The Moon Will Wait

The Moon Will Wait

In early 1969, Nation editors were skeptical about the space race, and NASA’s “juvenile, brutal approach” in rushing to get a man on the moon.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

This editorial appeared in the January 13, 1969, issue of The Nation.

From a technological viewpoint, and in a sense from a human viewpoint, the Apollo 8 flight was a triumph on a scale without precedent. Only an engineer with some background in astronautics could fully appreciate the precision with which it was done and the risks that were faced and circumvented. Perhaps the tensest moments of all were at the very end, when the capsule had to re-enter through that 2-degree arc, with a quick fiery death awaiting the men if the angle was a little too steep, and a slow death by asphyxiation if it was a little too shallow.

Yes, a triumph, but not a time for euphoria. The moon landing for which NASA is now preparing (and in even greater haste because Apollo 8 was so successful) is far more hazardous. Why all the rush? It is not clear whether we are racing the Soviets or only ourselves. If the Russians still intend to compete—and if Apollo 11, scheduled for next summer, should end with. the American contenders stranded on the moon-we might lose not only the crew but the race.

The project entails risks in any event; but these might be reduced if only we could relinquish our insistence on getting the men onto the great slag heap and back to earth before the end of the decade, the date which has assumed such mystic, fetishistic importance in NASA’s thinking. As Apollo 11 (or possibly even Apollo 10) is now planned, everything will depend on the precise functioning of the lunar module in which the two men will ride from the mother ship to the moon and back. It must detach flawlessly, land at the prescribed spot, take off again, and couple with the main vehicle. The module will have no backup. Nor will there be more than a partial rehearsal maneuvers in earth orbit, as planned for Apollo 9, are not the same thing.

Would it not be possible to guide an unmanned lunar module to the desired location on the moon and let it serve as a backup in case the module, in which the two astronauts descend should be disabled in landing, or the engine should fail to fire for ascent? Remote control guidance is now so accurate that the back-up, unmanned module could be brought to a landing alongside the main vehicle. Still other precautionary measures might be considered—if it all didn’t have to be done before January 1, 1970.

Robert Hotz, editor in chief of Aviation Week and Space Technology, rejoiced before the Apollo 8 flight that “with a Soyuz and an Apollo carrying the Hammer and Sickle and the Stars and Stripes, respectively, around the moon at about the same time, it would require a phlegmatic world indeed not to get excited at these extraterrestrial Olympics.” That is one way of looking at it-the red-blooded sporting instinct, coupled with billions in business for the aerospace industry. But this juvenile, brutal approach is not the one that should dominate NASA’s thinking at this critical juncture.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read, just one of the many incisive, deeply reported articles we publish daily. Now more than ever, we need fearless journalism that moves the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media.

Donate right now and help us hold the powerful accountable, shine a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug, and build a more just and equitable future.

For nearly 160 years, The Nation has stood for truth, justice, and moral clarity. As a reader-supported publication, we are not beholden to the whims of advertisers or a corporate owner. But it does take financial resources to report on stories that may take weeks or months to investigate, thoroughly edit and fact-check articles, and get our stories to readers like you.

Donate today and stand with us for a better future. Thank you for being a supporter of independent journalism.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x