Apollo Program Date: May 28, 1964, to December 19, 1972 Type of program: Lunar exploration, piloted spaceflight The Apollo lunar mission was an American bid for international leadership in space exploration, to be dem- onstrated by landing astronauts on the Moon and returning them safely to Earth during the 1960’s. After eight years of development, the project achieved success with the return of Apollo 11 on July 24, 1969. Apollo also had Cold War political significance, heralding the technological superiority of the United States, and effec- tively ending the Space Race with the Soviet Union. Key Figures Summary of the Program James E. Webb (1906-1992), NASA Administrator, Piloted flights to the Moon, either to land or merely 1961-1968 circumnavigate it, appeared in early plans for the D. Brainerd Holmes (b. 1921), Associate Adminis- American space program. In July, 1960, the Na- trator for Manned Spaceflight, 1961-1963 tional Aeronautics and Space Administration George E. Mueller (1918-2001), Associate Admin- (NASA) convened its first NASA Industry Program istrator for Manned Spaceflight, 1963-1969 Plans Conference, during which long-range Apollo George M. Low (1926-1984), Director of Manned program goals were outlined to aerospace industry Spaceflight programs, 1958-1964; Deputy executives. The plans included circumlunar flights Director of Manned Spacecraft Center, 1964- and (sometime after 1970) a piloted lunar landing. 1967; Manager of Apollo Spacecraft Project In February, 1961, a Manned Lunar Landing Task office, 1967-1969; NASA Deputy Administrator, Group, chaired by George M. Low, director of 1969-1976 Manned Spaceflight programs, reported that a pi- Rocco A. Petrone (1926-2006), Director of Launch loted lunar landing could be accomplished by the Operations, Kennedy Space Center, 1961- 1969; end of the 1960’s. Almost simultaneously, NASA Director of Apollo Program Office, 1969-1973 announced the contract award for a study of naviga- Samuel C. Phillips (1921-1990), Director of Apollo tion and guidance systems required for a lunar mis- Program Office, 1964-1969 sion; a few months later, it contracted studies on the Wernher von Braun (1912-1977), Director of spacecraft for such a mission. Marshall Space Flight Center The decisive stimulus, however, came in April, Robert R. Gilruth (1913-2000), Director of 1961, when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Manned Spacecraft Center (USSR) placed Yuri A. Gagarin into Earth’s orbit. Kurt H. Debus (1908-1983), Director of Kennedy This Soviet achievement was widely perceived as a Space Center threat to American security and technological pre- Christopher C. Kraft, Jr. (1924-2019), Apollo eminence in the world—a propaganda stroke to be flight director countered by some dramatic demonstration of the United States’ capability. On May 25, 1961, a scant 24 USA in Space Apollo Program 25 ten days after America’s first piloted suborbital flight, President John F. Kennedy went before Congress to call for the United States to land humans on the Moon and return them safely to Earth “before this decade is out.” The Space Race was on. Inasmuch as NASA had yet to send a Mercury astronaut into Earth orbit, Kennedy’s challenge was a formidable one. Neither the spacecraft nor launch vehicles and facilities for a lunar landing existed, nor did operational techniques for conducting it. Studies already under way were intensified following Kennedy’s national chal- lenge, and, by the end of 1961, the President John F. Kennedy in his historic message to a joint session of the basic requirements for the launch ve- Congress, on May 25, 1961 declared, “...I believe this nation should hicle and launch facilities had been commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.” (NASA) outlined. Although the final design for a lunar spacecraft could not yet be superior to other methods in terms of development specified, a contract for its design and development time, cost, and simplicity of management. How- was awarded late in 1961. ever, it required the greatest degree of astronaut pi- A key Apollo program decision was made in loting skills of the three options (DA, EOR, and July, 1962, when, after more than a year of studying LOR) under consideration before LOR was offi- alternatives, NASA Administrator James E. Webb cially determined to be the best way to reach the announced that lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) had Moon’s surface prior to 1970. been chosen as the primary operational mode for Following this LOR decision, NASA awarded the program rather than a direct ascent (DA) ap- contracts for the CSM, LM, and Saturn V rocket. In proach or Earth orbit rendezvous (EOR) method. September, 1961, the Manned Spacecraft Center LOR required a single large, three-stage rocket (the was established to manage development and pre- Saturn V) to launch two spacecraft: one, the Com- flight testing of the spacecraft, train astronauts, and mand and Service Module (CSM), to carry a three- conduct flight operations. Construction began on a person crew into orbit around the Moon and back; 6.7-square-kilometer site some 35 kilometers south- and another, the Lunar Module (LM), in which two east of Houston, Texas, the following year; this astronauts would land on the Moon while the third Space Center began operations in 1964. To launch tended the Moon-orbiting CSM. After a brief trip Saturn V, NASA built its own Launch Complex outside their lander to collect samples and emplace (later named Kennedy Space Center) on Merritt Is- instruments, the lunar explorers would lift off in the land, adjacent to the Air Force Missile Test Center LM’s upper stage to return to lunar orbit, rendez- at Cape Canaveral, Florida. New facilities included vous and dock with the CSM, and then head back to two launch pads plus a huge Vehicle Assembly Earth. This goal appeared operationally complex Building (VAB) in which as many as four Saturn and difficult, but studies indicated that it was V’s could be assembled simultaneously in a 26 Apollo Program USA in Space protected environment. Two diesel/electric-pow- Manned Spacecraft Center in planning the scientific ered transporters were designed and built to move work for each specific mission. completed Apollo-Saturn vehicles from the VAB to In spite of many delays in development of two the launch pad. The new site was activated in complex and sophisticated spacecraft, by late 1966, mid-1966. NASA was preparing to put the first piloted CSM While spacecraft and launch vehicles were being through its paces in Earth orbit. On January 27, developed, other anticipated problems were ad- 1967, however, during a simulation two weeks be- dressed in parallel projects. Project Gemini investi- fore scheduled launch, a flash fire swept through the gated the operational problems of rendezvous in spacecraft, killing all three crew members. Had it orbit, established that humans could function nor- flown, the mission would have been called Apollo mally for up to fourteen days in weightlessness, 1. Throughout the accident investigation, the mis- qualified many spacecraft systems, and provided sion was referred to as Apollo-Saturn 204. As with training for crews and flight controllers. To test past-piloted programs, Apollo flights were given Apollo’s launch escape system, which could pull names based upon their launch vehicle, using a the spacecraft away from the Saturn rocket in case three-digit number. Saturn IB flights were indicated of a malfunction in the first few minutes of ascent, a by the number 2 followed by a two-digit sequence solid-fueled rocket called Little Joe 2 was built and number. Saturn V flights used 5. The name Apollo 1 a test program was started at the White Sands Mis- would have been used as the radio call sign. sile Range in southern New Mexico. The two-stage Thorough investigation failed to pinpoint the Saturn I and its more powerful version, the Saturn exact cause of the fire, but it appeared to have been IB, were brought to operational status, to be used started by an electrical short-circuit, which pro- for Earth-orbital tests of the Apollo CSM. In late duced a spark that ignited flammable material in- 1963, the Lunar Orbiter project was established to side the CSM. In the pure oxygen atmosphere used obtain high-resolution photographs of possible during flight, the fire spread with a rapidity no one lunar-landing sites, and the Surveyor Program (a ro- had anticipated. Apollo’s first piloted mission was botic lunar lander intended to gather scientific data) delayed twenty one months, while every aspect of was called upon to provide information on the phys- spacecraft manufacture and test procedures was re- ical characteristics of the Moon’s surface, data re- viewed to reduce the danger of fire. quired for designing the LM’s landing gear. Progress continued, however, in other phases of Starting in 1962, NASA solicited advice from the Apollo Program. The first flight of a complete prominent American scientists in planning a sci- Saturn V rocket (Apollo 4) was successfully con- ence program for Apollo. Summer conferences in ducted on November 9, 1967; it carried a test ver- 1962 and 1965 outlined major objectives, defining sion of the CSM to test heatshield integrity under three general types of scientific work: observations conditions approximating reentry from a lunar made by the astronauts, collection of samples for flight. Two months later, Apollo 5 carried a LM into detailed study in the laboratory, and emplacement Earth orbit for extensive robotic testing. On April 4, of lunar surface instruments to return data to Earth 1968, the second Saturn V flight test (Apollo 6) fur- over a long period of time.