The moon - in earth's back yard, so to speak -
offered an optimum launch opportunity once every lunar month, and if one
were missed because of problems with a launch vehicle the delay was only
four weeks, whereas a mission to Mars would have to wait two years if an
optimum launch date were missed. While JPL was developing a plan for 12
deep-space missions, including 5 moon probes, Jastrow was urging Newell
to accelerate NASA's lunar exploration programs.
Once again, however, the Soviets' eagerness to achieve space
"firsts" exerted its pernicious influence on American space
programs. Even before the Working Group for Lunar Exploration could
finish drawing up a list of recommendations for lunar missions, the
Russian Luna I swung by the moon and into solar orbit, measuring
magnetic fields and particles in space. A month after JPL submitted its
plan to Headquarters on April 30, 1959, orders went out to Pasadena to
reorient the program to concentrate on lunar orbiting and soft-landing
missions. (Apparently Headquarters felt that the more frequent
opportunities for lunar missions offered the best chance to beat the
Russians to their apparent target.) As the year progressed, the Soviets
sent two more Luna spacecraft to the moon; one crashlanded, the other
photographed the hidden side of the moon for the first time. In December
Headquarters killed JPL's planetary exploration plan, in part because of
problems with the proposed Atlas-Vega launch vehicle, and substituted a
program of seven lunar missions using the Atlas-Agena B. Emphasis was on
obtaining high-resolution photographs of the moon's surface, but some
space science instruments would be carried as well. JPL would also
investigate the feasibility of sending a hard-landing instrument package
to transmit data about the moon. This project, called
"Ranger," was explicitly recognized as a high-risk project
geared to very short schedules and intended to capture the initiative in
lunar exploration from the Soviet Union.7
Since lunar and planetary exploration seemed to have a promising future,
Homer Newell established a Lunar and Planetary Program Office at
Headquarters in January 1960 to manage it.8 Initially, Ranger was the the new office's
only lunar project. In July 1960 a second, Surveyor, was approved. More
ambitious than Ranger, Surveyor had the objective of soft-landing a
large (2,500 pounds, 1,100 kilograms) instrumented spacecraft on the
moon's surface to gather physical and chemical information about the
lunar soil and return it to earth by telemetry.9
Both Ranger and Surveyor were technically ambitious projects, requiring
improvements in spacecraft stabilization, navigation and guidance, and
telemetry. Both encountered technical and management problems that
pushed back their completion dates to the point where rapidly changing
events made their original objectives obsolete. In 1960, neither Ranger
nor Surveyor was primarily intended to support the manned lunar landing,
which at that time was still only an idea in the minds of NASA's
planners, although both, if successful, would yield information useful
to that project. But the pressures generated by the needs of Apollo
between 1961 and 1963 forced Ranger and Surveyor into supporting roles
for the manned space flight program, to the intense chagrin of the space
scientists.
* JPL's director William Pickering
had proposed an unmanned lunar probe as a response to Sputnik but had
found no support for it.
1. R. Cargill Hall,
Lunar Impact: A History of Project Ranger, NASA SP-4210
(Washington 1977), pp. 15- 16.
2. Stephen G. Brush, "Nickel for
Your Thoughts: Urey and the Origin of the Moon," Science
217 (1982):891-98.
3. Senate Committee on Aeronautical and
Space Sciences, Scientists' Testimony on Space Goals,
Hearings, 88/1, June 10, 1963, pp. 51, 52-53.
4. Homer E. Newell, Beyond the
Atmosphere: Early Years of Space Science, NASA SP-4211
(Washington, 1980), pp. 212-13.
5. Hall, Lunar Impact, p.
15.
6. Ibid., pp. 5, 17; Clayton R. Koppes,
JPL and the American Space Program: A History of the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory (New Haven and London: Yale University
Press, 1982), pp. 99-100.
7. Hall, Lunar Impact, pp.
18, 20-24.
8. Ibid., p. 38.
9. NASA, Fifth Semiannual Report to
Congress, October 1, 1960, Through June 30, 1961 (Washington,
1962), pp. 49-50.