calculating trajectories of spacecraft
and satellites.
She experienced a highlight of her life when she married her second husband, Colonel James A.
Johnson, in 1959. At that time, her organization changed names to the Flight Mechanics Branch
of the Aero-Space Mechanics Division
In 1960, Johnson and engineer Ted Skopinski coauthored a report entitled Determination of
Azimuth Angle at Burnout for Placing a Satellite Over a Selected Earth Position, using basic two-
body equations for an orbital spaceflight in which the landing position of the spacecraft is
specified. Such equations could be solved using a Frieden calculator. It was the first time a woman
in the Division had received credit as an author of a research report. She also was coauthor of a
report in 1962 on the orbital behavior of the first communications satellite, Echo I (a 100-ft-
diameter inflatable balloon). That effort was a pioneering contribution because it was the first
satellite whose orbit was affected by solar pressure.
When interviewed for the book Hidden Figures, Johnson discussed her activities in Project
Mercury and the Apollo missions. She recalled doing trajectory analysis for Alan Shepards May
1961 Mercury mission, Americas first human suborbital spaceflight. She also remembered how,
in 1962, as NASA prepared for the orbital mission of John Glenn, the complexity of the orbital
flight had required the construction of a worldwide communications network, linking tracking
stations around the world to IBM computers in Washington, DC, Cape Canaveral, and Bermuda.
The network provided tracking and communications of Glenns spacecraft from blast off to
splashdown. According to Johnson, Glenn asked engineers to get the girlKatherine Johnson
to run the same numbers through the same equations that had been programmed into the
computers, but by hand, on her desktop mechanical calculating machine. If she says theyre
good, she remembers the astronaut saying, then Im ready to go. Glenns flight was a
success, and marked a turning point in the competition between the United States and the Soviet Union
in space.

After Project Mercury, she joined the Space Mechanics Division, and calculated the trajectory for
the 1969 Apollo 11 flight to the Moon, and computed backup navigational charts for astronauts

19
in case of electronic failures. In 1970, Apollo 13s aborted mission to the Moon made use of her
earlier research on backup parameters and charts, enabling the crew to safely return to Earth
four days later. Later in her career, as a member of the Flight Dynamics and Control Division, she
worked on the Space Shuttle program, the Earth Resources Satellite, and plans for a mission to
Mars. Her final projects before retirement included analysis of guidance and control of large
flexible structures.
When asked to name her greatest contribution to space exploration, Johnson highlights the
calculations that helped synchronize Project Apollos Lunar Lander with the moon-orbiting
Command and Service Module. She authored or coauthored 13 research reports during her
career.
Katherine Johnson retired in 1986. Her legacy includes an extraordinary social impact as a pioneer
in space science and computing that may be seen both from the honors she has received and the
number of times her story is presented as a role model to aspiring young people. Since 1979
(before she retired from NASA), Johnson's biography has had a place in lists of African-Americans
in science and technology. In 2015, President Barack Obama awarded Johnson the Presidential
Medal of Freedom, citing her as a pioneering example of African-American women in Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). In 2016, NASA dedicated a new Katherine G.
Johnson Computational Research Facility at the Langley Research Center. Dr. Johnson was
included in the list of BBC 100 Women, a list of 100 inspiring and influential women from
around the globe. Her awards include the Astronomical Society of the Pacifics Arthur B.C. Walker
II Award (2016); a NASA Silver Snoopy award (2016); an Honorary Doctorate of Science from Old
Dominion University (2010); an Honorary Doctor of Science by the Capitol College, Laurel,
Maryland (2010); the West Virginia State College Outstanding Alumnus of the Year (1999); and
an Honorary Doctor of Laws, from SUNY Farmingdale (1998).
Katherine Johnson and her husband reside in Newport News, Virginia, and have two daughters:
Joylette, and Katherine. A third daughter, Constance is deceased. Katherine Johnson is now 98
years old.
CITATION:
In recognition of contributions to the development of methodologies for analysis of manned
mission (from Mercury to Apollo) and satellite (Echo) trajectories, and dynamic control of large
space structures.

20
Appendix B: Excerpts from numerous articles and biographies:
The following are excerpts from a number of articles relative to Katherine Johnsons
accomplishments. I have highlighted words and phrases which are total fabrications, or gross
exaggerations. Many of the items are totally absurd! Note: It is interesting to Google the name
Katherine Johnson you will get countless articles of her amazing accomplishments. Here are
just a few excerpts:

1. NASA Statements on Katherine Johnsons Medal of Freedom

Note: Charles Bolden was a former astronaut and the NASA Administrator under Obama.
The following is a statement from NASA Administrator Charles Bolden about former NASA
mathematician and physicist Katherine Johnson being awarded the Presidential Medal of
Freedom Tuesday:
Katherine Johnson once remarked that even though she grew up in the height of segregation,
she didnt think much about it because I didnt have time for that dont have a feeling of
inferiority. Never had. Im as good as anybody, but no better.
The truth in fact, is that Katherine is indeed better. Shes one of the greatest minds ever to
grace our agency or our country, and because of the trail she blazed, young Americans like my
granddaughters can pursue their own dreams without a feeling of inferiority.
Katherines legacy is a big part of the reason that my fellow astronauts and I were able to get
to space; its also a big part of the reason that today there is space for women and African-
Americans in the leadership of our nation, including the White House.
The entire NASA family is both proud of and grateful to Katherine Johnson, a true American
pioneer who helped our space program advance to new heights, while advancing humanitys
march of progress ever forward.
The following is a statement from NASA Deputy Administrator Dava Newman:
The reach of Katherine Johnsons leadership and impact extends from classrooms across
America all the way to the moon. Katherine once remarked that while many of her colleagues
refrained from asking questions or taking tasks further than merely what they were told to do,
she chose instead to ask questions because she wanted to know why.
For Katherine, finding the why meant enrolling in high school at the age of 10; calculating the
trajectory of Alan Shepards trip to space and the Apollo 11s mission to the moon; and
providing the foundation that will someday allow NASA to send our astronauts to Mars. She
literally wrote the textbook on rocket science.

21
We are all so fortunate that Katherine insisted on asking questions, and insisted on relentlessly
pursing the answers. We are fortunate that when faced with the adversity of racial and gender
barriers, she found the courage to say tell them Im coming. We are also fortunate that
Katherine has chosen to take a leading role in encouraging young people to pursue education in
the STEM disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and math.
Katherine was born on National Equality Day. Few Americans have embodied the true spirit of
equity as profoundly or impacted the cause of human exploration so extensively. At NASA, we
are proud to stand on Katherine Johnsons shoulders.
For more information about Johnsons remarkable NASA career, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/feature/katherine-johnson-the-girl-who-loved-to-count
2. Notes from one of the biographies of Katherine Johnson
Katherine G. Johnson is a pioneer in American space history. A NASA mathematician, Johnson's
computations have influenced every major space program from Mercury through the Shuttle
program. Johnson was hired as a research mathematician at the Langley Research Center with
the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), the agency that preceded NASA,
after they opened hiring to African-Americans and women. Johnson exhibited exceptional
technical leadership and is known especially for her calculations of the 1961 trajectory for Alan
Shepards flight (first American in space), the 1962 verification of the first flight calculation
made by an electronic computer for John Glenns orbit (first American to orbit the earth), and
the 1969 Apollo 11 trajectory to the moon. In her later NASA career, Johnson worked on the
Space Shuttle program and the Earth Resources Satellite and encouraged students to pursue
careers in science and technology fields.
3. The Presidential Medal of Freedom Award
Katherine Johnson was awarded the U.S. Medal of Freedom at an award ceremony at the White
House on Tuesday November 24, 2015. There are probably other awardees who are/were
equally unqualified . BUT . This certainly provides a new perspective relative to the U.S.
Medal of Freedom
4. Notes on the upcoming Medal of Freedom award ceremony:

Hall of Fame catcher and noted linguist Yogi Berra will receive a
posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom along with 16 other notable Americans, the
White House said Monday. The list includes another baseball great Willie Mays as
well as musicians Gloria and Emilio Estefan, retiring Sen. Barbara Mikulski, classical
musician Itzhak Perlman, composer Stephen Sondheim, film director Steven Spielberg,
and singers James Taylor and Barbra Streisand. Another posthumous medal will go to
long-time U.S. Rep. Shirley Chisholm, D-N.Y. Note: a distinguished group indeed!

22
 "I look forward to presenting these 17 distinguished Americans with our nation's
highest civilian honor," Obama said in a statement. "From public servants who helped us
meet defining challenges of our time to artists who expanded our imaginations, from
leaders who have made our union more perfect to athletes who have inspired millions
of fans, these men and women have enriched our lives and helped define our shared
experience as Americans,"

5. Here are a few excerpts from articles related to Katherines career:

Katherine Johnson was a pioneer scientist at the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA). She determined the trajectories for America's first manned
space flights in 1961 and 1962. In 1969 her work was instrumental in landing men on
the moon. The following year she helped bring the ill-fated Apollo 13 safely back to
Earth. An early computer expert, Johnson was considered to be one of the most brilliant
mathematicians at NASA. (an incredible statement!!)
"We were pioneers of the space era. We worked in secret for about three years, often
without knowing exactly what the total thrust of our work wasYou had to read
Aviation Week to find out what you'd doneEverything was so newthe whole idea of
going into space was new and daring. There were no textbooks, so we had to write
themWe created the equations needed to track a vehicle in space."

"We needed to be assertive as women in those daysassertive and aggressive. I was

working with Ted Skopinski and he wanted to leave and go to Houstonbut Pearson,
our supervisorwho was not a fan of womenkept pushing him to finish the report we
were working on. Finally, Ted told him, Katherine should finish the report, she's done
most of the work, anyway. So Ted left Pearson with no choice; I finished the report and
my name went on it, and that was the first time that a woman in our division had her
name on something." Her groundbreaking report provided

23
Appendix C email exchange with Margot Shetterly
There are two parts to this attachment. Part (A) is an email that I got from Margot; she asks
some specific questions relative to her understanding of Katherines involvement in the space
program. She also lists some of her assumptions and asks for clarification on particular items.
Her questions are interesting and revealing. In Part (B), I answer her questions and provide
facts. I describe who exactly did what, when and how in the early days of the space program. I
recommended that she beat her story against the true history and make modifications as
required.
(A) An email from Margot
From: Margot Lee Shetterly [mailto:margot.lee@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2016 6:22 PM
To: Harold Beck <drewbeck@swbell.net>
Subject: MA-6 calculations

Hal-- One of Katherine Johnson's big moments came when she coauthored the "Azimuth Angle" report
with Ted Skopinski, and another when she was asked to check the output of the computer prior to John
Glenn's orbital flight MA-6.

I was able to track down the "Calculated Preflight Trajectory Data for Mercury-Atlas Mission 6"-- this is
Project Mercury Working paper 217. Most of the document pages are number runs (attaching here the
first 40 pages so you can see what it looks like).

Here are my assumptions:

(1) This trajectory data is based at least in part on the orbital equations set out in Katherine and
Skopinski's Azimuth angle report;
(2) This data was calculated using one of the Goddard IBM 7090s, programmed with the trajectory
equations from the report, and any other equations that other groups were working on that would have
been necessary for guidance and tracking during the flight (although in the original 1959 report, it
appears they used an IBM 704 to crunch the numbers).
(3) Input data for the "test" is set out on page 1-1 in Section 1.1, "Description of Test", and those are the
input parameters used to generate the computer run in this working paper.
(4) When Katherine Johnson was asked to check the numbers, she was given the same input and
equations that were being fed into the computer, and required to calculate all numbers by hand, using
her Friden (or Monroe or Marchant).

(5) Katherine's check of MA-6 was at the tail end of her involvement with MA-6, after that, most of the
mission planning became the full-time job of the Houston-based math aides (Mary Shep Burton,
Catherine Osgood et al)

Here are my questions:

(1) When would Katherine Johnson have performed this check?

24
--How close to launch?

--What input parameters was she given to do the check, and who would they have come from?

(2) She remembers being in the office (1244, upstairs from the Hangar which I think had just been
renamed the Aero Space Mechanics Division) and a phone call came in from John Glenn to one of the
engineers who was there in the office at the time (You? William Aiken? John Mayer? I believe this was
before the group had moved to Houston, though three years after the Space Task Group had set up
offices on the East side). She remembers overhearing a conversation, the gist of which was that the
engineer in question was being asked to "get the girl to do it"-- ie ask your (human) computer to double
check the output that has come out of the IBM, as a part of the preflight checklist. One thing I have read
in many of the oral histories is that the computers were not completely reliable in the beginning. I've
also read in more than one place that the astronauts were particularly distrustful of computers (there
was an interesting section on this in the book Digital Apollo).
(3) Katherine remembers it having taken her "a day and a half", to do the hand check of the computer
run, does that square with what you remember?

Margot

Margot Lee Shetterly

Author of Hidden Figures-- William Morrow/September 2016
margot.lee@gmail.com
www.margotleeshetterly.com
Phone: (305) 433-8051

(B) My response to Margots email

(To Margot) - The following notes are in specific response to the email that you sent yesterday. There
are nine major items addressing: the attachment, Working Paper 217; a response to your assumptions;
and answers to your questions.

(1) Relative to the attachment, Working Paper 217: Working Paper 217, Project Mercury Calculated
Preflight Trajectory Data for Mercury-Atlas Mission 6 (MA-6), was part of the preflight documentation
that was generated in support of MA-6. It was part of a typical reference trajectory documenting the
final results of the mission planning and analysis that was done in the months prior to the mission
launch date (for MA-6 the launch date was Feb 20, 1962). Such a set of documentation was done to
support each flight. It was used to define the nominal mission plan, including the launch window, orbit
inclination and altitude, orbit lighting conditions, the crew timeline, maneuver sequences, spacecraft
attitude timeline, etc. The nominal profile was also used for all sorts of contingency planning (abort
planning and alternate mission planning). The official reference trajectory was also used to configure
the world-wide network for a specific mission, e.g., ship placement, etc. Within NASA it was the official
and primary roadmap for mission operations. The reference trajectory, related analyses and trajectory
studies were the official responsibility of the Mission Analysis Branch (John Mayers group) of the Space
Task Group; the data was of course under strict configuration control. This particular document was the
responsibility of Clay Hicks, who was project engineer for MA-6 (note the signature page). The document
was approved for distribution by Robert Gilruth (for this particular document Paul Purser signed for
Gilruth).

25
The software program used in the precise trajectory simulation for the MA-6 trajectory was called
CO3E which was developed in 1959 in the Mission Analysis Branch by John Shoosmith. The following is a
description of the CO3E development and utilization.

The development of Mercury Orbital Mechanics Tools CO3E

An early software project within the Branch was the development of a detailed mission
simulation program to be used in planning all of the essential flight information, including:
ground track, lighting, tracking coverage, spacecraft attitude profile, landing site locations,
retrofire time/attitude, etc.

In April 59, John Shoosmith joined the Space Task Group and was assigned to the Mathematical
Analysis Section of the Mission Analysis Branch. John was one of the exceptional engineers who
had come down to Langley from A.V.Roe, Canada.

John began the development of a primary tool to be used by the trajectory and mission planning
analysts. He is credited with the early development of the C03E program that was used for
Mercury mission planning and analysis. The CO3E software was initially developed on the IBM
704 at Langley, but the program would be used for years within MPAD. Soon after the start of
the CO3E project, John was promoted to a management position and Wilber Boykin took over
the program and later revised it for the IBM 7094 computer.

Sidenote of interest: For those interested from an historical perspective, heres a

reference for documentation for the CO3E program: Revised Three Degree of Freedom
Particle Trajectory Program CO3E for the IBM 7094 Computer - NASA Technical Note TN
D-3463; Boykin, Wilbur R. - NASA. The document was published in 1966 and is available
on Amazon.com

Parallel to the CO3E program development, Charlie Allen was developing orbital analysis
programs for the Bendix G-15. These programs were used in trajectory studies to calculate
parameters for elliptic orbits, e.g., altitude, velocity, flight path angle, apogee radius, perigee
radius, and other parameters. The programs were useful in validating results from the primary
C03E trajectory program.

After developing the computer programs required to support Project Mercury, the Branch was
ready for the mission planning tasks. As time went on the C03E program had to be augmented
with a number of output-parameter options. Mercury spacecraft characteristics were
incorporated to provide the capability to calculate accurate ground track data, tracking
acquisition data, retrofire times/attitude, landing area data, and other ancillary information. The
program was later used by the Mission Planning and Analysis Division of MSC for many years. It
was primary for Mercury and was used extensively for Gemini.

The very important math aide group under the most capable management of Mary Shep Burton was
responsible for the preparation of the reference mission documentation and the quality control of the
related planning products. Mary Sheps team included Shirley Hunt (Hinson) and Cathy Osgood. (They
later moved to Houston and worked in the organization for many years). All three frequently went to

26
the Cape and supported the realtime operations for the Mercury flights and generated the post-flight
reports. The post-flight reports were a measure of mission success, documenting any off nominal system
performance, etc.

(2) Relative to assumption 1: This trajectory data is based at least in part on the orbital equations set out
in Katherine and Skopinski's Azimuth angle report.

Response: As stated earlier, the primary trajectory tool, the workhorse for the Branch, was the CO3E
program developed initially by John Shoosmith. CO3E was a high fidelity trajectory program that
integrated the spacecraft equations of motion taking into account external perturbations. CO3E was
used for all of the Mercury flights.

The Skopinski algorithm was a two-body orbital mechanics solution. The equations were closed form
and did not require an integration engine and were readily solved using the Friden calculator. Its
important to note that the two-body solution was most frequently used in orbit mechanics studies. It
was most convenient for parametric analyses and required little computer resources. The two-body
solution provided reasonably accurate results and was easily calculated. When the MAB moved to the
STG we had an IBM 1620 and two-body studies were a natural for the smaller computer. The CO3E
required the IBM 704/7094. We also used the Friden calculators extensively for quick-look studies.

(3) Relative to assumption 2: This data was calculated using one of the Goddard IBM 7090s,
programmed with the trajectory equations from the report, and any other equations that other groups
were working on that would have been necessary for guidance and tracking during the flight (although in
the original 1959 report, it appears they used an IBM 704 to crunch the numbers).

Response: The CO3E software was initially developed at Langley within the STG on the IBM 704 by a
Branch engineer, John Shoosmith. It was later installed on the IBM 7094. The branch engineers used
CO3E extensively for mission planning and analyses, especially for higher fidelity simulations. The
Goddard computers were used in near-real-time for orbit determination. During Mercury, the Control
Center at the Cape did not have computers. During the missions, all support calculations were done
using the Goddard computer resources.

(4) Relative to assumption 3. Input data for the "test" is set out on page 1-1 in Section 1.1, "Description
of Test", and those are the input parameters used to generate the computer run in this working paper.

Response: Section 1.1 provides the orbit insertion state vector - or the cut-off conditions from the
Mercury-Atlas launch trajectory. One could take this state vector and propagate it and obtain the
resulting orbit. The fidelity of the propagation would depend upon the software simulation it could be
a two-body sim or a more accurate numerical integration simulation.

(5) Relative to assumption 4: When Katherine Johnson was asked to check the numbers, she was given
the same input and equations that were being fed into the computer, and required to calculate all
numbers by hand, using her Friden (or Monroe or Marchant).

Response: as stated above, Section 1.1 provides the orbit insertion state vector or the cut-off conditions
from the Mercury-Atlas 6 launch trajectory. Katherine was probably given the input (insertion
parameters) from the working paper but she did not use the equations of motion in the CO3E software
spec (given the same input and equations). She used the input conditions for the two-body simulation

27
to calculate the basic orbit parameters. The results would be approximate but would be reasonably
close especially if you are only propagating for a few orbits. Sidenote: In general, you dont validate a
high-fidelity simulation using a two-body solution but rather the other way around, i.e., you use an
accurate simulation to check your approximate solution to see how adequate the approximation is.

(6) Relative to assumption 5. Katherine's check of MA-6 was at the tail end of her involvement with MA-
6, after that, most of the mission planning became the full-time job of the Houston-based math aides
(Mary Shep Burton, Catherine Osgood et al)
Response: The launch date for MA-6 was Feb 20, 1962 - a couple of months prior to the Branch move to
Houston. The detailed planning for MA-6 was done in the months prior to the launch date (late in 61
and early 62). Clay Hicks was the project engineer and was responsible for the generation of the
nominal trajectory and for all of the ancillary data. Again, CO3E was the primary software tool. The work
was certainly not an individuals responsibility but rather a team activity. Carl Huss, John Mayer, Ted
Skopinski and other engineers were all involved - and indeed the math aide group played a most
important role in data reduction, ancillary data generation, data validation and documentation. The
Mission Analysis Branch worked the problem from the conceptual profile definition up through real-time
support at the Cape. Branch members (including Mayer and Huss) spent a great deal of time at the Cape
supporting the mission, real-time and with postflight analyses and postflight documentation. Question:
what is meant by the tail end of her involvement with MA-6?

(7) Relative to Question 1: When would Katherine Johnson have performed this check?

--How close to launch?

--What input parameters was she given to do the check, and who would they have come from?

Answer: If she used the input insertion vector from the Working Paper 217 (and I guess that this is a
good assumption) then she must have done the calculations no sooner than early January 1962. The
working paper was published On December 28, 1961.The launch date for MA-6 was Feb 20, 1962. A
possible scenario: someone in Pearsons organization probably had access to the classified document,
Working Paper 217, and provided Katherine with the input parameters for use in her calculations.
Perhaps someone like Bill Aiken or Henry Pearson just asked her to do the computations as a matter of
interest (to see how well the two body solution would compare??)

(8) Relative to question 2: . and a phone call came in from John Glenn to one of the engineers who
was there in the office at the time (You? William Aiken? John Mayer? . she remembers overhearing a
conversation, the gist of which was that the engineer in question was being asked to "get the girl to do
it"-- i.e. ask your (human) computer to double check the output that has come out of the IBM.

Answer: Question 2 is really a challenge!

Part 1: Im not sure who got the phone call. I assume it was around early January 62. Skopinski, Mayer
and I had previously transferred to the STG and we were preparing for the move to Houston in a couple
of months. The call could have come in to Henry Pearson or perhaps Bill Aiken Im not sure though
when Bill left Pearsons organization to take a position in Washington?

28
Part 2. I doubt very seriously that John Glenn called Pearson and asked for validation of the official NASA
Operational Flight Profile. If for any reason he had a question or an issue, he would naturally have gone
to Gilruth, Kraft, John Mayer, Carl Huss or Clay Hicks. The Space Task Group was a relatively small team
at that time and everyone worked together with absolute open communication. Glenns office was
down the hall from Mayers office. Within the Space Task Group there was a formal process for the
validation of software and the data used in operations there was a high confidence level even in the
early days.

In my years working with the flight crew I have only experienced unbounded trust by the flight crew
guys in the competence of the mission control team and in the flight planners. Perhaps (?) some of the
astronauts later on did question computers but if they did so, they were definitely in the wrong
business. The success of all the missions was absolutely tied to computer capability and software
validation and that is true to this day! Just look at the complexity and reliability of the onboard
computers! With what I know about John Glenn it seems totally out of character to make such a call. I
think the most likely scenario is the one mentioned above: someone in Pearsons organization probably
had access to the classified document, Working Paper 217, and provided Katherine with the input
parameters for use in her two-body calculations. Perhaps someone like Bill Aiken or Henry Pearson just
asked her to do the computations as a matter of interest (to see how well the two-body solution would
compare??). But the two-body solution would absolutely never be used to validate a high-fidelity
trajectory simulation!

(9) Relative to question 3. Katherine remembers it having taken her "a day and a half", to do the hand
check of the computer run, does that square with what you remember?

Answer: Thats certainly a reasonable amount of time for the task. Katherine was quite familiar with the
two-body equations. Setting up the spreadsheet in preparation for the computation was a bit time
consuming but Katherine was one of the best when it came to the Friden operation. She could out-
perform almost everyone in the organization. (Incidentally, one of her top competitors was Bill Aiken,
one of the senior engineers he was a whiz indeed). The number of calculations of course depends
upon the chosen time steps or granularity of the solution. It should be noted that the Friden
computation is not actually a hand check of the computer run. There are levels of accuracy in
trajectory propagation: the two-body is one level (and represents an approximation) and the numerical
integration is the second level. But indeed, there is no true mathematical model to predict the actual
position of a spacecraft there are uncertainties in upper atmosphere densities, physical characteristics
of the spacecraft, etc. That opens the door to a discussion on orbit determination, earth modelling,
etc.for another day.

29
30