12.16.18 SB_Q

APOLLO 50TH ANNIVERSARY SECTION

One small step One giant leap for mankind

MOONSHOT AT 50: WHY DID WE GO, WHY DID WE STOP, WHAT DID WE GAIN AND WILL WE GO AGAIN? COMMENTARY

BY JOHN M. LOGSDON

W

Author of “John F. Kennedy and the Race to the Moon”

hy did we stop exploring space?

Isn’t it time to start again?

The trips to Earth orbit astronaut’s have made in the 45 years since the last Apollo mission have produced valuable scientific and technological payoffs, but they were not exploration. Michael Collins, the Apollo 11 astronaut who remained in orbit as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the moon, has frequently commented that the lasting justification for human space flight is “leaving” — going away from Earth to some distant destination.

Apollo was space exploration at its best. Humans for the first time traveled to and explored another celestial body. It was a grand success, with positive impacts that have persisted to the present day. Fifty years later, the world is again celebrating that success. The Apollo missions to the moon will forever be a milestone in human experience, and particularly in the history of human exploration and perhaps eventual expansion. Its most lasting significance may well be simply that it happened.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 12

NASA

The first steps on the moon were viewed by a global audience and helped create a sense that the United States was a nation capable of achieving great things, with people deserving of respect and admiration, Logsdon says.

Inside EXCLUSIVE Q&A: REVISIT HOW AMERICA WON THE SPACE RACE. PAGE 2-5

BE INSPIRED: JOURNEY ALONG WITH APOLLO 11. PAGES 13-17

DISCOVER: WHAT’S NEXT FOR NASA IN SPACE EXPLORATION. PAGE 21

2

DECEMBER 2018 |

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

Winning space race

Q&A: Why Americans journeyed to the moon COMMENTARY BY JOHN M. LOGSDON

By the end of 1959 the newly created NASA had identified landing on the moon as the long-range goal of its human spaceflight program. What led to that choice, and what impacts did it have?

Even before it opened its doors for operation on Oct. 1, 1958, the new civilian space agency had won a fight with the Air Force for the lead role in human spaceflight. NASA soon began planning for Project Mercury, which had the very basic objective of learning whether a human could survive the experience of orbital flight and could perform simple tasks while in space.

The space agency in April 1959 then began to develop a long-range plan, with one issue being what should be the ultimate goal for its human spaceflight program. NASA published its plan in December 1959; it called for “manned flight to the moon” at some point “beyond 1970.” Eighteen months before President John F. Kennedy decided to send Americans to the moon, NASA had already decided to pursue that objective, seeing it as a worthy end in itself, not a step to another goal.

With a lunar landing set as the goal, NASA engineers could begin planning for the intermediate steps and studies needed to eventually mount such a program. A key was developing

a three-person spacecraft capable of being in space for 14 days, either to test systems in Earth orbit as a first step toward a space station or to fly around the moon, but with no capability for landing. NASA announced its post-Mercury plan in July 1960. It designated the new undertaking as Project Apollo.

That NASA was thinking about sending astronauts to the moon did not get a positive reaction at Dwight Eisenhower’s White House. Eisenhower’s science advisory committee was asked to take a look at NASA’s planning. The committee estimated that a lunar landing program would cost between $26 billion and $38 billion. Eisenhower’s reaction was that “he couldn’t care less whether a man ever reaches the moon” and that he was not about to “hock his jewels” to finance a lunar trip, as Spanish monarch Queen Isabella had done to support the voyages of Christopher Columbus.

As John F. Kennedy prepared to become president, the outlook for NASA’s human spaceflight program was thus very uncertain. The new young president would have to decide what path to pursue.

ABOVE: President John F. Kennedy attends a briefing during a tour of Launch Complex 34 at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. In attendance, front row from left, James Webb, NASA administrator; Vice President Lyndon Johnson; Kurt Heinrich Debus, director of NASA’s Launch Operations Center; President Kennedy; Major General Leighton Davis, commander of the Air Force Missile Test Center; and Robert McNamara, U.S. secretary of defense.

Why did President Kennedy become so personally and politically invested in having the United States get to the moon before the Soviet Union?

LBJ LIBRARY

What was the context for the April 20, 1961, memorandum from President Kennedy to Vice President Johnson that was directly linked to the decision to go to the moon?

The space review that Kennedy requested on April 14 would have to wait. The next morning, planes flown

by U.S. pilots began bombing airfields in Cuba, recently transformed into a communist society ruled by dictator Fidel Castro. Within 36 hours, the attempt to overthrow the Castro government was what one observer characterized as a “perfect failure.”

As that failure became clear, the White House was consumed by how to react. Kennedy speechwriter Ted Sorensen described Kennedy as “anguished and fatigued” and “in the most emotional, self-critical state I had ever seen him.” The president’s brother Robert told Kennedy’s top staff, “All you bright fellows . . . got the president into this. We’ve got to do something to show the Russians we are not paper tigers.” While John Kennedy had already made the basic decision to enter the space race, the Bay of Pigs fiasco certainly reinforced his commitment to win that competition.

Kennedy had decided the prior December to give Vice President Lyndon Johnson the space policy

portfolio, but it was not until April 20 that Congress approved the change in legislation to make the vice president, rather than the president, chairman of the National Aeronautics and Space Council. Kennedy met with Vice President Johnson on April 19, they agreed that Johnson would head the space review he wanted. Sorensen drafted a memorandum from Kennedy to Johnson, dated and signed the next day. It spelled out in very clear terms the focus of the review.

The key paragraph in the one-page memo asked, “Do we have a chance of beating the Soviets by putting a laboratory in space, or by a trip around the moon, or by a rocket to land on the moon, or by a rocket to go to the moon and back with a man?”

Kennedy made very clear his intent, asking, “Is there any other space program which promises dramatic results in which we could win?”

“Space program,” “dramatic results,” and “win”— these were unambiguous requirements for the response Kennedy was seeking.

It was not long before the answer came back – go to the moon.

After several men turned down the position of NASA administrator, President Kennedy offered the position to James Webb, a veteran Washington bureaucrat, telling Webb that he wanted someone at NASA to deal with “great issues of national and international policy.” But when Webb came to the White House in late March with a request for a 30 percent increase in the NASA budget over what outgoing President Eisenhower had requested, Kennedy demurred. He was not yet ready to make such a commitment to an accelerated space effort; he approved only a 10 percent increase aimed at increasing the lifting power of the new Saturn booster, saying he wanted to wait until the fall 1961 review of the next year’s space budget to make decisions on the direction of the space program.

Events forced an earlier decision. The White House in the early morning hours of April 12, 1961, learned that Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin had completed a one-orbit space flight and returned safely to Earth. The Soviet achievement did not come as a surprise; Kennedy had been warned the previous day that the flight was imminent. During a press conference on the afternoon of April 12, he said, “No one is more tired than I

am” of the United States being second in space, but that it was intent “to go in other areas where we can be first and which will bring perhaps more longrange benefits to mankind.”

The positive international and domestic reaction to Gagarin’s flight quickly changed Kennedy’s mind about the importance of space achievement.

He met with the NASA leadership and science adviser Jerome Weisner on the late afternoon of April 14, seeking how best to respond to the Soviet feat.

Kennedy was told that with a sufficient commitment the United States had a chance to beat the Soviets to the moon.

At the end of the meeting, Kennedy said: “When we know more, I can decide whether it [going to the moon] is worth it or not. If somebody can just tell me how to catch up.”

Once the decision to try to reach the moon by the end of the 1960s was made, what were the key technical choices that made it possible to achieve that goal?

In an undertaking of the complexity of Apollo, there were of course myriad crucial choices. In my view, the most important of them were: • The choice of the lunar orbit rendezvous approach to the mission. This involved separating the Apollo spacecraft into two parts. One would carry the crew from Earth to lunar orbit and return them to Earth; the other would carry them from lunar orbit to the moon’s surface and back, then rendezvous with the “mother ship.” When this choice was made in 1962, no space rendezvous had been attempted, and making such a rendezvous 240,000 miles away from Earth essential to getting the astronauts home was a very risky choice. But it allowed a moon voyage to require only one Saturn V launch.

• The 1963 switch in testing philosophy that mandated an “all up” approach

in which, rather than testing each of the three stages of the Saturn V booster separately, all three were tested together.

This switch saved months, perhaps even more than a year, of schedule time leading up to the first lunar landing.

• The mid-1968 decision to send the first crew-carrying Saturn V mission, Apollo 8, into lunar orbit. This mission was originally intended to be a test of the lunar excursion module in high Earth orbit. But the lunar module was months from being qualified for launch, while the command and service module, redesigned after the Apollo 1 fire, was ready for use. By taking the bold decision to insert a rapidly invented lunar orbit mission into the schedule only six months before its launch, Apollo’s managers made it likely that the program would achieve President Kennedy’s goal of landing on the moon “before this decade is out.”

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

|

DECEMBER 2018

3

was mission critical After public and private remarks emphasizing the need to get to the moon before the Soviet Union, on September 20, 1963, President Kennedy suggested that the journey to the moon become a cooperative U.S.-Soviet undertaking, so that the first people to travel to the moon “would not be representative of a single nation, but representatives of all our countries.” What was behind this dramatic shift in space strategy?

NASA

During the 1950s, émigré German rocket engineer Wernher von Braun had become a widely known popularizer of the potentials of space travel, even as he and his rocket team developed military missiles and space launch vehicles under Army sponsorship. They were transferred to NASA management in 1960.

What role did von Braun play in the choice to go to the moon and in carrying out that decision?

NASA

ABOVE: “We intend to become the world’s leading spacefaring nation,” President Kennedy told a crowd of 40,000 on Sept. 12, 1962, at Rice Stadium in Houston.

Which speech on space exploration by President Kennedy was more politically impactful in the race to the moon: his ‘Urgent National Needs’ address to Congress in 1961 or his 1962 speech at Rice University, and why?

President John F. Kennedy made two major space speeches early in the Apollo program. One, made to a joint session of Congress on May 25, 1961, announced Kennedy’s decision to go to the moon.

The other, made to a sweltering crowd of 40,000 in Houston’s Rice University football stadium on the morning of Sept. 12, 1962, set out his reasons for making that decision. The 1961 speech was the more influential, since it was in it that Kennedy pledged to land Americans on the moon “before this decade is out.”

Many incorrectly remember the Rice speech as the occasion at which Kennedy initiated the lunar landing program. The recommendation emerging from the review he had ordered in April urged Kennedy to set a lunar landing as a national goal, because the prestige associated with that accomplishment was “part of the battle along the fluid front of the Cold War.” Kennedy on May 10, 1961, decided to accept that recommendation, and made announcing that decision the centerpiece of his “second State of the Union” speech two weeks later.

Congress and the American public quickly supported his choice, and the mobilization of financial and human resources required for Apollo got underway.

To get a sense of progress being made on Apollo, Kennedy in Sep-

tember 1962 visited space program facilities in Florida, Alabama, Texas, and Missouri. As part of that inspection tour, he made his Rice University speech, intended to justify the decision he had made 17 months earlier. The most memorable line in his Rice speech was...

‘We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.’

It is little known that that line originated in a speech draft submitted to the White House by NASA. Kennedy speechwriter Ted Sorensen incorporated NASA’s suggestion into what stands as John Kennedy’s most eloquent explanation of “the decision last year to shift our efforts in space from low to high gear,” which he characterized “as among the most important decisions that will be made during my incumbency in the office of the presidency.”

As Vice President Johnson organized the rapid space review that Kennedy had requested in his April 20, 1961, memorandum, one of the several people he consulted was Wernher von Braun.

This was a bit unusual, since in formal terms von Braun was several layers down in the NASA organization, but von Braun’s very visible public profile and his prior interactions with Johnson had made him a valued source of advice.

Von Braun followed his meeting with Johnson with an April 29 letter. In it, he provided answers to the five questions in the Kennedy memorandum. Most crucially, he told the vice president, “We have von Braun a sporting chance of sending a 3-man crew around the moon ahead of the Soviets (1965/1966)” and, “We have an excellent chance of beating the Soviets to the first landing of a crew on the moon . . . A performance jump by a factor of 10 over their present rockets is necessary to accomplish this feat.” Von Braun added, “While today we do not have such a rocket, it is unlikely that the Soviets have it. Therefore we would not have to enter a race toward this obvious next goal in space exploration against hopeless odds favoring the Soviets.”

The self-assured Von Braun did not have to add that the fact that he was working for the United States made it the favorite in the race to build a moon rocket. And, indeed, he and his associates were able to succeed in developing the massive Saturn V booster, while the competing Soviet heavy lift rocket was never successfully launched.

While many others in NASA contributed to the decision to go to the moon and to the success of Project Apollo, von Braun’s 1961 advice that the United States could prevail in a rocket-building race provided needed technical confidence to underpin President Kennedy’s policy decision to set a lunar landing as a national goal. His effective management of Saturn rocket development during the 1960s was essential to getting Americans to the moon “before this decade is out.” Without von Braun’s contributions, it would have been harder to meet that challenge.

John Kennedy realized how close to a nuclear confrontation the United States and the Soviet Union had come during the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

In its aftermath, he was determined to do all in his power to lessen the tension.

Kennedy laid out what he called a new “strategy for peace” in a June 1963 commencement speech at American University. A first step in implementing that strategy was the August 1963 signing by the United States and the Soviet Union of a limited nuclear test ban treaty.

Kennedy’s UN proposal to turn Apollo into a cooperative program was intended as a second step in his strategy. Writing to an influential congressman a few days after his speech, he said that “our readiness to cooperate with others enlarges the international meaning of our own peaceful American program.”

There was no immediate Soviet response to Kennedy’s cooperative offer, and on Nov. 12, 1963, Kennedy ordered NASA Administrator James Webb to follow up on that offer by developing “a program of substantive cooperation with the Soviet Union . . . including cooperation in lunar landing programs.” Ten days later Kennedy was dead, the victim of an assassin’s bullet.

Was there actually a race to the moon? Did the Soviet Union also have a lunar landing program aimed at getting humans to the moon before the United States?

The Soviet Union did not make a decision to send cosmonauts to the moon until August 1964. The Soviet lunar landing program was marked throughout by internal rivalries among various space development centers, and never received the kind of generous funding that was made available to NASA for Apollo.

The Kremlin in the early 1960s approved plans to develop the kind of very large rocket needed for a lunar mission; it was designated the N-1. After the August 1964 decision, the N-1 design was optimized for a lunar mission. The Soviet’s chief designer in charge of N-1 development, Sergei Korolev, was a longtime bitter rival of Russia’s top rocket engine developer, Valentin Glushko. Glushko refused to make his most powerful engine available to Korolev, who was forced to turn to a jet-engine designer who had never built a rocket engine. The resulting engine was not very powerful; the first stage of the N-1 thus required 30 engines.

The Soviet Union later in the 1960s also developed a spacecraft for the lunar landing mission and, like the United States, adopted the lunar orbit rendezvous approach to reaching the moon.

Several cosmonauts, including the initial spacewalker Alexey Leonov, were trained for a lunar landing mission.

However, Korolev died in 1966 during a botched surgery; His successor, Vasily Mishin, was not the strong personality that Korolev had been, and he was not able to bring the lunar landing program to fruition. There were four attempts to launch the N-1; Each failed, and the program was canceled in 1974.

While all of this was going on, there was a second Soviet lunar program aimed at sending cosmonauts around the moon without landing. This program was managed by another of Korolev’s rivals, Vladimir Chelomei. Concern that the Soviets might be first to reach the moon was a major reason for the mid-1968 NASA decision to send Apollo 8 into orbit around the moon in December 1968. A mission in September 1968 was successful in returning two tortoises safely after a loop around the moon. But the next test mission had re-entry problems that would have killed anyone aboard, and the Soviet Union decided not to risk a crew on the next flight, scheduled for early December. That cleared the path for Apollo 8 to win the race to the moon.

4

DECEMBER 2018

| MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

Six questions for the author Q: What was your earliest memory of space exploration and how did it influence your life’s passion?

A: My first space-related memory is watching John Glenn parade through Manhattan on March 1, 1962, after he became the first American to orbit the Earth. The excitement surrounding Glenn’s flight made me eager to learn more about what he and his colleagues were up to. I went back to graduate school that fall to study international relations (my bachelor’s degree was in physics) and from my first research paper on, I wrote about the foreign policy aspects of space, leading to a Ph.D. dissertation that was finished before Apollo 11 and was published as The Decision to Go to the Moon: Project Apollo and the National Interest (MIT Press, 1970). That work got me an invitation to the Kennedy Space Center to witness Apollo 11 take off for the moon. With that remarkable introduction to space, my career path was set. I joined the faculty at George Washington University in September 1970, and have been there ever since.

All of this just happened – I never planned it.

Q: Your latest book, “Ronald Reagan and the Space Frontier,” was just published; It is the third in a series of research-based books you have written since 2010. In each book, you describe how U.S. presidential politics, especially the decisions of Kennedy, Nixon, and Reagan, drove space policy.

In your opinion, what would have happened if Nixon, rather than Kennedy, had become president in January 1961?

A: It is not clear to me that the United States would have gone to the moon in the 1960s, or indeed in the following decades, if Richard Nixon had been elected in 1960. As Dwight Eisenhower’s vice president, Richard Nixon had been more bullish about the need for an ambitious U.S. space program than was Ike. But he was still a Republican fiscal conservative, and he was not the risk-taker that Kennedy was. So I doubt that his reaction to the Soviet Union being first to orbit a human would have been anything like the rapid mobilization of financial and human resources that Kennedy approved in order for the United States to beat the Russians to the moon. Ironically, Nixon was president in 1969 as Kennedy’s mandate was accomplished; Never once as he gloried in the success of Apollo 11 did Nixon mention Kennedy’s name. And within nine months, he decided not to continue an Apollo-like program of exploration. We have been limited to human travel in low-Earth orbit ever since.

Q: You have also just edited a paperback book called The Penguin Book of Space Exploration. What is that about?

A: First of all, it is not about penguins; that is the name of the publisher! The book contains excerpts from over 100 original documents that trace the history of NASA and human space flight, ranging from Wernher von Braun’s 1954 essay about a trip to Mars to Elon Musk’s 2016 vision of creating a million-person city on the Red Planet. There are a lot of Apollo-related documents in the book. I really enjoy seeing the actual documents that defined what this country chooses to do in space.

There are also character sketches of the Apollo 11 crew by their colleague, Apollo 8’s Frank Borman, and even the customs form the crew had to file as they returned to Earth from the moon.

Q: There were 11 astronaut-carrying Apollo missions, six of which landed two men on the moon. Of the Apollo astronauts, which one impressed you the most and in what ways?

A: That’s a tough question, since I know several of the Apollo astronauts personally – others, I know only casually or have never met. I am a longtime colleague of Apollo 8’s Bill Anders; I even wrote a few speeches for him when he worked for Vice President (Spiro) Agnew in the Nixon White House. Bill, of course, took the iconic “Earthrise” photo. After leaving the White House in 1973, he was an ambassador to Norway, head of the

Dr. John M. Logsdon is professor emeritus of political science and international affairs at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs. He was the founder in 1987 and director of GW’s Space Policy Institute. He also has been a faculty member of the International Space University since 1989. He holds a B.S. in physics from Xavier University (1960) and a Ph.D. in Political Science from New York University (1970).

ROSLYN LOGSDON PHOTO

Nuclear Regulatory Agency, and then pursued an extremely successful business career, plus until recently flew his P-51 Mustang in races. Another Apollo veteran who pursued a diverse career was Mike Collins, first as a diplomat, then as the founding director of the National Air and Space Museum and an industry executive, and now as a retired painter of delightful watercolors. Mike wrote what I still think is the best book about Apollo, Carrying the Fire. Buzz Aldrin makes an impression on everyone he meets, and has stayed engaged as a committed advocate for space exploration.

To use a cliché, last but certainly not least, Neil Armstrong, whom I got to know when we were both members of the NASA Advisory Council, was of course, despite his protestations and innate modesty, the “First Man.” To have known that pioneering explorer was a life privilege.

Q: Your presentations about space policy and history, many of which can be viewed on YouTube, are very informative and engaging.

What is the most interesting Apollo-related question from an audience member you received and how did you respond?

A: That’s also a tough question, given I have been in one venue or another been talking about Apollo for a half-century – and I am still not tired of the topic! I can remember one question that went something like, “You are not much younger than the 24 different men who voyaged to the moon. Do you ever wish you had been one of them?” My response has been consistent – I have never had the ambition to sit atop a rocket that lets loose the power of a small nuclear weapon to accelerate people to 25,000 miles per hour. That takes a special kind of personality, and it is not mine. I am very grateful to have been able to be a close-in observer and chronicler of U.S., indeed global, space achievements, and to have known many of the extraordinary men and women who have enabled those achievements. It’s great to meet astronauts, but equally gratifying to interact with the managers, engineers, scientists, and thousands of others who are the foundation of space activity. Besides, there (so far) is no place in space to get a glass of good wine.

Q: Why does Apollo matter 50 years later and what are your plans for celebrating the Apollo anniversaries?

A: We remember Apollo as one of the great achievements of American society, with over 400,000 people working together toward a common goal. That goal was peaceful and inspiring. We could use some of that solidarity and sense of positive accomplishment today. I plan over the coming months to attend as many of the Apollo anniversary celebrations as possible, including being at the Kennedy Space Center on Apollo 11 launch day, July 16, and participating in the national celebration in Washington on July 20. In a bit of self-promotion, I am also seeking speaking opportunities to share my views on Apollo and its legacy with any groups interested in hearing them. (See www.johnmlogsdon.com)

Books by John M. Logsdon

“John F. Kennedy and the Race to the moon” (2010)

“After Apollo: Richard Nixon and the American Space Program” (2015)

“The Penguin Book of Outer Space Exploration” (2018)

“Ronald Reagan and the Space Frontier” (2019)

Some 400,000 people worked on Project Apollo.

Which ones of that large group were the most influential in terms of the project’s success?

Several high-profile individuals had major influence on the success of Project Apollo. Perhaps first among them was NASA Administrator James Webb, who made sure that the undertaking had continuing support from both the White House and the Congress. Although Wernher von Braun had helped shape the choice of the moon as the project’s goal, he was not involved in its overall management. Rather he oversaw the very successful development of the Saturn V booster, which was critical to getting to the moon. The lead NASA center for Apollo was the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston; Its director, Robert Gilruth, was not von Braun’s equivalent as a public personality, but provided steady guidance throughout, as did his deputy George Low, who in 1960-1961 while still at NASA Headquarters led the first study of the requirements for a lunar landing mission. Also at NASA Headquarters, NASA’s general manager Robert Seamans and Project Apollo manager General Sam Phillips played central roles through the critical development years leading up to Apollo 11.

For each of the major decisions, there was a particular individual who was key to that choice. John Houbolt at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia was a persistent advocate for the lunar orbit rendezvous approach to the moon mission, cutting through bureaucracy to make sure top NASA managers gave that approach a fair hearing. The “all up” testing approach was the brainchild of NASA’s top manned spaceflight official, George Mueller, who also combined a tough management style with political skill at maintaining the Apollo support coalition from 1963-1969. The idea of sending Apollo 8 to the moon originated with the aforementioned George Low, who was perhaps the least visible of all key Apollo managers. Low also was in charge of the redesign of the command module after the Apollo 1 fire.

There of course were many more individuals who could be mentioned.

In 1989, I chaired a discussion of why Apollo succeeded among Mueller, Gilruth, and others that is available online at history.nasa.gov/monograph14.pdf.

NASA

Apollo 1 astronauts, from left, Ed White II, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee.

On January 27, 1967, Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger Chaffee died in their Apollo 1 capsule when a fire broke out during a launch pad test. Why didn’t that tragic accident lead to a political and public outcry that could have brought an end to the lunar landing program?

In my view there were two reasons why the Apollo 1 fire only delayed the lunar landing rather than led to Project Apollo’s cancellation.

One was NASA Administrator James Webb’s political skill. Within a day of the accident, he convinced President Lyndon Johnson to allow NASA, rather than some outside group, to investigate the causes of the accident. With NASA in charge, the accident investigation was narrowly focused on technical factors. The possibility of not moving ahead was never considered by the investigation team. The focus was on what caused the fire and what steps

were needed to reduce future risks of similar accidents. This approach defused the limited congressional and media discussion of the possibility of ending Apollo.

The other, more fundamental reason for continuing was that, to President Johnson and his associates — and probably to most of the country — Apollo had become a memorial to a fallen young president, who five years earlier had reminded the country that getting to the moon would be “hard,” as Kennedy said in his speech. To stop Apollo in the face of adversity would have been seen as a disservice to Kennedy’s memory.

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

|

DECEMBER 2018

5

What decisions led to Neil Armstrong being the first human to walk on the moon? Were Armstrong’s famous “one small step” words scripted by NASA or the White House, or were they his own?

NASA

ABOVE: The Apollo 11 crew rides in a shower of ticker tape in New York City. Pictured in the lead car, from right, are astronauts Neil A. Armstrong, commander; Michael Collins, command module pilot; and Edwin E. Aldrin Jr., lunar module pilot.

NASA

Eugene Cernan, Apollo 17 mission commander, shown inside the lunar module after his second moonwalk of the mission.

Cernan was the last man to touch the surface of the moon.

NASA

The first Apollo 11 sample return container arrives July 25, 1969, at Ellington Air Force Base from the Pacific recovery area. Holding the box containing lunar surface material, are, from left, George M. Low, manager of the Apollo Spacecraft Program; U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Samuel C. Phillips, Apollo program director; George S. Trimble, MSC deputy director; Dr. Thomas O Paine, NASA administrator; and Dr. Robert R. Gilruth, MSC director.

Apollo was not primarily about science, but it certainly led to many discoveries with respect to the moon. What were some of the most significant scientific results?

The first three Apollo landing missions carried limited scientific equipment. Astronauts were limited to the near vicinity of their landing sites, since they had to be within walking distance of their lunar landing module should there be an emergency. The final three landing missions, Apollo 15, 16, and 17, carried a small battery-powered rover so the astronauts could travel greater distances. In addition, astronauts on those missions received intensive r geological training, and one of them, Apollo 17’s Harrison Schmitt, was a e Ph.D. geologist. While Armstrong and Aldrin traveled only 3,300 feet during their Apollo 11 moonwalk, dSchmitt and Gene Cernan traveled 22 miles during their three-day stay on the moon.

The Apollo missions contributed significantly to our scientific understanding of the origins, evolution, and current status of the Earth’s only natural satellite. The moon turns out to be a complex body, made of rocky material that has been variously melted, erupted through volcanoes, and crushed by meteorite impacts. The moon and the Earth were formed from the same pool of material, but have evolved differently. The youngest moon rocks are about the same age, 3.2 billion years, as the oldest Earth rocks, but the oldest moon

NASA

A close-up view one of the rocks brought back to Earth from the Apollo 12 lunar landing mission. The rock is one of two breccia gathered by astronauts Charles Conrad Jr. and Alan L. Bean. rocks date back to the origins of the solar system 4.6 billion years ago.

These old rocks provide clues to the geologic evolution of the terrestrial planets Mercury, Venus, and Mars.

The surface of the moon is covered by a rubble pile of rocks and dust that contains a unique record of implanted solar radiation, important to understanding climate change on Earth.

There was no trace of life forms, past or current, in the 842 pounds of moon rocks brought back to Earth during Apollo.

Why did the United States stop flying to the moon after the December 1972 Apollo 17 mission?

There were a number of reasons why three planned Apollo missions were canceled and the program ended after Apollo 17.

President Kennedy had defined Apollo as a race to the moon, and once Apollo 11 won that race, the political will to keep going dissipated. There was no other rationale strong enough to justify the funds needed to keep returning to the moon.

NASA at the time of Apollo 11 proposed an ambitious post-Apollo exploration effort, leading to lunar bases and the initial human mission to Mars in the 1980s. Richard Nixon, who became president six months before Apollo 11 landed on the moon, had no interest in approving such an expensive undertaking, even though he wanted human spaceflight to continue. His January 1970 budget proposal ended production of the Saturn V moon rocket, which was key to future exploration. NASA proposed an Earth-orbiting space station serviced by a reusable space shuttle as its next effort, but that proposal was also rejected.

In addition, the NASA leadership, even before the near-tragedy of the Apollo 13 mission, was aware of just how risky the flights were. In 1970 the agency proposed canceling the final Apollo missions to free up funds for the station and shuttle, and the Nixon White House agreed. In fact, after the Apollo 13 close call, Nixon wanted to cancel Apollo 16 and 17, but was talked out of that move.

As Apollo 17 left the moon on Dec. 24, 1972, President Richard Nixon stated, “This may be the last time in this century that men may walk on the moon.”

By focusing the post-Apollo space program on the development of a redefined space shuttle, a vehicle that would operate only in low Earth orbit, Nixon made his forecast become reality for the almost half-century since.

Two factors led to Armstrong becoming the “First Man.” One was the way crews were assigned to the Apollo missions. The backup crew for a particular mission would become the prime crew three missions later. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were backups for Apollo 8, together with Fred Haise. But Haise was a substitute for Michael Collins, who had had neck surgery in July 1968. When it came time on January 9, 1969, to announce the Apollo 11 prime crew, Collins had recovered, and he replaced Haise as a member of the crew.

If the next two missions – Apollo 9, an Earth-orbit test of the lunar lander, and Apollo 10, a dress rehearsal that would do everything except actually land on the moon – were successful, then Apollo 11 would be the first attempt at a landing.

But that success was far from a given.

NASA managers, however, worked from January on with the assumption that Apollo 9 and Apollo 10 would be successful, and thus that Apollo 11 would be the initial landing attempt. Then the question was who would be first to leave the lunar module and take the first steps on the moon – Armstrong as commander or Aldrin as lunar module pilot.

Aldrin for several months thought he would be first, but a combination of results from technical simulations showing that the commander was in a better position to be first out and an assessment of the personalities of the two men by their managers in Houston led to a March decision that Armstrong would be first. As James Hansen says in his book First Man, the NASA managers making the decision recognized that “the first man on the moon would be a legend . . .

It should be Neil Armstrong . . . Calm, quiet, and [with] absolute confidence . . . the Lindbergh type.”

There were more than four hours between the time the lunar lander touched down and the time Armstrong left it to descend to the lunar surface. Armstrong claimed after the mission that it was only during that time that he decided what he should say. He recalled, “I didn’t think it was particularly important, but other people obviously did.”

Indeed, Armstrong’s, “That’s one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind” will be remembered throughout human history.

Why does the Apollo program intrigue people five decades after we first landed on the moon? Is there political will today to return to the moon and then beyond?

Apollo is a piece of lasting human history. Its most important significance may well be simply that it happened.

Humans did travel to and explore another celestial body. Apollo will forever be a milestone in human experience, and particularly in the history of human exploration and perhaps eventual expansion. Apollo 11 was the first great exploratory voyage that was a shared human experience — what historian Daniel Boorstin called “public discovery.”

It may be the symbolic character of America’s voyages to the moon that is the most important heritage of the Apollo program. Certainly the image of Apollo 11’s Buzz Aldrin standing next to the American flag at “Tranquility Base” has become iconic, communicating to subsequent generations that the United States achieved something unique in human experience, the first steps off the home planet.

Leaving the Earth also gave the Apollo astronauts the unique opportunity to look back at our home planet and to share what they saw. The Apollo 8 “Earthrise” picture is surely one of the iconic images of the 20th century. It allowed us, as poet Archibald McLeish noted at the time, “to see earth as it truly is, small and blue and beautiful in that eternal silence where it floats” and “to see ourselves as riders on the earth together, brothers on that bright loveliness in the eternal cold — brothers who truly know that they are brothers.”

A year ago, NASA was charged with leading “an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system . . . Beginning with missions beyond lowEarth orbit, the United States will lead the return of humans to the moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.” Whether the political system and public sentiment will provide the support required to implement this directive remains to be seen. I certainly hope that will be the case. One thing is sure: There will not be a “Kennedy moment” leading to another effort like Apollo. Those of us who experienced Armstrong’s “great leap” were indeed fortunate.

6

DECEMBER 2018

| MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

BOOK EXCERPT

A final Kennedy visit to the Apollo launch site

O

N NOVEMBER 16, 1963, John Kennedy made the short flight to Cape Canaveral from his family home in Palm Beach, Florida for an inspection tour of progress being made by NASA in the Gemini and Apollo programs . . . The president’s visit was seen as “an effort to focus attention on the nation’s space program” as the Congress made final decisions on the NASA FY1964 budget.

Kennedy was first briefed on the Gemini program by astronauts Gus Grissom and Gordon Cooper. He then had a short presentation on Apollo by [NASA’s head of manned space flight] George Mueller in the launch control center at Launch Complex 37; a Saturn 1 booster was sitting on that launch pad for a planned December launch attempt. As his party left the control center, the president lagged behind to inspect the models of the various launch vehicles being used

by NASA, ranging from the small Redstone booster that had been used for the suborbital launches of Alan Shepard and Gus Grissom to the mighty Saturn V that would be used to send astronauts to the moon. When he was assured that the models were all to the same scale, Kennedy used words like “amazing” and “fantastic.”

[NASA’s number three official] Robert Seamans, who accompanied Kennedy throughout the visit, suggests that the President “maybe for the first time, began to realize the dimensions of these projects.”

Kennedy then walked to the vicinity of the Saturn 1 booster, where he was briefed on the rocket’s dimensions and capabilities by Wernher von Braun.

Before leaving the launch pad, and much to the discomfort of his Secret Service detail, Kennedy walked over and stood directly underneath the rocket. At that moment, he asked whether the upcoming launch “will be the largest payload that man has ever put in orbit.” When told that this was indeed the case, Kennedy responded: “That is very, very significant.” He recognized that with the upcoming launch the United States would finally surpass the Soviet Union in lifting capacity, a goal that he had pursued from his first presidential decisions on space. The party then flew by helicopter over the Saturn V launch facilities under construction at Launch Complex 39 on the adjoining Merritt Island; Kennedy had been shown a model of the complex during his earlier briefing by Mueller.

Apollo to go forward as planned What might have happened to Project Apollo if John F. Kennedy had not been assassinated in Dallas on November 22, 1963 is an unanswerable question. Historian Roger Launius has suggested that “had Kennedy served two full terms, it is quite easy to envision a point . . . in which he might have decided that the international situation that sparked the announcement of a lunar landing ‘by the end of the decade’ had passed and he could have safely turned off the landing clock.” Such a thought could well have been the president’s mind as he worried during the summer and fall of 1963 about the increasing criticisms and costs of Apollo and sought Soviet cooperation in a lunar mission; it was certainly one of the options being considered at the White House senior staff level. However, backing off of being first to the moon did not seem to be on Kennedy’s mind in November 1963. In remarks he planned to deliver in Dallas on November 22, Kennedy would have said “the United States of America has no intention of finishing second in space. This effort is expensive—but it pays its own way for freedom and for America.” !!!

The pace of the lunar landing program was an issue in the BOB [Bureau of the Budget] review of the national space program . . . A November 13 draft of report of this “Special Space Review” contained a clear statement of the goal of the lunar landing program: “to attempt to achieve a manned lunar landing and return by the end of the decade” with “principal purposes” of (1) “demonstrating an important space achievement ahead of the USSR”; (2) “serving as a focus for technological developments necessary for other space objectives and having potential

ASSOCIATED PRESS

President John F. Kennedy looks at a Saturn rocket on Nov. 16, 1963, as he inspects the nation’s moon program during a visit to Cape Canaveral, Fla. At right, briefing the president is Wernher von Braun, director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. significance for national defense”; and (3) “acquiring useful scientific and other data to the extent feasible” (This statement reinforces the reality that science was never the primary goal of going to the moon.).

The conclusion of the draft review was that “after examining the pros and cons and the fiscal implications of possible alternatives . . . the goal as stated above should be adhered to at this time, with due recognition of the problems involved and of the possibility that it may be necessary to change the objective at some future date.”

The next draft of the report was dated November 20. It expanded on the analysis of why it was prudent to stay with the lunar landing program as planned, saying that “the feasible alternatives available for major changes . . . are quite limited.” First, “there were generally good and sufficient reasons” for setting the lunar landing goal which were “still valid today.” In addition, “previous administration policy statements, testimony, and ‘commitments’ tend to limit the flexibility for major changes.” Also, “significant losses in time, money, and other disruptions are likely to result from major changes at this time.”

The final draft of the Special Space Review was dated November 29, one week after President Kennedy’s assassination. This draft best represents the analysis and conclusions of the senior space leadership that would have been presented to the president for final decision if he had lived. The draft noted that its contents had been prepared “by Bureau of the Budget staff in consultation with senior representatives of NASA and the Department of Defense.” The report first asked: “Should consideration be given at this time to backing off from the manned lunar landing goal?” Three alternative actions were offered: 1. “Adhere to the present goal.”

2. “Decide now to abandon current work directly related to the manned lunar landing objective but to con-

tinue development of the large launch vehicle (Saturn V) so that it will be available for future space programs.”

3. “Decide now to abandon both current work toward the manned lunar landing objective and the development of the Saturn V large launch vehicle.”

In support of alternative 1, the report suggested that “in the absence of clear and compelling external circumstances a change in present policies and commitments would involve an unacceptable ‘loss of face’ both domestically and internationally” and that canceling Apollo would not “in fact reduce criticism of the total magnitude of the budget or increase support for other meritorious programs to which the funds might be applied.”

The bottom line of the 1963 Special Space Review was that there was no reason for “backing off” the lunar landing goal. It is very unlikely that either President Kennedy’s top advisers or the president himself would have countermanded this conclusion, had Kennedy lived to consider that choice.

Kennedy’s final words on space The recommendation to continue Apollo on its current path would most likely have been welcomed by the president. As the BOB review was underway, John F. Kennedy repeatedly made clear his view that the United States should continue its effort to assume the leading position in space.

Kennedy’s excitement during his November 16 visit to Cape Canaveral in recognizing that the upcoming Saturn 1 launch would give the United States

the weight-lifting lead in space reflected this determination; he referred to that soon-to-be-realized achievement several times in remarks on November 21 and the morning of November 22 as he moved forward with his tragic Texas tour.

Perhaps Kennedy’s attitude on the space program on the last full day of his life are best reflected in remarks he made at the dedication of an aerospace medicine facility in San Antonio on November 21: “I think the United States should be a leader [in space]. A country as rich and powerful as this which bears so many burdens and responsibilities, which has so many opportunities, should be second to none . . . We have a long way to go. Many weeks and months and years of long, tedious work lie ahead.

There will be setbacks and frustrations and disappointments. There will be, as there always are, pressures in this country to do less in this area as in so many others, and temptations to do something else that is perhaps easier . . . This space effort must go on. The conquest of space must and will go ahead.

That much we know. That much we can say with confidence and conviction.

“Frank O’Connor, the Irish writer, tells in one of his books how, as a boy, he and his friends would make their way across the countryside, and when they came to an orchard wall that seemed too high and too doubtful to try and too difficult to permit their voyage to continue, they took off their hats and tossed them over the wall—and then they had no choice but to follow them.

“This Nation has tossed its cap over the wall of space, and we have no choice but to follow it.”

From “JOHN F. KENNEDY AND THE RACE TO THE MOON” by John M. Logsdon.

Copyright © 2010 by Palgrave Macmillan and reprinted with the permission of the author and Palgrave Macmillan.

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

|

DECEMBER 2018

7

WHILE NATION RACED TO MOON, LIFE ON EARTH WAS UNPREDICTABLE

War in Vietnam spurs protests

Making their debuts The U.S. was introduced to several cultural “firsts” in 1968 and 1969. Among them: ON TELEVISION

Jan. 22, 1968: Rowan

& Martin’s “Laugh-In” debuts.

Feb. 19, 1968: “Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood” premieres.

Rogers Oct. 14, 1968: Apollo 7 makes the first live broadcast from a spacecraft in orbit.

Sept. 24, 1968: Newsmagazine “60 Minutes” premieres.

June 15, 1969: “Hee Haw” premieres.

Sept. 26, 1969: “The Brady Bunch” premieres.

Nov. 10, 1969: “Sesame Street” first airs.

SAFETY & TECHNOLOGY

Jan. 1, 1968: All new cars produced

are required to have seat belts.

Feb. 16, 1968: The first 911 emergency

ASSOCIATED PRESS PHOTOS

U. S. soldiers give first aid to the wounded in 1968 in Vietnam.

The Tet Offensive

Jan. 30, 1968: North Vietnamese and communist Viet Cong forces launched a coordinated attack against a number of targets in South Vietnam, including the United State forces, during the lunar new year (or “Tet”) holiday. The U.S. and South Vietnamese militaries sustained heavy losses before finally repelling the communist assault. At the end of the Tet Offensive, both sides had endured losses, and both sides claimed victory. The U.S. and South Vietnamese military response resulted in the regaining of all lost territory. At the same time, the Tet Offensive weakened domestic support for U.S. President Lyndon Johnson’s administration as vivid reporting on the event by the U.S. media made clear to the American public that a victory in Vietnam was not imminent.

FAST FOOD 1968: McDonald’s begins serving the Big Mac in all of its restaurants.

Aug. 18, 1969: The first Long John Silver’s store opens in Lexington, Kentucky.

Nov. 15, 1969: Dave Thomas opens the first Wendy’s store in Columbus, Ohio.

Anti-war sentiment grows

By the numbers

1968-69 Today

My Lai Massacre

March 16, 1968: American troops killed scores of civilians during a combat operation in the villages of My Lai, Vietnam. Initial military reports claimed the massacre began when two Americans were killed and 10 wounded by booby traps. In reality, the only U.S. casualty was a soldier who shot himself in the foot. The incident, which did not become widely known until nearly two years later, intensified the American public’s ill feelings about the war.

FAST-FORWARD: On March 31, 1968, Johnson announced that he would not seek a second term as president. The job of finding a way out of Vietnam was left to the next president, Richard Nixon. U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War ended in August 1973 after 58,220 American military casualties.

201.2M

329.1M

World population

3.48B

7.54B

66.8 years 76.1 years 74.4 years 81.1 years

Median family income*

Nov. 15, 1969: More than 500,000 people gathered in Washington to participate in the Moratorium March, an organized protest of the United States’ involvement in the Vietnam War.

June 5, 1968: New York Sen. Robert Kennedy had just won the California Democratic presidential primary, narrowly beating Minnesota Sen. Eugene McCarthy. “On to Chicago and let’s win there,” Kennedy told a jubilant crowd at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles.

Moments later, a Palestinian immigrant named Sirhan Sirhan, who was angry about U.S. support for Israel, shot Kennedy in the hotel’s kitchen. He died 26 hours later, on June 6. Kennedy’s death at 42 was a shocking echo of the assassination of his brother, President John F. Kennedy, who was killed less than five years earlier.

The Miracle Mets

Protest at Olympics Oct. 16, 1968: U.S. sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos, standing shoeless, bowed their heads and each raised a gloved fist — what they later called a “human rights salute” — during the medals ceremony for the 200 meters at the Summer Olympic Games in Mexico City, where they had won gold and bronze, respectively, in the event.

The sprinters hoped to draw attention to the treatment of blacks in an America still struggling with integration.

The power of the moment triggered a worldwide response — some praised Smith and Carlos as heroes, while others dismissed them as “militants” performing a “Nazi-like salute.”

Tommie Smith, left, and John Carlos.

Grocery prices* Bread, pound Ground beef, pound Sugar, pound Potatoes, pound Cost of living* New home, median New car, average Movie ticket Gasoline, gallon Postage stamp

$61,490

$57,652

$1.60 $4 87¢ 54¢

$1.28 $3.71 63¢ 75¢

$188,783 $343,300 $24,269 $35,285 $10.69 $9.14 $2.44 $2.89 43¢ 50¢

*Prices are adjusted for inflation

In theaters

MGM

April 2, 1968: “2001: A Space Odyssey,” directed by Stanley Kubrick and starring Keir Dullea and Gary Lockwood, premieres in Washington. With his realistic spaceship Discovery, Kubrick took cinematic techniques to new levels by creating the effect of zero gravity. “2001” helped shape the science-fiction film genre.

On the radio

Woodstock rocks

Aug. 15-18, 1969: Billed as three days of peace and music, the Woodstock Music and Art Fair became not only one of the largest concerts in history but one that would change the history of music and society. It was held on Max Yasgur’s 600-acre dairy farm in the rural town of Bethel, N.Y., after the town of Woodstock decided not to allow it. In a weekend of rain and mud, concertgoers witnessed 32 acts, including some legendary performances by The Who, Santana, Janis Joplin, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Joe Cocker and Jimi Hendrix.

Oct. 16, 1969: The New York Mets, an expansion team that joined the National League in 1962, had lost 100 games in five of their first seven seasons. Going into the 1969 season, they were a 100-to-1 shot to win the World Series. But the underdog Mets, led by manager Gil Hodges, went 100-62 and defeated the Baltimore Orioles 4-1 to capture the franchise’s first championship.

Karl Ehrhardt, a Mets fan known as the Sign Man, holds up an appropriate sign during the final game of the 1969 World Series.

U.S. Population Life expectancy Males Females

Assassinations send shockwaves

April 4, 1968: Civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. was shot and killed

by James Earl Ray while standing on the second-floor balcony of the Lorraine Motel. As news of his death spread, riots erupted in several cities around the country, including Chicago, Detroit, Washington and Newark, New Jersey. The Academy Awards ceremony and Opening Day of Major League Baseball were delayed. On April 8, King’s widow, Coretta Scott King, and the couple’s four children led a crowd estimated at 40,000 in a silent march through the streets of Memphis to honor the fallen leader.

telephone system in the United States is launched in Haleyville, Alabama.

Dec. 9, 1968: First demonstration of a computer mouse.

Feb. 9, 1969: The Boeing 747 jumbo jet is flown for the first time.

Sept. 2, 1969: First ATM in the United States is installed in New York.

Billboard magazine’s Year-End Hot 100 songs of 1968 and 1969: 1968 1. “Hey Jude,” The Beatles.

2. “Love is Blue,” Paul Mauriat.

3. “Honey,” Bobby Goldsboro.

4. “(Sittin’ On) The Dock of the Bay,” Otis Redding.

5. “People Got to be Free,” The Rascals.

1969 1. “Sugar, Sugar,” The Archies.

2. “Aquarius/Let the Sunshine In,” The 5th Dimension.

3. “I Can’t Get Next to You,” The Temptations.

4. “Honky Tonk Women,” The Rolling Stones.

5. “Everyday People,” Sly and the Family Stone.

The Beatles in 1968.

OTHER SIGNIFICANT EVENTS OF THIS TIME PERIOD: April 7, 1969: Considered Aug. 8-9, 1969: Manson Meir becomes Israel’s first the symbolic birth date of Family murders actress female prime minister. the internet.

Sharon Tate, four others.

March 17, 1969: Golda

Sources: Tribune News Service, Associated Press, U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Department of Energy, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Census Bureau, Billboard, OnThisDay.com, Notable Names Database, Internet Movie Database, International Tennis Hall of Fame, boxofficemojo.com

8

DECEMBER 2018 |

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

REDISCOVER THE APOLLO MISSIONS The uncrewed missions of Apollo

Mission

Highlights

AS-201

Feb. 26, 1966; The mission lasted 37 minutes and was recovered two and a half hours after splashdown.

There were several malfunctions, mostly minor, but three were serious. Objectives included 11:12:01 a.m. achieving structural integrity, demonstrating rocket separation stages and verifying system EST operations.

AS-202

AS-203

Launch

Orbit

Landing

Altitude: 303 miles Orbits: Suborbital Duration: 36 minutes, 59 seconds Distance: 5,264 miles

Feb. 26, 1966; 11:49 a.m. EST

This second flight made another test of major spacecraft systems and made performance checks. It was the first use of a spacecraft fuel cell power system.

Aug. 25, 1966; Altitude: 710 miles 1:15:32 p.m.

Orbits: Suborbital EDT Duration: 93 minutes

Mission objectives included evaluating performance on instruments under orbital conditions, and obtaining flight information and gathered information heating and cooling systems.

July 5, 1966; 10:53:17 a.m.

EDT

APOLLO 1 (AS-204)

Altitude: 185 km by 189 km Orbits: Four

A fire swept through the Command Module killing all three.

According to NASA, the exhaustive investigation and reworking of the Apollo command modules postponed crewed launches until officials could clear them for flight. The schedules for the rocket that launched the command modules into space, Saturn IB, were suspended for nearly a year. The launch vehicle that finally bore the designation AS-204 carried a lunar module instead of a command module. In the spring of 1967, the mission was officially renamed Apollo 1.

Scheduled launch: Feb. 21, 1967 On Jan. 27, 1967, a preflight test was in progress for the Apollo 204 (AS204) mission when tragedy struck on the launch pad at Cape Kennedy.

The men who were supposed to take part in the first crewed flight of Apollo — astronauts, at right, Virgil Grissom, Edward White and Roger Chaffee — would never make it off the ground.

Splashdown: Atlantic Ocean Aug. 25, 1966 Splashdown: Pacific Ocean No Recovery

NASA

Apollo 4 During the third orbit, the spacecraft coasted to a simulated path to the moon, reaching an altitude of 18,079 km. The AS-501 launch marked the initial flight testing of the S-IC and S-II stages. Objectives included checking integrity of the spacecraft as well as launching and systems while in orbit.

Nov. 9, 1967; 7:00:01 a.m.

EST

Apollo 5

Jan. 22, 1968; Altitude: 222 km apogee, 163 km perigee No Recovery 05:48:08 p.m. Orbits: Orbital EST Duration: seven hours, 50 minutes

This mission set out to verify operation of the Lunar Module and check ascent and descent propulsion systems. It also evaluated staging and instrument performance. All mission objectives were achieved.

Apollo 6 Mostly a success, the mission was able to demonstrate structural integrity of launch vehicle April 4, 1968; 7:00:01 a.m. and spacecraft as well as separation of launch vehicle stages. It confirmed launch loads and dynamic characteristics. Some engine failure stunted testing of some Saturn V (launch EST vehicle) systems.

Altitude: 11,240 miles Orbits: Orbital Duration: nine hours, 37 minutes

Altitude: 13,792 miles Orbits: Orbital Duration: nine hours, 57 minutes

Nov. 9, 1967; 03:37 p.m. EST Splashdown: Pacific Ocean

April 4, 1968; 5:23 p.m. EST Splashdown: Unknown

Launch: 1:13 p

The crewed missions of Apollo APOLLO 7 Launch: Oct. 11, 1968; 11:02:45 a.m.

The first successful crewed Apollo mission was met by perfect weather conditions. Systems operated normally with few hitches.

The team, however, experienced discomfort when they developed colds and had to learn to deal with the mucus, which would not drip out normally in the gravityless conditions.

Crew ! Walter Schirra Jr., Commander ! R. Walter Cunningham, Lunar Module Pilot ! Donn F. Eisele, Command Module Pilot

The team also was able to make the first live American TV broadcast from space. The images were crude but educational.

The team was in space for nearly 11 days, which is longer than a journey to the moon and back. The journey would clear the way for lunar orbit missions to follow.

This view of southern California was taken by the Apollo 7 crew during their 18th revolution of the Earth on Oct. 12, 1968.

First trip around the moon APOLLO 8

Orbit Altitude: 141.65 miles Orbits: 163 revolutions Duration: 10 days, 20 hours, nine minutes, three seconds Distance: 4,546,918.3 miles Landing Oct. 22, 1968; 7:11:48 a.m. EDT, Atlantic Ocean

NASA

From left, Jim Lovell, Bill Anders and Frank Borman.

NASA

Launch: Dec. 21, 1968; 7:51 a.m.

In 1968 as the world prepared for Santa’s trip around the world, three men became the first in the world to make a trip in orbit around the moon. It was the first time man would lay eyes on the dark side.

The crew would take on a 20-hour sleepless orbit that was filled with tasks including tracking landmarks, navigation and photography.

Six telecasts were conducted during the mission: two while coasting between the earth and moon, known as translunar trajectory; two while orbiting the moon and two in transit toward the Earth. These transmissions were telecast worldwide and in real time to all five continents.

To the moon and back

Apollo lunar missions used a free-return trajactory. While it limited the area on the moon they could reach, it added a safety net for return, using the earth’s atmosphere to pull in the craft without needing all functional systems.

7. Rocket and module separate, enter atmosphere and land

3. Rocket second burn - translunar trajectory 5. Lunar orbit operations

1. Launch into Earth’s orbit

7

2.

Earth’s orbital checkout

NASA

Apollo 8 tested not only the network tracking the spacecraft in the Earth’s orbit but also in lunar orbit. In a telecast on Christmas Eve, the astronauts showed the world the first images of the lunar surface while reciting lines from the Bible’s Book of Genesis.

6. Service module burn command and service module in transearth trajectory Source: NASA

4. De-boost into lunar orbit

Lee Enterprises graphic

Crew

! Frank Borman, Commander ! William A. Anders, Lunar Module Pilot ! James A. Lovell Jr., Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 118.82 miles Duration: Six days, three hours, 42 seconds

Orbits: 10 revolutions Distance: 579,606.9 miles

A

Landing Dec. 27, 1968; 10:52 a.m., Pacific Ocean

b w Maur plo cir b

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY |

APOLLO 9 Launch: March 3, 1969; 11 a.m.

This mission focused on testing the craft’s engineering during orbit and to practice maneuvers such as lunar module rendezvous and docking to prepare for the Apollo 10 mission.

The propulsion system test showed to produce less velocity than desired for a moon landing,

APOLLO 10 Launch: May 18, 1969; 12:49 p.m.

The Apollo 10 crew were the first to operate entirely around the moon.

Astronauts were tasked with testing all aspects of a lunar landing without the landing.

The crew sent the first live color TV transmissions to Earth when

APOLLO 11 Launch: July 16, 1969; 9:32 a.m.

This flight completed a goal set by President John F. Kennedy on May 25, 1961: Perform a crewed lunar landing and return to Earth.

In the days leading up to the main event, the crew made a telecast while checking out the lunar module in their spacesuits, and made the performed the first maneuver to adjust a spacecraft’s moment to enter the moon’s orbit.

According to NASA, an estimated 530 million people watched Commander Neil Armstrong’s televised image and heard his voice describe

APOLLO 12 Launch: Nov. 14, 1969; 11:22 a.m.

Despite a lightning strike, the mission launched. The second crew to land on the moon had an extensive series of lunar exploration tasks. An instrument was to left behind to gather seismic, sci-

APOLLO 13 Launch: April 11, 1970; 1:13 p.m.

Apollo 13 was plagued by troubles. The spacecraft was supposed to land in the Fra Mauro area of the moon. An explosion on board forced the ship to circle the moon without landing.

Before the mission started, backup lunar module pilot, Charles

APOLLO 14 Launch: Jan. 31, 1971; 4:03 p.m.

Another try at landing in the Fra Mauri area of the moon, despite initial landing difficulties, was a success.

The flight had achieved the most precise landing to date, even though several attempts had to be

APOLLO 15 Launch: July 26, 1971; 9:34 a.m.

Apollo 15 was the first of the Apollo “J” missions capable of staying on the moon longer and moving along a greater distance along the surface.

The astronauts were to work on four main objectives falling in the general categories of lunar surface

APOLLO 16 Launch: April 16, 1972; 12:54 p.m.

This flight landed Apollo 16 in the Descartes region of the moon.

The team collected samples, put surface experiments in place and conducted in-flight experiments.

APOLLO 17 Launch: Dec. 7, 1972; 12:33 a.m.

The final J-type mission, it would collect rocks older and younger than previously discovered by other Apollo missions in the Taurus-Littrow highlands and valley area.

The team collected samples, surveyed the geologic features,

! James A. McDivitt, Commander ! Russell L. Schweickart, Lunar Module

Pilot

! David R. Scott, Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 118.63 miles Orbits: 151 revolutions Duration: 10 days, one hour, 54 seconds Distance: 4,214,543 miles NASA

! Thomas Stafford,

Commander

! Eugene Cernan,

Lunar Module Pilot

! John Young,

Command Module Pilot

NASA

took photos and conducted experiments, including the Biostack II and BIOCORE biomedical experiments.

Apollo 17 hosted the first scientist-astronaut to land on moon: Harrison Schmitt.

Totals for the trip: The lunar rover traveled about 19 miles; astronauts were on the surface for 75 hours; and they were in lunar orbit for 17 hours. Astronauts gathered 243 pounds of material.

Landing May 26, 1969; 12:52:23 p.m., Pacific Ocean

! Neil Armstrong,

Commander

! Edwin E. Aldrin Jr.,

Lunar Module Pilot

! Michael Collins,

NASA

Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 118.65 miles Orbits: 30 revolutions Duration: Eight days, three hours, 18 min, 35 seconds Distance: 953,054 miles Lunar Location: Sea of Tranquility Landing July 24, 1969; 12:50 p.m., Pacific Ocean

Crew

NASA

! Charles Conrad Jr.,

Commander

! Alan L. Bean, Lunar

Module Pilot

! Richard F. Gordon Jr.,

Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 118.55 miles Orbits: 45 revolutions

From left, Jim Lovell, John Swigert, and Fred Haise.

NASA

Duration: 10 days, four hours, 36 minutes, 25 seconds Distance: 952,354 miles Lunar Location: Ocean of Storms Landing November 24, 1969; 3:58:24 p.m., Pacific Ocean

Crew

! James A. Lovell Jr., Commander ! Fred W. Haise Jr., Lunar Module Pilot ! John L. Swigert Jr., Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 118.99 miles Earth Orbits: 1.5 Duration: Five days, 22 hours, 54 minutes, 41 seconds Distance: 622,268 miles Landing April 17, 1970, Pacific Ocean

made to make a “hard dock.”

There were also some communication systems issues.

Two astronauts were within 50 to 75 meters of the Cone Crater rim when they were told to collect samples at that spot and head back to the lunar module.

Alan Shepard set a new distance-traveled record on the lunar surface of about 9,000 feet.

Cameras and SIM bay instruments allowed the team to verify results from Apollo 15 data and provide information on lunar terrain not previously covered.

A new ultraviolet stellar camera took return photography of the Earth and celestial regions in spectral bands not seen from Earth. The lunar rover was also put through tests.

Orbit Altitude: 118.83 miles Orbits: 31 revolutions Duration: Eight days, 23 minutes, 23 seconds Distance: 829,437.5 miles

Crew

From left, Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin.

Duke, inadvertently exposed the crew to German measles.

Command Module Pilot Ken Mattingly had no immunity and was replaced by backup command module pilot John Swigert.

In orbit, the crew finished a telecast showing how living in weightlessness worked when an oxygen tank blew up. After many emergency maneuvers, the crew safely returned to Earth.

science. The team explored the Hadley-Apennine region, set up and activated lunar surface scientific experiments, made evaluations of new equipment and conducted lunar orbital experiments and photographic tasks.

Geological investigations were enhanced by the use of a lunar roving vehicle. Apollo 15 also set several new records for a crewed spaceflight.

Landing March 13, 1969; 12:01 p.m., Atlantic Ocean

Crew

the spacecraft was 3,570 miles from Earth. The transmission showed the docking process and the interior of the command and service module. A second telecast was made 14,625 miles from Earth. Photos of Earth were sent from 24,183 miles out, and a fourth telecast was made from 140,000 miles.

The crew continued to test to prepare for a lunar landing.

entific and engineering data.

The crew collected samples, and were able to perform a seismic shock test and solar wind experiment.

This was the first nonfree-return trajectory. It was used to allow for a daylight launch as well as to save fuel and be able to land on a desired site on the moon.

The team also were able to photograph future landing sites.

9

Crew

but didn’t affect the Apollo 9’s flight. However, the thruster tests improved orbital lifetime overall and proved the guidance and navigation system were working well.

The third day, the crew put on spacesuits and performed the first crewed throttling of an engine in space and increased the spacecraft’s orbit to 130 by 300 miles.

A multi-spectral terrain photograph test was successful.

the event as he took “ ... one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind” on July 20, 1969.

About 109 hours, 42 minutes after launch, Armstrong stepped onto the moon. About 20 minutes later, Buzz Aldrin followed him. The camera was then put on a tripod about 30 feet from the lunar module. Half an hour later, President Richard Nixon spoke by telephone link with the astronauts.

Armstrong and Aldrin spent a total of 21 hours, 36 minutes on the moon’s surface during the trip, collecting samples and deployed a scientific experiments package, as well as leaving behind some mementos from Earth.

DECEMBER 2018

From left, Edgar Mitchell and Alan Shepard.

NASA

Crew

! Alan B. Shepard Jr.,

Commander

! Edgar D. Mitchell,

Lunar Module Pilot

! Stuart A. Roosa,

Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 118.55 miles Orbits: 34 revolutions

Duration: Nine days, two minutes Distance: 1,150,321 miles Lunar Location: Fra Mauro Landing Feb. 9, 1971, Pacific Ocean

Crew

NASA

! David R. Scott, Commander ! James B. Irwin, Lunar Module Pilot ! Alfred M. Worden, Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 99.7 miles Orbits: 74 revolutions Duration: 12 days, 17 hours, 12 min Distance: 1,274,137 miles Lunar Location: Hadley-Apennine Landing Aug. 7, 1971, Pacific Ocean Crew

! John W. Young,

Commander

! Charles M. Duke Jr.,

Lunar Module Pilot

! Thomas K. Mattingly

Astronaut Charles Duke NASA

II, Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 107.5 miles

Astronaut Eugene Cernan NASA

Orbits: 64 revolutions Duration: 11 days, one hour, 51 minutes Distance: 1,391,550 miles Lunar Location: Descartes Highlands Landing April 27, 1972, Pacific Ocean

Crew

! Eugene A. Cernan, Commander ! Harrison H. Schmitt, Lunar Module Pilot ! Ronald E. Evans, Command Module Pilot

Orbit Altitude: 105.86 miles Orbits: 75 revolutions Duration: 12 days, 13 hours, 52 minutes Distance: 1,484,933.8 miles Lunar Location: Taurus-Littrow Landing: Dec. 19, 1972, Pacific Ocean

10

DECEMBER 2018 |

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

NASA

APOLLO 9: Astronaut David Scott emerges from an open hatch in the Command Module.

This mission conducted the first docking maneuvers in space between the Command/ Service modules and the Lunar Module.

Time capsule Lasting images of Apollo remind of the challenges of space exploration

NASA

APOLLO 4: The spacecraft stands ready early in the morning prior to launch on Nov. 9, 1967.

NASA

MEMENTOS: A picture of Apollo 16 astronaut Charles Duke’s family, at left, and other items, at right, left by Apollo 15 remain on the lunar surface.

NASA

APOLLO 17: Harrison “Jack” Schmitt, the Lunar Module pilot, examines a large boulder found on the surface of the moon Dec. 13, 1972, during an Lunar Roving Vehicle mission.

The Last Man

Apollo 17 Commander Gene Cernan was the last of 12 men to walk on the surface of the moon. NASA

APOLLO 13: A panel on the Service Module, left, was blown away after an apparent oxygen tank explosion on April 13, 1970. The Apollo 13 crew remained in the Lunar Module/Command Module and configured a device, right, to purge carbon dioxide from the module.

NASA

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

|

DECEMBER 2018

11

LUNAR MODULE: Nicknamed “Spider” during the Apollo 9 mission, the Lunar Module, left, tests its landing configuration with astronauts James A McDivitt and Russell L. Schweickart onboard.

Engineers designed several vehicle shapes, including the 1963 lunar lander model, far left, in preparation for the moon landing. NASA

NASA

SATURN V ROCKETS: The first stages of the Saturn V rockets, above, are prepared Oct. 1, 1968, at Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans. At top, a stage separates from the Saturn V rocket to fall into the Atlantic Ocean after launch of Apollo 6.

NASA

APOLLO 1: The burned exterior of the AS-204 capsule within which a fire on Jan. 27, 1967, claimed the lives of astronauts Virgil “Gus” Grissom, Edward White and Roger Chaffee.

GENESIS ROCK: In the laboratory at Johnson Space Center.

SPLASHDOWN: The Apollo 14 Command Module with astronauts Alan Shepard, Stuart A Roosa and Edgar Mitchell aboard approaches Earth on Feb. 9, 1971, in the South Pacific Ocean.

NASA

NASA

NASA

FAR SIDE: The view of the lunar far side as seen by the crew of Apollo 8.

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

|

DECEMBER 2018

12

‘To see earth as it truly is, small and blue and beautiful in that eternal silence where it floats’ ARCHIBALD McLEISH, POET

NASA

“Earthrise,” a photograph taken by Apollo 8 astronaut Bill Anders, is an iconic image. Apollo 8, with crew members James Lovell, Frank Borman and Anders, orbited the moon on Dec. 24, 1968.

One small step: A sense of national pride PICTURED ON THE COVER: Astronaut Edwin E. “Buzz” Aldrin Jr. walks on the surface of th moon during the Apollo 11 mission. Mission commander Neil Armstrong took this photograph with a 70mm lunar surface camera while the two astronauts explored the Sea of Tranquility.

CONTINUED FROM COVER The impacts of Apollo went beyond scientific discovery. The Apollo 8 “Earthrise” photograph helped create a heightened awareness, as the poet Archibald McLeish put it at the time, of “earth as it truly is, small and blue and beautiful in that eternal silence in which it floats.” Then, on July 20, 1969, Apollo 11’s Neil Armstrong made his historic “giant leap for mankind.” The image of Buzz Aldrin standing next to the U.S. flag planted on the lunar surface remains an iconic symbol of American achievement.

The first steps on the moon were viewed by a global audience, and helped create a sense that the United States was a nation capable of achieving great things, with people deserving of respect and admiration. Apollo also provided a sense of national pride; It was a bright spot for American citizens, coming at the end of a decade characterized by assassinations, urban riots and a seemingly endless conflict in Southeast Asia.

While Apollo will stand as a milestone in the history of human exploration, more Earthbound reasons prompted President John F. Kennedy’s decision to send Americans to the moon. Kennedy, stung by the Soviet Union being the first to orbit a human, on April 20, 1961, asked his advisers to identify “a space program which promises dramatic results in which we could win?”

The answers came quickly. Rocket engineer Wernher von Braun told the White House, “We have an excellent chance of beating the Soviets to the first landing of a crew on the moon.” NASA chief James Webb and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara added that winning a race to the moon was “part of the battle along the fluid front of the Cold War.” Kennedy accepted this advice, and on May 25, 1961, he told a joint session of Congress, “I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the

NASA IMAGE

NASA

Speaking to Congress and the nation in a joint session of Congress on May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy said: “I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth.” goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth.” The Congress and the country accepted that challenge, and the United States began what Kennedy called “a great new American enterprise.”

There is thus little question of why we went to the moon in the first place; Apollo was an effort driven by Cold War geopolitical competition, not by an exploratory imperative or a quest for military or economic power. Kennedy backed up his words with action, mobilizing in a war-like but peaceful fashion the human and financial resources needed for what he characterized as “a great new American enterprise.”

NASA in 1973 estimated that the cost of Apollo was $25.4 billion; that equates to over $150 billion in today’s dollars.

The set of judgments that led Kennedy to decide to spend the resources to send Americans to the moon combined lasting characteristics of the American people; a conviction of American exceptionalism and a mission derived from that conviction; the geopolitical situation of early 1961; and the individual values and style that Kennedy brought to the White House.

After Apollo 11, five more missions to the lunar surface followed between November 1969 and December 1972. Then we stopped. As Apollo 17 lifted off of the

moon on December 24, 1972, President Richard Nixon stated, “This may be the last time in this century that men may walk on the moon.” By his post-Apollo decisions, Nixon turned that forecast into reality.

Apollo had been defined by President Kennedy as a race, and once the United States won that competition Nixon saw no reason to keep racing. As one of his aides commented as decisions were being made on what to do after Apollo, “No compelling reason to push space [after Apollo] was ever presented to the White House by NASA or anyone else.” There was in 1972, and since, no public or political will to provide to the post-Apollo NASA anywhere near the resources that had been needed to carry out the moon program. In a space program sense, Apollo was a dead end; NASA in 1972 started over in human spaceflight with the space shuttle and space station programs. !!!

Could Apollo happen again? Certainly not in the same way. But resuming exploration has been NASA’s guiding goal since 2004, and the hardware to restart travel beyond Earth’s orbit is well along in development. How that hardware – or equivalents developed by the private sector – will be used in the coming decade is still not clear. But I do hope that the United States once again takes the lead role in human exploration, and that the 60th anniversary of Apollo finds Americans living and working on the lunar surface.

NASA

A panoramic photograph taken April 23, 1972, by Charles Duke shows the Apollo 16 landing site in the lunar highlands.

ABOUT THE SECTION

STAFF

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

CREDITS

Space exploration in the late 1960s captivated the world’s attention. Fifty years later, relive Apollo and the six lunar landings with this special report and watch for Apollo 50th anniversary events near you in 2019.

Editors: John M. Humenik, Vice President/News and CCO, and Ben Cunningham, Director of News Presentation, Lee Enterprises Contributors: Jason Adrians, April Burford, Deborah Hile, Mary Garrison, Kent Nichols, Jill Jorden Spitz

This section would not be possible without the support of NASA. We thank Public Affairs Officer Kathleen Haas Ellis at NASA/KSC Office of Communications and Matthew Miller, Program/Project Coordinator II Apache-Logical, JV at the NASA Communication Office for their assistance and guidance. We also thank author Dr. John M. Logsdon, professor emeritus of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs, for his expert commentary and his contagious passion for learning about the Apollo missions, space policy and space exploration.

NASA photos in this section represent a fraction of Apollo-related visuals and content available online. You can discover more historical and current mission information at nasa.gov and images of the moon at lroc.asu.edu.

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

| DECEMBER 2018

Journey along to the moon 1.0 Mission summary

The purpose of Apollo 11 was to land men on the lunar surface and to return them safely to Earth.

NASA’s mission report captures in flat prose what took place during the 1969 Apollo 11 moon landing — included are commander Neil Armstrong’s detailed observations 4.0 Pilots’ Report

The launch The space vehicle was launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida, at 8:32 a.m. EST, July 16, 1969. The activities during earth orbit checkout, translunar injection, transposition and docking, spacecraft ejection, and translunar coast were similar to those of Apollo 10. ...

The spacecraft was inserted into lunar orbit at about 76 hours, and the circularization maneuver was performed two revolutions later. ... The commander and Lunar Module pilot entered the lunar module to prepare for descent.

The two spacecraft were undocked at about 100 hours, followed by separation of the command and service modules from the lunar module.

Lunar landing Descent orbit insertion was performed at approximately 101-1/2 hours, and powered descent to the lunar surface began about 1 hour later. The lunar module was maneuvered manually approximately 1,100 feet downrange from the nominal landing point during the final 2 1/2 minutes of descent. The spacecraft landed in the Sea of Tranquility at 102:45:40. ...

During the first 2 hours on the lunar surface, the two crewmen performed a post-landing checkout. ...

The commander egressed through the forward hatch and deployed an equipment module in the descent stage. A camera in this module provided live television coverage at 109:24:15 (9:56:15 p.m. EST, July 20, 1969). !!!

NASA

The Apollo 11 crew was Neil A. Armstrong, commander; Michael Collins, Command Module pilot; and Edwin E. “Buzz” Aldrin, Jr., Lunar Module pilot.

4.1 Prelaunch Activities All prelaunch systems operations and checks were completed on time and without difficulty. The configuration of the environmental control system included operation of the secondary glycol loop and provided comfortable cockpit temperature conditions.

4.2 Launch

Lift-off occurred precisely on time with ignition accompanied by a low rumbling noise and moderate vibration that increased significantly at the moment of hold-down release. The vibration magnitudes decreased appreciably at the time tower clearance was verified. The yaw, pitch, and roll guidance-program sequences occurred as expected.

No unusual sounds or vibrations while passing through the region of maximum dynamic pressure and the angle of attack remained near zero.

The S-IC/S-II staging sequence occurred smoothly and at the expected time.

The entire S-II stage flight was remarkably smooth and quiet, and the launch escape tower and boost protective cover were jettisoned normally. The mixture ratio shift was accompanied by a noticeable acceleration decrease.

The S-II/S-IVB staging sequence occurred smoothly and approximately at the predicted time. The S-IVB insertion trajectory was completed without incident and the automatic guidance shutdown yielded an insertion-orbit ephemeris, from the command module computer, of 102.1 by 103.9 miles. Communications between the crewmembers and the Network were excellent throughout all stages of launch.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 14

Apollo 11 takes off from Launch Pad 39A on July 16, 1969. NASA

NASA transcript PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICER: “We are still go with Apollo 11. 30 seconds and counting. Astronauts reported, feels good. T-25 seconds. 20 seconds and counting. T-15 seconds, guidance is internal, 12, 11, 10, 9, ignition sequence starts, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, zero, all engines running, LIFTOFF. We have a liftoff, 32 minutes past the hour. Liftoff on Apollo 11. Tower cleared. ...

“All is well at Houston. You are good at 1 minute. Downrange 1 mile, altitude 3- 4 miles now, velocity is 2,195 feet per second. We are through the region of maximum dynamic pressure now.

8 miles down range, 12 miles high, velocity 4,000 feet per second. ...

“At 3 minutes, down range 70 miles, 43 miles high, velocity 9,300 feet per second. ...

“Velocity 25, 254 feet per second. Downrange 1,400 miles now. Altitude 102.8 nautical miles.” !!!

ARMSTRONG: “Hey, Houston, Apollo 11. That Saturn gave us a magnificent ride.”

CAP COM: “Roger, 11. We’ll pass that on. And, it certainly looks like you are well on your way now.”

ARMSTRONG: “We have no complaints with any of the three stages on that ride. It was beautiful.”

13

14

DECEMBER 2018 |

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 13

4.3 Earth Orbit Coast and Translunar Injection The insertion checklist was completed, and a series of spacecraft systems checks disclosed no abnormalities.

All tests of the navigation equipment, including alignments and drift checks, were satisfactory. The service module reaction control thrusters were fired in the minimum impulse mode and were verified by telemetry.

No abnormalities were noted during preparation for translunar injection.

Initiation of translunar injection was accompanied by the proper onboard indications and the S-IVB propellant tanks were repressurized on schedule.

The S-IVB stage reignited on time at 2:44:16 without ignition or guidance transients. An apparent 0.50- to 1.5degree pitch-attitude error on the attitude indicators was not confirmed by the command module computer, which indicated that the attitude and the attitude rate duplicated the reference trajectory precisely . . .The guided cutoff yielded a velocity very close to that expected, as indicated by the onboard computer. The entry monitor system further confirmed that the forward velocity error for the translunar injection maneuver was within 3.3 ft/sec.

Astronauts Edwin E. “Buzz” Aldrin, Jr. and Neil Armstrong landed the Lunar Module “Eagle” on the moon July 20, 1969. Part of their mission also was to set up experiments and take photos of the lunar surface. NASA

!!!

4.6 Lunar Orbit Insertion

The spacecraft was inserted into a 169.9- by 60.9-mile orbit based on the onboard computer with a 6-minute service propulsion maneuver. Procedurally, this firing was the same as all the other service propulsion maneuvers, except that it was started by using the bank-B propellant valves instead of the bank-A valves.

The steering of the docked spacecraft was exceptionally smooth, and the control of applied velocity change was extremely accurate, as evidenced by the fact that residuals were only 0.1 ft/sec in all axes.

The circularization maneuver was targeted for a 66- by 54-mile orbit, a change from the 60-mile circular orbit which had been executed in previous lunar flights. The firing was normally accomplished using bank-A propellant valves only, and the onboard solution of the orbit was 66.1 by 54.4 miles. The ellipticity of this orbit was supposed to slowly disappear because of irregularities in the lunar gravitational field, such that the command module would be in a 60-mile circular orbit at the time of rendezvous. However, the onboard estimate of the orbit during the rendezvous was 63.2 by 56.8 miles, indicating the ellipticity decay rate was less than expected. As a result the rendezvous maneuver solutions differed from the preflight estimates.

4.7 Lunar Module Checkout

Two entries were made into the lunar module prior to the final activation on the day of landing. The first entry was made at about 57 hours, on the day before lunar orbit insertion. Television and still cameras were used to document the hatch probe and drogue removal and the initial entry into the lunar module. The command module oxygen hoses were used to provide circulation in the lunar module cabin. A leisurely inspection period confirmed the proper positioning of all circuit breaker and switch settings and stowage items. All cameras were checked for proper operation.

4.8 Descent Preparation

The crew was awakened according to the flight plan schedule. The liquid cooling garment and biomedical harnesses were donned. In anticipation, these items had been unstowed and prepositioned the evening before. Following a hearty breakfast, the Lunar Module Pilot transferred into the lunar module to accomplish initial activation before returning to the command module for suiting. This staggered suiting sequence served to expedite the final checkout and resulted in only two crewmembers being in the command module during each suiting operation.

The sequence of activities was essentially the same as that developed for Apollo 10, with only minor refinements.

Numerous Network simulations and training sessions, including suited operations of this mission phase, ensured the completion of this exercise within the allotted time. As in all previous entries into the lunar module, the repressurization valve produced a loud “bang” whenever it was positioned to CLOSE or AUTO with the cabin regulator off. Transfer of power from the command module to the lunar module and then electrical power system activation were completed on schedule.

The primary glycol loop was activated about 30 minutes early, with a slow but immediate decrease in glycol temperature. The activation continued to progress smoothly 30 to 40 minutes ahead of schedule. With the Commander entering the lunar module early, the Lunar Module Pilot had more than twice the normally allotted time to don his pressure suit in the command module.

The early powerup of the lunar module computer and inertial measurement unit enabled the ground to calculate the fine gyro torquing angles for aligning the lunar module platform to the command module platform before the loss of communications on the lunar far side. This early alignment added more than an hour to the planned time available for analyzing the drift of the lunar module guidance system.

After suiting, the Lunar Module Pilot entered the lunar module, the drogue and probe were installed, and the hatch was closed. During the ascent-battery checkout, the variations in voltage produced a noticeable pitch and intensity variation in the already loud noise of the glycol pump. Suit-loop pressure integrity and cabin regulator repressurization checks were accomplished without difficulty.

Activation of the abort guidance system produced only one minor anomaly. An illuminated portion of one of the data readout numerics failed, and this resulted in some ambiguity in data readout . . .

Following command module landmark tracking, the vehicle was maneuvered to obtain steerable antenna acquisition and state vectors were uplinked into the primary guidance computer. The landing gear deployment was evidenced by a slight jolt to the vehicle. The reaction control system, the descent propulsion system, and the rendezvous radar system were activated and checked out. Each pressurization was confirmed both audibly and by instrument readout.

The abort guidance system calibration was accomplished at the preplanned vehicle attitude. As the command and service modules maneuvered both vehicles to the undocking attitude, a final switch and circuit breaker configuration check was accomplished, followed by donning of helmets and gloves. !!!

4.9 Undocking and Separation Particular care was exercised in the operation of both vehicles throughout the undocking and separation sequences to ensure that the lunar module guidance computer maintained an accurate knowledge of position and velocity.

The undocking action imparted a velocity to the lunar module of 0.4 ft/sec, as measured by the lunar module primary guidance system. The abort guidance system disagreed with the primary system by approximately 0.2 ft/sec,

which is well within the preflight limit.

The velocity was nulled, assuming the primary system was assumed to be correct. The command module undocking velocity was maintained until reaching the desired inspection distance of 40 feet, where it was visually nulled with respect to the lunar module.

A visual inspection by the Command Module Pilot during a lunar module 360-degree yaw maneuver confirmed proper landing gear extension. The lunar module maintained position with respect to the command module at relative rates believed to be less than 0.1 ft/sec. The 2.5ft/sec, radially downward separation maneuver was performed with the command and service modules at 100 hours to enter the planned equiperiod separation orbit.

4.10 Lunar Module Descent

The first optical alignment of the inertial platform in preparation for descent orbit insertion was accomplished shortly after entering darkness following separation. The torquing angles were approximately 0.3 degree, indicating an error in the docked alignment or platform drift. A rendezvous radar lock was achieved manually, and the radar boresight coincided with that of the crew optical sight. Radar range was substantiated by the VHD ranging in the command module.

4.10.1 Descent Orbit Insertion

The descent orbit insertion maneuver was performed with the descent engine in the manual throttle configuration.

Ignition at the minimum throttle setting was smooth, with no noise or sensation of acceleration. After 15 seconds, the thrust level was advanced to 40 percent, as planned. Throttle response was smooth and free of oscillations. The guided cutoff left residuals of less than 1 ft/sec in each axis. The X- and Z-axis residuals were reduced to zero by using the reaction control system. The computer determined ephemeris was 9.1 by 57.2 miles, as compared with the [4-8] predicted value of 8.5 by 57.2 miles. The abort guidance system confirmed that

the magnitude of the maneuver was correct. An additional evaluation was performed by using the rendezvous radar to check the relative velocity between the two spacecraft at 6 and 7 minutes subsequent to the maneuver.

These values corresponded to the predicted data within 0.5 ft/sec.

4.10.2 Alignment and Navigation Checks Just prior to powered descent, the angle between the line of sight to the sun and a selected axis of the inertial platform was compared with the onboard computer prediction of that angle and this provided a check on inertial platform drift. Three such measurements were all within the specified tolerance, but the 0.08-degree spread between them was somewhat larger than expected.

Visual checks of downrange and crossrange position indicated that ignition for the powered descent firing would occur at approximately the correct location over the lunar surface. Based on measurements of the line-of-sight rate of landmarks, the estimates of altitudes converged on a predicted altitude at ignition 52 000 feet above the surface. These measurements were slightly degraded because of a 10 - to 15-degree yaw bias maintained to improve communications margins.

4.10.3 Powered Descent

Ignition for powered descent occurred on time at the minimum thrust level, and the engine was automatically advanced to the fixed throttle point (maximum thrust) after 26 seconds. Visual position checks indicated the spacecraft was 2 or 3 seconds early over a known landmark, but with little cross-range error. A yaw maneuver to a face-up position was initiated at an altitude of about 45 900 feet approximately 4 minutes after ignition. The landing radar began receiving altitude data immediately. The altitude difference, as displayed

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY |

DECEMBER 2018

15

!!!

4.12 Lunar Surface Operations 4.12.1 Postlanding Checkout

NASA

This photograph of Armstrong was taken by Aldrin soon after returning to the Lunar Module.

First man on the moon CAP COM: “Okay. Neil, we can see you coming down the ladder now.”

ARMSTRONG: “Okay. I just checked getting back up to that first step, Buzz.

It’s - not even collapsed too far, but it’s adequate to get back up.”

CAP COM: “Roger. We copy.”

ARMSTRONG: “It takes a pretty good little jump.”

ARMSTRONG: “And the — the surface is fine and powdery. I can - I can pick it up loosely with my toe. It does adhere in fine layers like powdered charcoal to the sole and sides of my boots. I only go in a small fraction of an inch, maybe an eighth of an inch, but I can see the footprints of my boots and the treads in the fine, sandy particles.”

CAP COM: “Neil, this is Houston. We’re copying.”

ARMSTRONG: “I’m at the foot of the ladder. The LM footpads are only depressed in the surface about 1 or 2 inches, although the surface appears to be very, very fine grained, as you get close to it. It’s almost like a powder. Down there, it’s very fine.

I’m going to step off the LM now.

ARMSTRONG: “There seems to be no difficulty in moving around as we suspected. It’s even perhaps easier than the simulations at one-sixth g that we performed in the various simulations on the ground. It’s actually no trouble to walk around. Okay. The descent engine did not leave a crater of any size. It has about 1 foot clearance on the ground. We’re essentially on a very level place here. I can see some evidence of rays emanating from the descent engine, but a very insignificant amount.”

“That’s one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind.”

ARMSTRONG: “Okay, Buzz, we ready to bring down the camera?”

CAP COM: “Buzz, this is Houston. F/2 1/160th second for shadow photography on the sequence camera.”

ALDRIN: “Okay.”

— NASA TRANSCRIPT

Aldrin egresses the Lunar Module and descends the steps of the ladder. NASA

‘Magnificent desolation’

‘The Eagle has landed’ ALDRIN: “Okay. 75 feet. There’s looking good. Down a half, 6 forward.”

CAP COM: “60 seconds.”

ALDRIN: “Lights on. Down 2 1/2. Forward. Forward. Good. 40 feet, down 2 1/2. Kicking up some dust. 30 feet, 2 1/2 down. Faint shadow. 4 forward. 4 forward. Drifting to the right a little.

Okay. Down a half.”

CAP COM: “30 seconds.”

ARMSTRONG: “Forward drift?”

ALDRIN: “Yes. Okay. CONTACT LIGHT. ... Okay. ENGINE STOP. ...”

CAP COM: “We copy you down, Eagle.”

ARMSTRONG: “Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed.”

CAP COM: “Roger, Tranquility. We copy you on the ground. You got a bunch of guys about to turn blue.

We’re breathing again. Thanks a lot.”

ARMSTRONG: “Thank you.”

CAP COM: “You’re looking good here.”

ARMSTRONG: “Okay. We’re going to be busy for a minute.” !!!

CAP COM: “Roger. Tranquility. Be advised there’s lots of smiling faces in this room and all over the world. Over.”

ARMSTRONG: “Well, there are two of them up here.”

CAP COM: “Roger. That was a beautiful job, you guys.”

COLLINS: “And don’t forget one in the command module.”

— NASA TRANSCRIPT

from the radar and the computer, was approximately 2800 feet. y 4 At 5 minutes 16 seconds after ignition, the first of a series of computer alarms indicated a computer overload edcondition. These alarms continued in-

termittently for more than 4 minutes, and although continuation of the trajectory was permissible, monitoring of the computer information display was occasionally precluded . . .

Attitude-thruster firings were heard during each major attitude maneuver and intermittently at other times.

Thrust reduction of the descent propulsion system occurred nearly on time (planned at 6 minutes 24 seconds after ignition), contributed to the prediction that the landing would probably be downrange of the intended point, inasmuch as the computer had not been corrected for the observed downrange error.

The transfer to the final-approach-phase program (P64) occurred at the predicted time. After the pitch maneuver and the radar antenna position change, the control system was transferred from the automatic to the attitude hold mode and control response checked in pitch and roll.

Automatic control was restored after zeroing the pitch and yaw errors.

After it became clear that an automatic descent would terminate in a boulder field surrounding a large sharp-rimmed crater, manual control was again assumed, and the range was extended to avoid the unsatisfactory landing area. The rate-of-descent mode of throttle (program P66) was entered in the computer to reduce altitude rate so as to maintain sufficient height for landing-site surveillance.

Both the downrange and the crossrange positions were adjusted to permit final descent in a small, relatively level area bounded by a boulder field to the north and sizable craters to the east and south. Surface obscuration caused by blowing dust was apparent at 100 feet and became increasingly severe as the altitude decreased.

Although visual determination of horizontal velocity, attitude, and altitude rate were degraded, cues for these variables were adequate for landing. Landing conditions are estimated to have been 1 or 2 ft/sec left, 0 ft/sec forward, and 1 ft/sec down; no evidence of vehicle instability at landing was observed.

ALDRIN: “Okay. Now I want to back up and partially close the hatch. Making sure not to lock it on my way out.”

ARMSTRONG: (Laughter) “A pretty good thought.”

ALDRIN: “That’s our home for the next couple of hours and we want to take good care of it. Okay. I’m on the top step and I can look down over the RCU, landing gear pads. It’s a very simple matter to hop down from one step to the next.”

ARMSTRONG: “Yes. I found I could be very comfortable, and walking is also very comfortable. You’ve got three more steps and then a long one.” !!!

ARMSTRONG: “A little more. About another inch. There you got it. That’s a good step. About a 3-footer.”

ALDRIN: “Beautiful view!”

ARMSTRONG: “Isn’t that something!

Magnificent sight out here.”

ALDRIN: “Magnificent desolation.”

— NASA TRANSCRIPT

The postlanding checklist was completed as planned. Venting of the descent oxidizer tanks was begun almost immediately. When the oxidizer tank pressure was vented to between 40 and 50 psi, fuel was vented to the same pressure level. Apparently, the pressure indications received on the ground were somewhat higher and they increased with time . . . At ground request, the valves were reopened and the tanks vented to 15 psi.

Platform alignment and preparation for early lift-off were completed on schedule without significant problems.

The mission timer malfunctioned and displayed an impossible number that could not be correlated with any specific failure time. After several unsuccessful attempts to recycle this timer, it was turned off for 11 hours to cool. The timer was turned on for ascent, and it operated properly and performed satisfactorily for the remainder of the mission . . .

4.12.2 Egress Preparation

The crew had given considerable thought to the advantage of beginning the extravehicular activity as soon as possible after landing instead of following the flight plan schedule of having the surface operations between two rest periods. The initial rest period was planned to allow flexibility in the event of unexpected difficulty with postlanding activities. These difficulties did not materialize, the crew were not overly tired, and no problem was experienced in adjusting to the 1/6-g environment. Based on these facts, the decision was made at 104:40:00 to proceed with the extravehicular activity prior to the first rest period.

Preparation for extravehicular activity began at 106:11:00. The estimate of the preparation time proved to be optimistic. In simulations, 2 hours had been found to be a reasonable allocation; however, everything had also been laid out in an orderly manner in the cockpit, and only those items involved in the extravehicular activity were present. In fact, items involved in the extravehicular activity were present. In fact, there were checklists, food packets, monoculars, and other miscellaneous items that interfered with an orderly preparation. All these items required some thought as to their possible interference or use in the extravehicular activity. This interference resulted in exceeding the time line estimate by a considerable amount.

Preparation for egress was conducted slowly, carefully, and deliberately, and future missions should be planned and conducted with the same philosophy.

The extravehicular activity preparation checklist was adequate and was closely followed. However, minor items that required a decision in real time or had not been considered before flight required more time than anticipated.

An electrical connector on the cable that connects the remote control unit to the portable life support system gave some trouble in mating (see section 16.3.2). This problem had been occasionally encountered with the same equipment before flight. At least 10 minutes were required in order to connect each unit, and at one point it was thought the connection would not be successfully completed.

Considerable difficulty was experienced with voice communications when the extra-vehicular transceivers were used inside the lunar module. At times communications were good, but at other times they were garbled on the ground for no obvious reason. Outside the vehicle, there were no appreciable communication problems. Upon ingress from the surface, these difficulties recurred, but under different conditions. That is, the voice dropouts to the ground were not repeatable in the same manner.

Depressurization of the lunar module was one aspect of the mission that had never been completely performed on the ground. In the various altitude chamber tests of the spacecraft and the extravehicular mobility unit, a complete set of authentic conditions was never present. The depressurization of the lunar module through the bacteria filter took much longer than had been anticipated. The indicated cabin pressure did CONTINUED ON PAGE 16

NASA

Armstrong turns toward the Lunar Module as his face is visible through his visor.

16

DECEMBER 2018

|

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

The handle on the camera was adequate, and very few pictures were triggered inadvertently. not go below 0.1 psi, and some concern The solar wind experiment was easily was experienced in opening the forward deployed. As with the other operations hatch against this residual pressure. The involving lunar surface penetration, it hatch appeared to bend on initial openwas only possible to penetrate the lunar ing, and small particles appeared to be surface material only about 4 or 5 inches. blown out around the hatch when the The experiment mount was not quite as seal was broken . . . stable as desired, but it stayed erect.

4.12.3 Lunar Module Egress The television system presented no difficulty except that the cord was conSimulation work in both the water tinually in the way. At first, the white immersion facility and the 1/6-g envicord showed up well, but it soon became ronment in an airplane was reasonably covered with dust and was therefore accurate in preparing the crew for lunar more difficult to see. The cable had a module egress. Body positioning and “set” from being coiled around the reel arching-the-back techniques that were and it would not lie completely flat on required to exit the hatch were prethe surface. Even when it was flat, howformed, and no unexpected problems ever, a foot could still slide under it, and were experienced. The forward platform the Commander became entangled sevwas more than adequate to allow changeral times . . . ing the body position from that used in Collecting the bulk sample required egressing the hatch to that required for more time than anticipated because the getting on the ladder. The first ladder modular equipment stowage assembly step was somewhat difficult to see and table was in deep shadow, and collecting required caution and forethought. In samples in that area was far less desirgeneral, the hatch, porch, and ladder able than taking those operation were not in the sunlight. It was particularly difficult also desirable to take and caused little consamples as far from the cern. Operations on the President Nixon’s exhaust plume and proplatform could be percall to the moon pellant contamination formed without losing PRESIDENT NIXON: “Neil as possible. An attempt body balance, and there and Buzz, I am talking to was made to include a was adequate room for you by telephone from the hard rock in each sammaneuvering.

Oval Room at the White ple and approximately The initial operation House, and this certainly 20 trips were required of the lunar equipment has to be the most historic to fill the box. As in conveyor in lowering telephone call ever made. simulations, the difthe camera was satisI just can’t tell you how ficulty of scooping up factory, but after the proud we all are of what the material without straps had become covyou ... for every American. throwing it out as the ered with lunar surface This has to be the proudscoop became free crematerial, a problem est day of our lives. And ated some problem. It arose in transporting for people all over the was almost impossible the equipment back into world, I am sure they, too, to collect a full scoop of the lunar module. Dust join with Americans in recmaterial, and the task from this equipment ognizing what an immense required about double fell back onto the lower feat this is. Because of the planned time. crewmember and into what you have done, the Several of the operathe cabin and seemed heavens have become a tions would have been to bind the conveyor so part of man’s world. And easier in sunlight. Alas to require consideras you talk to us from the Sea of Tranquility, it though it was possible able force to operate it. inspires us to redouble to see in the shadows, Alternatives in transour efforts to bring peace time must be allowed porting equipment into and tranquility to Earth. for dark adaptation the lunar module had For one priceless moment when walking from the been suggested before in the whole history of sunlight into shadow. flight, and although no man, all the people on this On future missions, it opportunity was availEarth are truly one; one would advantageous to able to evaluate these in their pride in what you conduct a yaw maneutechniques, it is behave done, and one in our ver just prior to landing lieved they might be an prayers that you will reso that the descent improvement over the turn safely to Earth.” stage work area would conveyor.

ARMSTRONG: “Thank you, be in sunlight.

Mr. President. It’s a great 4.12.4 Surface The scientific experhonor and privilege for us iment package was easy Exploration to be here representing to deploy manually, and not only the United States some time was saved Work in the 1/6-g but men of peace of all here. The package was environment was a nations, and with interest easy to manage, but pleasant experience. and a curiosity and a vifinding a level area was Adaptation to movesion for the future. It’s an quite difficult. A good ment was not difficult honor for us to be able to horizon reference was and movement seemed participate here today.” not available, and in to be natural. Certain PRESIDENT NIXON: “And the 1/6-g environment, specific peculiarities, thank you very much and I physical cues were not such as the effect of the look forward – All of us look as effective as in a one-g. mass versus the lack forward to seeing you on Therefore, the selection of traction, can be anthe Hornet on Thursday.” of a deployment site for ticipated but complete the experiments caused familiarization need not ALDRIN: “I look forward some problems. The exbe pursued. to that very much, sir.” periments were placed in The most effec— NASA TRANSCRIPT an area between shallow tive means of walking craters in surface mateseemed to be the lope rial of the same consisthat evolved naturally. tency as the surrounding area and which The fact that both feet were occasionally should be stable. Considerable effort was off the ground at the same time, plus the required to change the slope of one of the fact that the feet did not return to the experiments. It was not possible to lower surface as rapidly as on earth, required the equipment by merely forcing it down, some anticipation before attempting and it was necessary to move the experto stop. Although movement was not iment back and forth to scrape away the difficult, there was noticeable resistance excess surface material. provided by the suit.

No abnormal conditions were noted On future flights, crewmembers may during the lunar module inspection. want to consider kneeling in order to The insulation on the secondary struts work with their hands. Getting to and had been damaged from the heat, but from the kneeling position would be the primary struts were only singed or no problem, and being able to do more covered with soot. There was much less work with the hands would increase damage than on the examples that had productive capability. been seen before flight.

Photography with the Hasselblad Obtaining the core tube sample precameras on the remote control unit sented some difficulty. It was impossible mounts produced no problems. The to force the tube more than 4 or 5 inches first panorama was taken while the into the surface material, yet the matecamera was hand-held; however, it was rial provided insufficient resistance to much easier to operate on the mount.

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 15

NASA

Aldrin pauses for a photo in the Lunar Module during a translunar coast.

NASA

TOP: Aldrin salutes the U.S. flag during Apollo 11 extravehicular activity on the lunar surface.

ABOVE: Aldrin also deployed two components of the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Package during the 21 hours and 36 minutes he and Armstrong spent on the moon. hold the extension handle in the upright to guide his feet to the third step. Moveposition. Since the handle had to be ments in the 1/6-g environment were held upright, this precluded using both slow enough to allow deliberate foot hands on the hammer. In addition, the placement after the jump. The ladder resistance of the suit made it difficult was a bit slippery from the powdery surto steady the core tube and swing with face material, but not dangerously so. any great force. The hammer actually As previously stated, mobility on missed several times. Sufficient force the platform was adequate for develwas obtained to make dents in the hanoping alternate methods of transferdle, but the tube could be driven only ring equipment from the surface. The to a depth of about 6 inches. Extraction hatch opened easily, and the ingress offered little or virtually no resistance. technique developed before flight was Two samples were satisfactory. A contaken. certed effort to arch the Insufficient time back was required when End of the day remained to take the about half way through CAP COM: “Tranquility documented sample, the hatch, to keep the Base, Houston.” although as wide a forward end of the porvariety of rocks was table life support sysARMSTRONG: “Go ahead. selected as remaining tem low enough to clear Tranquility Base, here.” time permitted. the hatch. There was CAP COM: “Roger. Just The performance of very little exertion aswant to let you guys know the extravehicular mosociated with transition that since, you’re an hour bility unit was excellent. to a standing position. and a half over your timeNeither crewman felt Because of the bulk of line and we’re all taking any thermal discomfort. the extravehicular moa day off tomorrow, we’re The Commander used bility unit, caution had going to leave you. See the minimum cooling to be exercised to avoid you later.” mode for most of the bumping into switches, ARMSTRONG: “I don’t surface operation. The circuit breakers, and blame you a bit.”

Lunar Module Pilot other controls while switched to the maximoving around the cockCAP COM: “That’s a real mum diverter valve popit. One circuit breaker great day, guys. I really sition immediately after was in fact broken as a enjoyed it. sublimator startup and result of contact . . .

ARMSTRONG: “Thank you. operated at maximum Equipment jettiYou couldn’t have enjoyed position for 42 minutes son was performed as it as much as we did.” before switching to the planned, and the time CAP COM: “Roger.” intermediate position. taken before flight in The switch remained determining the items ALDRIN: “It was great.” in the intermediate ponot required for lift!!! sition for the duration off was well spent. of the extravehicular Considerable weight CAP COM: “Roger. And activity. The thermal reduction and increase good night.” effect of shadowed areas in space was realized.

COLLINS: “Good night, in versus those areas in Discarding the equipBruce.

Thanks a lot.” sunlight was not detectment through the hatch — NASA TRANSCRIPT able inside the suit. was not difficult, and The crewmen were only one item remained kept physically cool on the platform. The and comfortable, and post-ingress checklist the ease of performing in the 1/6-g procedures were performed withenvironment indicate that tasks reout difficulty; the checklist was well quiring greater physical exertion may planned and was followed precisely. be undertaken on future flights. The 4.12.6 Lunar Rest Period Commander experienced some physical exertion while transporting the The rest period was almost a comsample return container to the lunar plete loss. The helmet and gloves were module, but his physical limit had not worn to relieve any subconscious been approached. anxiety about a loss of cabin pressure and presented no problem. But noise, 4.12.5 Lunar Module Ingress lighting, and a lower-than-desired temperature were annoying. It was unIngress to the lunar module produced no problems. The capability to do a vercomfortably cool in the suits, even with tical jump was used to an advantage in the water-flow disconnected. Oxygen making the first step up the ladder. By flow was finally cut off, and the helmets doing a deep knee bend, then springing were removed, but the noise from the up the ladder, the Commander was able glycol pumps was then loud enough to

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY |

DECEMBER 2018

17

Reading the plaque

NASA PHOTOS

Armstrong with Aldrin, top, read from a plaque that is visible through the Lunar Module ladder, above.

Putting the flag in place

ARMSTRONG: “For those who haven’t read the plaque, we’ll read the plaque that’s on the front landing gear of this LM. First there’s two hemispheres, one showing each of the two hemispheres of the Earth. Underneath it says “Here Man from the planet Earth first set foot upon the Moon, July 1969 A.D. We came in peace for all mankind.” It has the crew members’ signatures and the signature of the President of the United States.” — NASA TRANSCRIPT

CAP COM: “Roger. The EVA is progressing beautifully. I believe they are setting up the flag now.”

COLLINS: “Great.”

CAP COM: “I guess you’re about the only person around that doesn’t have TV coverage of the scene.”

COLLINS: “That’s all right. I don’t mind a bit. How is the quality of the TV?” CAP COM: Oh, it’s beautiful, Mike. It really is.”

COLLINS: “Oh, gee, that’s great! Is the lighting half-way decent?”

CAP COM: “Yes indeed. They’ve got the flag up now and you can see the stars and stripes on the lunar surface.”

COLLINS: “Beautiful. Just beautiful.” !!!

ALDRIN: “That’s good. See if you can pull that end off a little bit. Take that end up a little.”

ARMSTRONG: “It won’t pull out.

Okay.”

— NASA TRANSCRIPT

interrupt sleep. The window shades did not completely block out light, and the cabin was illuminated by a combination of light through the shades, warning lights, and display lighting. The Commander rested on the ascent engine cover and was bothered by the light entering through the telescope. The Lunar Module Pilot estimated that he slept fitfully for perhaps 2 hours and the Commander did not sleep at all, even though body positioning was not a problem.

Because of the reduced gravity, the positions on the floor and on the engine cover were both quite comfortable.

NASA

The “Eagle” returns from the lunar surface to dock with the Command Module as the Earth is visible in the background. !!!

4.13 Launch Preparation

Aligning the platform before lift-off was complicated by the limited number of stars available. Because of sun and earth interference, only two detents effectively remained from which to select stars.

Accuracy is greater for stars close to the center of the field, but none were available at this location. A gravity/one-star alignment was successfully performed.

A manual averaging technique was used to sample five successive cursor readings and then five spiral readings. The result was then entered into the computer. This technique appeared to be easier than taking and entering five separate readings.

Torquing angles were close to 0.7° in all three axes and indicated that the platform drifted. (Editor’s note: Platform drift was within specification limits.)

After the alignment, the navigation program was entered. It is recommended that future crews update the abort guidance system with the primary guidance state vector at this point and then use the abort guidance system to determine the command module location. The primary guidance system cannot be used to determine the command module range and range rate, and the radar will not lock on until the command module is within 400 miles range. The abort guidance system provides good data as this range is approached.

A cold-fire reaction control system check and an abort guidance system calibration were performed, and the ascent pad was taken. About 45 minutes prior to lift-off, another platform alignment was performed. The landing site alignment option at ignition was used for lift-off.

The torquing angles for this alignment were approximately 0.09 degree.

In accordance with ground instructions, the rendezvous radar was placed in the antenna SLEW position with the circuit breakers off for ascent to avoid recurrence of the alarms experienced during a descent.

Both crewmembers had forgotten to watch for the small helium pressure decrease indication that the Apollo 10

4.19 Entry

NASA

The Apollo 11 crew and Command Module are recovered after splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. The astronauts were transported to the USS Hornet and later into quarantine. crew experienced when the ascent tanks were pressurized, and the crew initially believed that only one tank had been pressurized. This oversight was temporary and delayed the crew verification of proper pressurization of both tanks.

4.14 Ascent

The pyrotechnic noises at descent stage separation were quite loud, but ascent-engine ignition was inaudible.

The yaw and pitch maneuvers were very smooth. The pitch- and roll-attitude limit cycles were as expected and were not accompanied by physiological difficulties. Both the primary and the abort guidance systems indicated the ascent to be a duplicate of the planned trajectory. The guided cutoff yielded residuals of less than 2 ft/sec; and the inplane components were nulled to within 0.1 ft/sec with the reaction control system.

Throughout the trajectory, the ground track could be visually verified, although a pitch attitude confirmation by use of the horizon in the overhead window was found to be quite difficult because of the horizon lighting condition.

Lift off from the moon ARMSTRONG: “Got that ascent ... ?”

ALDRIN: “9, 8, 7, 6, 5, abort stage, engine arm ascent, proceed. ...

Beautiful.” !!!

ARMSTRONG: “Looking good here.

It’s a pretty spectacular ride.”

ALDRIN: “... off to the right.”

CAP COM: “Eagle, Houston. You’re still looking mighty fine. ...”

ARMSTRONG: “Roger, Houston. The Eagle is back in orbit, having left Tranquility Base and leaving behind a — a replica from our Apollo 11 patch and the olive branch.”

CAP COM: “Eagle, Houston. Roger.

We copy. The whole world is proud of you.”

ARMSTRONG: “We had a lot of help down there.”

— NASA TRANSCRIPT

Because of the presence of thunderstorms in the primary recovery area (1285 miles downrange from the entry interface of 400 000 feet), the targeted landing point was moved to a range of 1500 miles from the entry interface.

This change required the use of computer program P65 (skip-up control routine) in the computer, in addition to those programs used for the planned shorter range entry. This change caused the crew some apprehension, since such entries had rarely been practiced in preflight simulations. However, during the entry, these parameters remained within acceptable limits. The entry was guided automatically and was nominal in all respects. The first acceleration pulse reached approximately 6.5g and the second reached 6.0g.

4.20 Recovery

On the landing, the 18-knot surface wind filled the parachutes and immediately rotated the command module into the apex down (stable II) flotation position prior to parachute release. Moderate wave-induced oscillations accelerated the uprighting sequence, which was completed in less than 8 minutes. No difficulties were encountered in completing the postlanding checklist.

The biological isolation garments were donned inside the spacecraft. Crew transfer into the raft was followed by hatch closure and by decontamination of the spacecraft and crewmembers by germicidal scrubdown.

Helicopter pickup was performed as planned, but visibility was substantially degraded because of moisture condensation on the biological isolation garment faceplate. The helicopter transfer to the aircraft carrier was performed as quickly as could be expected, but the temperature increase inside the suit was uncomfortable. Transfer from the helicopter into the mobile quarantine facility completed the voyage of Apollo 11.

18

DECEMBER 2018

|

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

Mapping the moon

Arizona scientists played major role in locating lunar landing sites

I

BY MIKAYLA MACE Arizona Daily Star

n 1961, when President John F. Kennedy announced the United States would land a man on the moon by the end of the decade, modern lunar and planetary science was still in its infancy.

Its birthplace? The University of Arizona in Tucson.

The story of the Apollo 11 moon landing, which occurred nearly 50 years ago, wouldn’t be complete without the endeavors of a team led by Gerard Kuiper, who became the director of the UA Lunar and Planetary Laboratory.

Lunar atlases

Even before the Space Race began with the launch of Soviet satellite Sputnik in 1957, Holland-born Kuiper, director of the University of Chicago’s Yerkes Observatory in southern Wisconsin, was working on compiling the best images of the moon at the time to create a photographic lunar atlas.

Until that time, maps of the moon were drawn by hand and the names of the moon’s features were not agreed upon, said Timothy Swindle, the UA lab’s current director.

At an astronomical conference in Dublin, Ireland, in 1955, Kuiper asked anyone interested in assisting him in his endeavor to create a moon atlas to reach out to him.

Ewen Whitaker, then the director of the lunar section of the British Astronomical Association, was the only one to respond. Kuiper asked Whitaker to join him at Yerkes Observatory for a monthlong project.

Whitaker left for the United States the day after Sputnik took to the skies.

Then, Kuiper secured funding from the Air Force to complete the lunar atlas and Whitaker never returned to the United Kingdom, according to the 2016 documentary “Desert Moon,” by science writer Jason Davis, which details the UA’s role in helping the United States reach the moon.

While at Yerkes, Kuiper and his team published the first photographic lunar atlas. It was the most comprehensive photographic record of a planetary body ever published.

Kuiper moves to the desert

The moist air and cloudy skies of southern Wisconsin, as well as tension among colleagues agitated by Kuiper’s abrasive personality, were not ideal for observing the moon, according to those who worked closely with him.

Kuiper was drawn to Tucson for the dry and clear night skies, the newly built Kitt Peak National Observatory located about 50 miles southwest of the city, and the surrounding Santa Catalinas Mountains, which were well-suited for observatories because of their high elevation.

Kuiper’s mind was set. He and his team moved to Tucson.

They started out in a wing of the UA’s Physics, Mathematics and Meteorology Building — now the Physics and Atmospheric Sciences building. Years later, and after much growth in the program, NASA funded the construction of what is now called the Kuiper Space Sciences Building.

Kuiper and his team arrived in 1960, the same year their first and second lunar atlases were published. But the team’s work was just beginning.

“Going to the moon became a national priority in the spring of 1961.

Until that point, no one else was looking at the moon and he and his group were suddenly in demand,” Swindle said.

Mapping the moon

If the astronauts were going to land on the moon, they would need maps to land them there and navigate. Kuiper set out to create a Rectified Lunar Atlas. It was published in 1963.

To accomplish this, William Hartmann, one of the laboratory’s first graduate students, projected the best images of the moon onto a white globe, then took pictures of the globe from the side. This technique allowed him to see what the moon’s surface would look like as seen from directly above at every angle, without the distortion experienced in viewing the moon from Earth, Hartmann said.

This technique not only led to new theories about the moon’s history, but also to the creation of mineral and navigational maps of our celestial companion.

Hartmann, one of the founders of the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, is now also an acclaimed science artist and writer.

Navigating the moon

In 1967, Kuiper and his team published another version of his lunar atlas called the Consolidated Lunar Atlas.

“This atlas was a collection of very high quality, loose-leaf photographic prints of all of the best images taken from Earth-based telescopes ... (it was) distributed to members of the space community to support the upcoming

COURTESY OF NASA/JPL-CALTECH

From left, Ewen Whitaker, Gerald Kuiper and Ray Heacock stand in front of a lunar hemisphere and model of a Ranger spacecraft. Kuiper and his team worked at the University of Arizona and published in 1967 the Consolidated Lunar Atlas, which included a collection of photographs of the Moon taken from Earth-based telescopes.

The surface of the moon With too sparse an atmosphere to impede impacts, a steady rain of asteroids, meteors and comets strikes the surface of the moon, leaving numerous craters behind.

During the course of billions of years, these impacts have ground up the surface of the moon into fragments ranging from huge boulders to powder. Nearly the entire moon is covered by a rubble pile of charcoal-gray, powdery dust and rocky debris called the lunar regolith. Beneath is a region of fractured bedrock referred to as the megaregolith.

The light areas of the moon are known as the highlands. The dark features, called maria (Latin for seas), are impact basins that were filled with lava between 4.2 and 1.2 billion years ago. These light and dark areas represent rocks of different composition and ages, which provide evidence for how the early crust may have crystallized from a lunar magma ocean. The craters themselves, which have been preserved for billions of years, provide an impact history for the moon and other bodies in the inner solar system.

— NASA

Apollo missions to the moon,” according to the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston.

NASA wasn’t sure what the Apollo 11 astronauts would find when they got to the moon. Some scientists feared the dust might be so thick on the moon that the astronauts would sink deep into it.

So Kuiper was tasked with participating in a series of robotic missions to the moon that would take up-close photos of the surface years before the astronauts made an attempt to land.

At the same time, he had his graduate students explore places such as Mexico to understand the geology of landscapes shaped by volcanoes and molten rock, Hartmann said. They also studied geology under Spencer Titley, professor emeritus in geoscience.

Kuiper saw the importance of people getting trained to look at the moon as a place rather than just an object in a telescope, Swindle said.

When the first robotic spacecraft, Surveyor 1, landed on the lunar surface on June 2, 1966, and scientists announced its landing site, Whitaker did his own analysis of its location.

By examining the horizon and other geographic features, he correctly determined a more accurate location where Surveyor 1 had positioned itself, according to “Desert Moon” documentary.

Because of his success in locating Surveyor 1 landing spot, Whitaker was asked to locate Surveyor 3 after it landed on the moon, an important event for the astronauts just two years later.

When Apollo 11 reached the moon on July 20, 1969, the astronauts were deterred from the original landing site

by an unexpectedly rocky surface. The astronauts had to travel 4 miles away to land safely.

“With Apollo 12, NASA wanted to demonstrate a precision landing,” Swindle said about the second moon landing, “but the problem is, how do you do a precision landing site when you don’t know where anything is?

This is before GPS or anything like that.”

The location of Surveyor 3, accurately found by Whitaker years earlier, was their lunar lighthouse, guiding the Apollo 12 astronauts to their pinpoint landing.

On the horizon

Kuiper was director of the LPL until his death in 1973. Whitaker died in October 2016.

The Kuiper Belt, the region of the solar system beyond Neptune containing small, icy, astronomical bodies, was named in his honor.

To this day, LPL is still a world leader in lunar and planetary science. Currently, the university leads the OSIRISREx mission to the asteroid Bennu to learn more about the origins of life and the solar system.

“But the moon isn’t done. The Apollo program is done,” but the samples returned from those missions are still being studied to this day, Swindle said.

And as humans again ramp up efforts to revisit the moon (and possibly Mars), the laboratory is paying attention to the needs of those explorers.

When it comes to exploration, he said “there are different parts to the problem. When it comes to the scientific problems, we hope to be players.”

Significant dates in lunar history 1609: Thomas Harriot becomes the first person to use a telescope aimed at the sky and later made the first maps of the moon.

1610: Galileo Galilei publishes scientific observations of the moon in Sidereus Nuncius (Starry Messenger).

1959-1976: The U.S.S.R.’s Luna program of 17 robotic missions achieves many “firsts” — including the first glimpse of the far side of the moon — and three sample returns.

1961-1968: The U.S. Ranger, Lunar Orbiter, and Surveyor robotic missions pave the way for Apollo human lunar landings.

1969: Astronaut Neil Armstrong is the first human to walk on the moon’s surface.

1994-1999: Clementine and Lunar Prospector data suggest that water ice may exist at the lunar poles.

2003: The European Space Agency’s SMART-1 lunar orbiter inventories key chemical elements.

2007-2008: Japan’s second lunar spacecraft, Kaguya, and China’s first lunar spacecraft, Chang’e 1, both begin one-year missions orbiting the moon; India’s Chandrayaan-1 soon follows in lunar orbit.

2008: The NASA Lunar Science Institute is formed to help lead NASA’s research activities related to lunar exploration goals.

2009: NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter and LCROSS launch together, beginning the U.S. return to lunar exploration. In October, LCROSS was directed to impact a permanently shadowed region near the lunar south pole, resulting in the discovery of water ice.

LRO is still exploring the moon from orbit.

2011: Twin GRAIL spacecraft launch to map the interior of the moon from crust to core, and NASA begins the ARTEMIS mission to study the moon’s interior and surface composition. After the successful mission, the twin GRAIL spacecraft were directed to impact the moon in 2012.

2013: NASA launches LADEE to gather detailed information about the structure and composition of the thin lunar atmosphere.

The successful mission ended in April 2014.

Dec. 14, 2013: China becomes the third nation to safely land a robotic spacecraft on the moon with the touchdown and deployment of Chang’e 3’s Yutu rover.

— NASA

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY |

WHERE APOLLO LANDED

DECEMBER 2018

19

APOLLO 15

Astronauts who walked the lunar surface

Lunar Roving Vehicle at Station 6a; note the slope is steep enough that one of the wheels is off the ground.

Neil Armstrong (1930-2012), Apollo 11 Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin (1930-), Apollo 11 Charles “Pete” Conrad (1930-1999), Apollo 12 Alan Bean (1932-2018), Apollo 12 Alan B. Shepard Jr. (1923-1998), Apollo 14 Edgar D. Mitchell (1930-2016), Apollo 14 David R. Scott (1932-), Apollo 15 James B. Irwin (1930-1991), Apollo 15 John W. Young (1930-2018), Apollo 10 (orbital), Apollo 16 (landing) ! Charles M. Duke (1935-), Apollo 16 ! Eugene Cernan (1934-2017), Apollo 10 (orbital), Apollo 17 (landing) ! Harrison H. Schmitt (1935-), Apollo 17

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

The Apollo 15 landing site is shown. The Lunar Roving Vehicle is parked to the far right, and the Lunar Module descent stage is in the center.

APOLLO 17

APOLLO 12 The Apollo 17 Lunar Module “Challenger” descent state is shown. Notice the tracks from the lunar rover around it.

This image from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter shows the Apollo 12 landing site. The Lunar Module “Intrepid” descent stage, experiment package (ALSEP) and Surveyor 3 are all visible.

Arrows point to astronaut footpaths.

TECH

APOLLO 11

LROC’s best look yet at the Apollo 11 landing site. The remnants of man’s historic first steps on the surface are seen as dark paths around the Lunar Module “Eagle,” lunar ranging retroreflector and passive seismic experiment package, as well as leading to and from the Little West Crater.

y

APOLLO 14 New LROC low orbit image of the Apollo 14 Lunar Module descent state.

The upper two panels show a new image but with different contrast stretches, and the lower image is an enlarged version.

APOLLO 16

FAR RIGHT: Post EVA view from LM looking west toward ALSEP. Notice the astronaut tracks in the surface.

Low orbit view of Apollo 16 landing site.

LUNAR RECONNAISSANCE ORBITER (LROC) IMAGES COURTESY OF NASA’S GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER AT ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY

Orbit, rotation

Structure of the moon The moon’s core is proportionally smaller than other terrestrial bodies’ cores. Besides iron, other minerals on the moon include olivine, pyroxene, oxygen, silicon, magnesium, iron, calcium and aluminum.

— NASA

Liquid iron shell, 56 miles thick Partially molten layer; 93 miles The mantle extends from the top of the partially molten layer to the bottom of the moon’s crust The crust ranges from 42 miles to 93 miles depending on the location on the moon

Solid, iron-rich inner core; 149 miles

The moon is rotating at the same rate that it revolves around Earth (called synchronous rotation), so the same hemisphere faces Earth all the time.

Earth Moon

The other side: As the moon orbits Earth, different parts are in sunlight or darkness at different times. The changing illumination is why, from our perspective, the moon goes through phases.

Moon’s orbit

Earth’s orbit around the sun Lee Enterprises graphic

20

DECEMBER 2018

|

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

Lunar Module

1.

CSM continues in Lunar Parking Orbit

Command/ Service module

Lunar Landing

3.

1. Crew Transfer from Command/Service Module to Lunar Module and Begin Checkout and Landing Site Reconnaissance.

2. Separate Lunar Module from Command Module and Turn Lunar Module around to Descent Attitude.

4.

SYSTEMS THAT DEFINED APOLLO

2.

4.

3.

2.

2. Lunar launch stage propulsion cutoff and coast to lunar orbit.

3. Main engine firing into circular orbit, engine cutoff and prepare for rendezvous and docking with Command Module.

4. Jettison Lunar Module Launch stage and prepare Command/Service module for lunar Orbit Escape.

1.

Lunar Surface Activities

4. Landing Stage propulsion cut off and coast via elliptical orbit to near lunar surface.

- Assess crew capabilities in lunar environment

Landing stage is used as a launch platform for the Lunar Module Lunar Launch. The landing stage remains on the moon.

- Collect soil samples

5. Lunar Module Hover, translation, descent maneuvers and lunar landing.

- Module inspection - Photography

Laser reflector, seismic instruments and 5-band antenna remain on the moon.

Q-Ball

Command Module Re-Entry and Splashdown

Launch Escape System

Command Module Service Module

Service Module Instrument Unit

Lunar Module Adapter

1.

Cabin

2.

Oxygen Purge System

shock

3.

STEPS

Lunar Visor

1. Command Module separates from and jettisons service module.

Backpack Control Box Penlight Pocket

S-II Stage Glove

LM Restraint Ring

Urine Transfer connector

Lunar Module 5-Band steerable antenna

3. Jettison forward compartment heat shield and then deploy drogue chute after Module slowed to about 500 MPH.

Lunar Overshoe

5. Main chutes fully deployed for final descent after module is slowed to 140 mph.

Rendezvous radar antenna VHF Antenna

2. earth atmosphere re-entry and maneuver to slow descent.

4.

4. Initial main Chute Deployment.

Utility Pocket

Thermal Meteoroid Garment

Total Rocket Height: 363 feet

Thrusters

Command Module

Back Pack

S-IC Stage

Airlock

Crew Hatch

Extravehicular Mobility Unit S-IVB Stage

1. Lunar Module Lunar launch stage ignition and launch.

Graphic information adapted from NASA’s Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 Technical Information Summary Reports

5.

3. Lunar Module Landing stage ignition and burning to decent ellipse.

Space Vehicle

Lunar Takeoff

5.

Lunar Rover Dual Battery systems

INDEPENDENT STEERING IN FRONT AND REAR WHEELS

Windows

Reaction control engines

Ascent engine

SEAT

Landing Gear, Strut and pad

Descent engine

Display Console

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

|

DECEMBER 2018

21

NASA head: ‘It’s time we go back to the moon’

BY CHABELI HERRERA

F

NASA/JPL-CALTECH VIA ASSOCIATED PRESS

This photo made available by NASA shows a view from the arm-mounted camera on the InSight Mars lander.

Apollo set stage for Insight’s Mars mission

A

BY JULIA ROSEN

Tribune Content Agency

fter a seven-month interplanetary journey, Mars InSight touched down Nov. 26 on the Red Planet. There, the lander — which resembles an oversized bug with solar-paneled wings — is embarking on a groundbreaking mission to explore Mars’ interior.

Scientists have been eager to get a glimpse inside a planet that isn’t Earth.

But this will not be first time they’ve peeked under the hood of another object in the solar system.

The Apollo missions first did that nearly 50 years ago on the moon.

After Neil Armstrong took his famous first steps on July 20, 1969, Buzz Aldrin hauled two pieces of luggage out of the Eagle and unpacked them on the lunar surface. One contained a seismometer for recording meteorite impacts and moonquakes. The other was a reflector, off which scientists could bounce a laser beam to precisely measure the moon’s distance from Earth and track its movements to learn more about its composition and structure.

The seismometer failed after a few weeks, but not before recording more than 100 meteorite strikes — and how they reverberated through the moon’s internal layers. Astronauts brought additional instruments on every subsequent moon landing. They even set off grenades to shake the ground in certain spots and study the crust.

The Apollo experiments beamed data back to Earth for the better part of a decade and gave researchers an unprecedented picture of the lunar interior, said Renee Weber, a planetary scientist at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. They “formed the foundation of our knowledge of seismology on other planets,” she said.

Now, scientists want to know how the inside of Mars compares.

InSight, which stands for Interior Ex-

NASA/JPL-CALTECH VIA ASSOCIATED PRESS

This illustration made available by NASA in October 2016 shows NASA’s InSight lander about to land on the surface of Mars. ploration Using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport, will take many of the same measurements as the Apollo experiments did on the moon.

But there is one key difference, said Weber, who also is a member of InSight’s science team: “On Mars, we don’t have the luxury of a human being, so all of that has to be done robotically.”

For that, NASA engineers gave InSight a mechanical arm, which it uses to place the seismometer and its protective windshield on the Martian surface. It also will deploy a self-hammering heat probe, which will dig itself into the ground next to the lander.

Those instruments will give researchers crucial new data in their understanding of how rocky bodies form and evolve.

Researchers also want to understand how the insides of rocky planets differ.

The Earth, moon and Mars all formed through violent collisions and separated into the same basic layers of core, mantle and crust as they cooled. But we know that Earth has fairly complex internal structure, due to the greater temperatures and pressures in its interior and to the vigorous convection of the mantle. The Apollo experiments, on the other hand, showed the moon’s layering to be relatively simple.

When it comes to Mars, scientists again expect to find something in between.

“If we can learn about the internal structure of Mars, that is just another building block in the backstory of terrestrial planet evolution,” Weber said.

Orlando Sentinel

acing its 60th anniversary this year, NASA is reaffirming its vision for the next several years of spaceflight.

“It’s time we go back to the moon, friends,” NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine told members of the space industry at the annual AIAA Space Forum, held in Orlando.

Bridenstine, an appointee of President Donald Trump who took over as head of NASA in April, reaffirmed Trump’s 2017 policy directive to return astronauts to the moon — but further described what achieving that mission might look like.

During a keynote address highlighting the history of NASA, Bridenstine outlined the agency’s plans to return to the pace of exploration it set in the 1960s. Now, NASA plans to leverage the robust private space industry to create a more sustainable and long-term presence in space.

“We are doing it in a way that’s never been done before,” Bridenstine said. “There is only one country on the planet that is going to build an architecture for sustainability so we can go back and forth to the moon.”

Bridenstine was talking about the Gateway, a spaceport that will orbit the moon and act as a jumping-off point for deep space exploration missions. In conjunction with the Space Launch System, the most powerful rocket NASA has ever built, and the Orion spacecraft under construction at Kennedy Space Center, the Gateway would serve as a lunar space station that would support multiple missions to different areas of the moon as well as to Mars.

Orion is expected to make an uncrewed mission (Exploration Mission-1) to orbit the moon by 2020.

Exploration Mission-2 is scheduled to take a crew on a lunar flyby in mid-2022. And the first astronauts could visit the Gateway by 2024, according to NASA. Reusability ultimately will play a central role in what Bridenstine views is the next era of the program, highlighting a trend that has become the cornerstone of rocket development over the past several years. By Exploration Mission-4, Bridenstine said, Orion will have reusable components.

The moon would then serve as a kind of training ground, where NASA will fine-tune its technology before the next big leap.

“We are going to retire risk, and we are going to take that entire architecture to Mars,” Bridenstine said.

While the mission to bring the United States back to global prominence by establishing dominion in space is central to NASA’s current plans, former administrators cautioned Bridenstine to also focus on NASA’s other areas of exploration, including research on exoplanets.

“NASA is more than human spaceflight,” said former NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin during a NASA at 60 panel. “People have different expectations for NASA and you have to make sure there is a balance between the programs.”

Charles Bolden, another former NASA administrator, said he’d like to see less focus on launch vehicles and more focus on orbiters and orbiting platforms to get to the surface of the moon and Mars.

And whether those surfaces will ever serve as colonies for humans is still to be seen.

“We are not planning on having a permanent presence of humans on the moon, Bridenstine said, before he paused and added, “Although I’m not opposed to it.”

Commercialization of space attracts investment

BY CHABELI HERRERA

W

Orland Sentinel

hy innovate on Earth when you can innovate in space?

With the commercial space industry taking off, that’s the vision several aerospace startups have adopted as they look to take a slice of the growing cosmic market.

“We are the future of the space industry,” said Scott Weintraub, during a recent presentation of Weintraus, a company developing in-space mechanics to repair satellites.

More than a dozen companies in the aerospace field, some of them solely focused on space, presented their ideas at the Aerospace Capital Forum in November. Weintraus was one of several startups in the private space industry hoping

to get funding for its interstellar ideas.

The inaugural forum was a window into the infrastructure being built around the commercialization of space — and how much of that growth is happening in Florida.

Here is how the future space landscape is shaping up.

Infrastructure of space As the small satellite market continues to grow, with companies like OneWeb opening a factory on the Space Coast, Weintraus wants to help support that growth.

The Daytona Beach-based company’s plan is to build the Hercules Space Tug, a reusable, autonomous, and robotic orbiting mechanic that would be able to repair,

refuel upgrade and relocate satellites in low Earth orbit or geostationary orbit.

Resupply missions would keep the tug running, lowering costs, Weintraub said.

“It brings down the development cost of those space systems,” Weintraub said, to about $20 million for the Hercules Space Tug compared to hundreds of millions for comparable systems.

Connecting those satellites to Earth could also be getting faster and more reliable with Xenesis. The company has licensed technology from NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory that would expand the bandwidth available for satellites in space. They’ll communicate through a low-cost laser communications transceiver that would “satisfy the high-bandwidth communications needs of Earth-orbiting spacecraft” Xenesis said.

“We basically are the CISCO of space,” said CEO Mark LaPenna. “We build a terminal that accesses a network that is being developed.”

Better, cheaper and faster also is the mantra at Spintech, an Ohio-based company that is building composite parts for the aerospace industry. It does it with Smart Tooling, a shape memory polymer that is flexible and then becomes stronger and more rigid — and remembers its original shape.

The technology was used to make SpaceX’s landing legs for its Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters, said Craig Jennings, Spintech’s president and CEO. Like with SpaceX, whose approach is to build reusable rockets at a lower cost, the challenge now for Spintech is to convince companies to look outside the box.

22

DECEMBER 2018

|

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER

A Saturn V moon rocket hangs above visitors in the Apollo/Saturn V Center. Although a total of 13 Saturn V rockets were launched between 1967 and 1972, this is one of only three rockets remaining in the United States.

Apollo on display as KSC celebrates

S

Tribune Content Agency

pace memorabilia and astronaut tales are almost always a draw.

Just ask the people who run the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex, which gets more than 1.5 million visitors a year.

For years, the U.S. Astronaut Hall of Fame — brainchild of the Mercury 7 astronauts and loaded with artifacts from the space program — sat six miles down the road from the Kennedy visitor complex near Titusville, Fla., technically part of the Kennedy operation but getting few of its visitors.

In 2016, the Hall of Fame moved into a new $20 million exhibit at the space center’s visitor complex on Merritt Island.

The Heroes & Legends exhibit combines high-tech theater, tales of heroism and a 21st century setting for space vehicles and astronaut memorabilia.

For the 50th anniversary of the Apollo program, various events are planned in 2019 at the visitor complex. Guests of the year-round exhibits can see much of the space program technology on display, such as a Saturn rocket in the Apollo/Saturn V Center or the space shuttle Atlantis. And the Heroes & Leg-

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER

Children play beneath an exhibit featuring an Apollo command module in the Apollo/ Saturn V Center at the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex in Florida. ends exhibit captures the human element of the space program.

The highlight is a 7-minute movie, “Through the Eyes of a Hero,” that tells stories about four astronauts — Alan Shepard, Neil Armstrong, John Glenn

and James Lovell — enhanced by film clips and computer-generated images.

Honoring space travelers was the goal of the six surviving Mercury 7 astronauts and Betty Grissom, widow of the seventh, Gus Grissom, when they

founded the Astronaut Hall of Fame in 1990. Starting with the Mercury 7, a few U.S. astronauts were inducted every year. Currently, 93 of 338 U.S. astronauts from the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo and space shuttle programs are in the hall of fame.

Among the artifacts in the exhibit are Gus Grissom’s Mercury spaceflight suit; a Gemini IX capsule with a hologram of astronaut Gene Cernan climbing out of it; a Sigma 7 Mercury spacecraft paired with a Mercury-Redstone rocket; and an old NASA logo that was hung on the wall of the Mercury Mission Control Center at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in 1959.

Largest of all is a display containing the original consoles of the Mercury Mission Control room and the map of the world on which John Glenn’s 1962 flight on Friendship 7 was tracked.

Flagstaff was Arizona training ground for Apollo

BY SCOTT BUFFON

T

Arizona Daily Sun

oday humanity celebrates the most recent probe sent to Mars, but travel back to 1969 and humanity would have been recognizing its small step for man and giant leap to the moon.

NASA began celebrating the 50-year anniversary of the Apollo Program and the July 20, 1969 step on the moon this October and will end its celebrations in December 2022. One Arizona city that has made a big deal about that anniversary is the same city where the famous Apollo astronauts — Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Michael Collins — completed critical training for their trip to the moon.

Flagstaff was chosen by NASA to train the astronauts and get them excited about space geology. Northern Arizona is home to many naturally occurring wonders that NASA felt it could leverage like the Grand Canyon, Flagstaff’s copious volcanic rock, and Meteor Crater, one of the best preserved craters in the world. The city also has a strong scientific community.

And while teaching astronauts about the moon would be a benchmark for any city, Flagstaff was no stranger to making space history — Pluto was famously discovered by Clyde Tombaugh in Flagstaff at the city’s Lowell Observatory in 1930.

Those same telescopes would come in

handy for the United States Geologic Survey’s astrogeology branch, which used the telescopes to develop detailed moon maps for the space explorers.

In order to prepare the astronauts, the branch worked with NASA to blast craters into the Earth’s surface to prepare the astronauts for the moon’s iconic craters. Multiple lunar rovers were tested on the pseudo-moon surface made of volcanic rock.

The 11 years of training in Flagstaff may never have happened if not for one of the men who trained them: Eugene Shoemaker. The astrogeology branch was moved to Flagstaff after it was formed in California because of its terrain.

Shoemaker also coined the term astrogeology as the lead figure of the emerging field that studied celestial bodies in the solar system like asteroids, planets and moons. He began his fascination with the moon and its geology by seeing it as we all do, staring up at the night sky.

“That first evening of Gene’s focus on the moon, and its then uncertain geologic nature, led that spring to Gene’s admitted ‘epiphany’ about going the moon himself, and exploring its geology,” read a 2005 report outlining the activities of the USGS Astrogeology Branch in the Apollo Program.

NASA honored Shoemaker’s contribution to astrogeology by sending his ashes to the moon on their probe in

JAKE BACON, ARIZONA DAILY SUN

Ralph Nye led the restoration project of the 24-inch Clark Telescope at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Ariz., that Percival Lowell used to map the surface of Mars. The telescope also was used to make maps of the moon for Apollo astronauts.

January 1998.

Astrogeology was big for the Apollo missions and is still a large field of space study today. The most recent InSight Mars probe was sent to dig layers beneath the surface and gather data on

how the red planet was formed.

Now that we have made multiple trips to Mars at the start of the 50-year anniversary of the Apollo missions, the skies are certainly not the limit for humanity’s future.

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

|

DECEMBER 2018

23

Front page: July 21, 1969

How other media covered the Apollo 11 moon landing

ASSOCIATED PRESS

The New York Times, New York

Southern Illinoisan, Carbondale, Ill.

The Daily Pantagraph, Bloomingon, Ill.

Quad-Cities Times-Democrat, Davenport, Ia.

24

DECEMBER 2018

|

MOONSHOT AT 50: APOLLO ANNIVERSARY

Lunar light show Our celestial companion brightens the night sky and inspires story, song and art on Earth

JOHN HART, WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL

BLUE MOON – A so-called “blue moon,” which typically refers to a second full moon appearance within the same month, rises over the Lake Michigan horizon in Milwaukee on July 31, 2015.

BYRON HETZLER, THE SOUTHERN

LIGHTING THE WAY - A flight from Louisville to Las Vegas is silhouetted against the moon as it passes over Carbondale in January 2017.

JOHN HART, WISCONSIN STATE JOURNAL

SUPERMOON - A supermoon ascends behind the state Capitol dome as seen from the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus on Nov. 14, 2016, in Madison, Wis. Due to the moon’s slightly elliptical orbit, this was the closest a full moon had been to the Earth since 1948, making it appear somewhat bigger and brighter than usual. The next time it will be this close will be in 2034.

DAVID SANDERS, ARIZONA DAILY STAR

LUNAR ECLIPSE - The lunar eclipse begins as the Moon rises above the Tortolita Mountains on Feb. 20, 2008. Taken from The Gallery Golf Course at Dove Mountain near Tucson.

LORI ANN COOK-NEISLER, PANTAGRAPH

LUNAR ECLIPSE - The shadow of the earth draped the moon at about 9 p.m. the night of October 24, 2004. The total eclipse was a stark contrast to the brightness of the full moon just an hour before.

MIKE CHRISTY, ARIZONA DAILY STAR

SUPERMOON - A supermoon rises above the Rincon Mountains as seen from Gates Pass west of Tucson on June 23, 2013. The lunar event marks the closest the moon’s orbital path passes by Earth.

DAVID CARSON, POST-DISPATCH

SUPERMOON - A supermoon rises over the Arch in St. Louis as seen from the Compton Hill Water Tower on Nov. 13, 2016. The 2016 supermoon was the nearest supermoon in almost 70 years and will be the largest one until Nov. 25, 2034. A supermoon happens when a full moon makes its closest pass to Earth appearing up to 14 percent bigger and 30 percent brighter in the sky.

KAYLA WOLF, LINCOLN JOURNAL STAR

FULL MOON - A farmer harvests under an almost full moon Oct. 23, 2018, east of Ceresco, Neb.