This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force North American military history task force United States military history task force Spaceflight Stub‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles Stub This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I'm not entirely sure this article is accurate, since it seems to conflate the Gemini B/MOL project (which existed), with Blue Gemini/MODS, which never got funded. For example, see the discussion of Blue Gemini here[1].

Can someone with a better reference library than my own shed any light on this? -- Kaszeta 22:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(deleted, I can't read)

I propose merging Military Orbital Development System into Blue Gemini. The MODS article is currently a one-paragraph stub and has been since 2006. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

support merge, though both articles are really poor-sourced. Artem.G (talk) 10:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• support, Blue Gemini is the better name since it was to be the first step in the Manned Orbital Development System, which never moved further. (sdsds - talk) 01:13, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Out of curiosity, what was the source for Military? (sdsds - talk) 01:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  MOL Compendium, pp. 5, 8, 9, 20. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Excellent, thanks! The primary source use by the Compendium, referenced in endnote 23 is: Memo, McNamara to Zuckert, 22 Feb 62, subj: AF Manned Mil Space Prog. (Perhaps this reference entered the compendium from https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA606606.pdf?) In any case all the different names used pre-MOL could be covered in the Manned_Orbiting_Laboratory#Background section, and aren't really needed in Blue Gemini. (sdsds - talk) 07:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I found another reference: Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL) Information Plan. In Manned Orbiting Laboratory#Background we could paraphrase what it says:

  Study of military manned space concepts by the Air Force goes back to about 1958. Since then, various concepts and design proposals were studied. These included the Military Test Space Station (MTSS); NASA's Manned Orbital Space Station (MOSS); the Military Orbital Development Systems (MODS) --- which provided specific hardware proposals and clearer concepts --- and a National Orbital Space Station (NOSS).

  I don't think that Manned Orbiting Laboratory needs to say any more than that. But it begs the question: what should be said in Military Orbital Development System and Blue Gemini? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I added a citation (without linking it to any specific text) to an article by Dwayne Day. The section of that article titled, MODS to Blue Gemini lays out a pattern the article here could follow. (sdsds - talk) 09:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That's great! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]